The Note: Friendly Fire

Feb. 1, 2008 -- Those not-so-nice things Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama have been saying about each other? The snits and the snubs?

Well -- they did elbow each other out of the way in their efforts to praise John Edwards. And then they ended the evening with a hug (almost) -- and placed each other on their vice-presidential shortlists.

So we showed up for a fight, and a debate broke out. It says that both Clinton, D-N.Y., and Obama, D-Ill., are fairly pleased with where things stand -- if by "pleased" you mean dreadfully nervous about where things may turn before Tuesday.

Clinton has an on-the-ground edge in the big states that vote next. Obama has a clear advantage in enthusiasm and excitement. They both have plenty of money (we know that's not a problem for Obama, at least) to fight it out well beyond Feb. 5.

That's where the battle will be joined -- not on a debate stage, and certainly not on the debate stage Thursday night in Hollywood, in front of all those famous people. "Thursday's debate played out as if they were two talk show guests trading jokes as they worked around the edges of a number of domestic policies," Cathleen Decker and Maria L. La Ganga write in the Los Angeles Times.

"The gravest distinction came on the war, which loomed large as an issue as the presidential race began but has gradually diminished in the Democratic contests," they write. "With the war again the focus, the race reverted to the campaign's purest distillation: Clinton's experience against Obama's judgment."

Like one of those pay-per-view boxing matches that leaves viewers demanding refunds, Thursday night's one-on-one debate in Hollywood was a tactical dance that left both combatants standing. South Carolina was a distant memory.

ABC's David Wright: "Anyone who was expecting fireworks last night might well have been disappointed, but the two candidates both sought to rise above the bickering that marked their last encounter in Myrtle Beach, S.C."

"Gone were the sharp and sometimes personal attacks that have characterized a year's worth of debates, particularly a combative session last week in South Carolina, which both sides conceded had tarnished their images," Jeff Zeleny and Patrick Healy write in The New York Times. "Cordial as the encounter was, the candidates did not mask their own divisions, even as they previewed the attacks one of them will ultimately make against a Republican rival."

We're back where we started, pitting change against experience, or, at least, two different kinds of experience against each other. And Clinton got the deep breath she's been asking everyone to take, as she conveyed measured confidence and competence.

Beyond mild differences on Iraq, healthcare, and immigration, the candidates "sharply disagreed on who has the better combination of leadership and experience to defeat Republicans in November and lead the country as president," Dan Balz and Anne Kornblut write in The Washington Post. "They hewed to strategies designed to give them the upper hand after this Tuesday's 22 Democratic primaries and caucuses in what remains a fierce and extremely competitive nomination battle."

If Clinton and Obama were acting (auditioning for Spielberg and Reiner and Leo) then ABC's George Stephanopoulos was among those who bought their bits. "What I'll bet is, if she gets the nomination, she picks him" as a running mate, he said Friday on "Good Morning America."

Why would Obama want to jinx his January by picking a fight, anyway? Here's what Iowa/South Carolina/Bill Clinton/Ted Kennedy means to a campaign: Try $1 million a day.

Obama raised $32 million in January alone -- a stunning figure by any measure (and one that was met with silence over at Camp Clinton). "The number is the highest any candidate has raised in a single month and matches Obama's best three-month period from last year," ABC's Sunlen Miller writes.

"His money haul is almost certain to dwarf that of bitter rival Hillary Clinton," Michael Saul and Ian Bishop report in the New York Daily News. "Clinton boasted of raising $3 million eight days into January, but has largely been silent since. Her camp refused yesterday to put out her January numbers."

We're beyond the point of the Clinton campaign being scared by Obama's fundraising figures, and she'll still be in fine position for Feb. 5 and beyond. But it's another measure of the Obama excitement -- 650,000 individuals have now given money to his campaign. The money kept flowing right after he lost New Hampshire, in one of the campaign's darker moments. "We took a lot of encouragement from that," campaign manager David Plouffe said.

The cash is funding a new ad buy in Feb. 5 states and in the states that follow -- since no one really believes Super Tuesday will settle anything. It's an "an eight-figure, 24-state barrage of television advertising, heading into the Super Tuesday contests and beyond, that will carry his message to twice as many states as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's ads will reach with her current ad buy," Howard Kurtz reports in The Washington Post.

"Clinton plans to advertise in a dozen of the 22 states that will hold Democratic primaries and caucuses Tuesday," Kurtz continues. "But Clinton is also using some unconventional tactics. Her campaign bought an hour block on the Hallmark Channel to air a portion of the national town hall forum her campaign is mounting, on the eve of the Feb. 5 primaries. Clinton, former president Bill Clinton and their daughter, Chelsea, are set to appear."

Money's not a problem for former governor Mitt Romney, R-Mass., either -- and he's ended his brief TV blackout with an ad buy of between $2 million and $3 million in Feb. 5 states, per the AP's Glen Johnson -- though that's less than the $7 million campaign some aides discussed privately.

At least $1 million of the ads will air in California, the biggest Feb. 5 prize, "enough to give the former Massachusetts governor a presence in much of the state," Dan Morain and Scott Martelle write in the Los Angeles Times.