To be more precise: we asked the panel to assess, from an Israeli perspective, the initial reaction of the 2008 candidates. The outcome of this test is clear: Republicans were far better, Romney, Giuliani and Thompson on top, with Dodd and Edwards at the bottom. No Democratic candidate scored more than 3 out of 5 from the panel. No Republican we tested got less than 3.5 (McCain, with 3.62, fared the worst among Republicans).
Here is how we did it: We sent the panel quotes from news reports that came the day, or the day after, the report was issued. Some of the candidates made more rehearsed statements in the ensuing days, but we wanted the gut-raection test. In order to make sure the panelists were not influenced by their general attitudes toward the candidates, we removed the names of the candidates from the quotes we sent them. They were scoring the quotes - not the people. And the results are telling.
Advertisement
Below are the quotes and the marks:
What can we learn from this table?
First (and this is not new to those of you who read the Factor regularly), from an Israeli standpoint, the Republican candidates fare much better on Iran. We have examined this twice in recent weeks, and on each occasion the panel showed clearly that it is the Republican position it favors. This time, though, was more pointed, as the panelists voted for quotes without knowing the party to which each quote is allied ? and still, the Republican quotes resonated better.
We also learned that among the Democratic candidates, Edwards has the tendency to be the one who makes the panel most suspicious. We learned this about him when we rated a Democratic debate a couple of weeks ago, and now we re-learned it - again, anonymously.
To be frank, the outcome was not unanimous. Two of the more left-leaning panelists dragged some of the Republican quotes down. They gave Thompson, for example, a 2 and a 1 - while four other panelists gave him a 5 and two gave him a 4. These two "left-leaners" were also the panelists most receptive to Edwards' comments, giving him a 3 and a 4 - while the others gave him a 1 (three of the panelists) and a 2 (another three).
Romney got the upper hand for one reason: he was one of two Republican candidates (the other one being Giuliani) who reacted in a way that resonated with all the panelists. The panelists who gave the most-dismissive Thompson a 1 and a 2 - probably because they thought he was too trigger-happy - gave Romney a 3 and Giuliani a 3 and a 4. The other panelists gave Romney three scores of 4and three of 5. McCain, who also faired with both hawkish and dovish panelists, did okay. But he did not do as well as the Giuliani and Romney - because most of them just gave him a score of 3. His measured reaction wasn't something to make one either very worried or very pleased.
Clinton didn't do well on this matter. In the past the panel found her to be the best Democratic candidate on Iran, but compared to the Republican candidates, it doesn't seem to be much this time. She is tied with Obama for second highest among the Democrats. They both trail Biden, who actually got a 3 from six of the panelists. It was just one panelist, who gave him a 1 and dragged him down to the below-3 zone (the eighth panelist gave him a 4).
Bottom line: The panel did not appreciate those candidates who were too quick to embrace the NIE report. Measured resolve was the right reaction, according to the Israel Factor panel
Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, offers real-time breaking news, opinions and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.
