Imagine you're sitting around one night watching TV and a pollster calls. The nice man wants you to participate in a "blind bio" poll, which means he will describe several potential presidential candidates to you and then ask you which person you'd hypothetically support. He won't give you any names, only a brief description of the candidates' biographies. You think, well, "Scrubs" is over, I might as well hear him out. 

The pollster starts talking about this one guy, call him "Candidate A," who seems pretty cool:   He's "an experienced candidate from the South who has been Vice President...and a U.S. Senator." Wow!  Sounds great. Who could it be, though? This person has won "several awards, including an Oscar, a Grammy, and an Emmy for his documentary about global climate change."  Man, you're thinking, this guy is amazing! If only someone like that would run in real life. How could I not  vote for such a person?  

But wait!  It gets better. This mysterious hypothetical dream candidate also just won the Nobel Peace Prize! Woah! Think that's good? "This candidate has been against the Iraq war from the beginning." OMG! You are sold, especially when you learn that two of the other "blind bio" candidates "voted to authorize" the war but now say it was "wrong" or have been critical of how it's been handled. Flip-floppers. The only other candidate mentioned is a "first-term" Senator who "draws huge crowds to campaign rallies." Big whup.  

You think it over for half a second and tell the pollster you're choosing "Candidate A" over those war supporters B and D and the inexperienced C. You and 35 percent of the 527 "likely Democratic voters" interviewed nationwide October 24-27 agree that this mysterious fellow is a dream candidate.  (Which begs the question: who are the 65 percent of Dems who voted for the flip-floppers and non-Nobel winners?) The poll was done by Zogby International market research and was commissioned by something called "algore.org." Stay tuned to this space as our investigation into who this mysterious candidate might be continues.

It's one thing to believe you have the presidential nomination in the bag several months before the first votes are cast. But what does it say about a campaign when you're ready to celebrate several weeks before a debate?

That's what happened today on the Clinton campaign's Website. For a communications team that has a reputation for perfection, the Clinton group made the rookie mistake of posting what looked like a template for local groups to influence their hometown newspapers.

Perhaps the best line: "Insert quote from party host here--You can use the talking points on the Club44 web site to help you develop your quote about why you support Hillary Clinton. Ann Lewis will also provide you some guidance on the post-debate conference call."

There's nothing like a spontaneous outpouring of support for a candidate, after another successful debate. Complete with talking points, conference calls and developed quotes. Even if the debate in question is to be held in Las Vegas almost a month from today.

Club44, in case you were wondering, is "an effort to identify and mobilize young women voters who support Hillary Clinton for president," according to the campaign's website. It also sounds like an effort to channel their minds--ahead of time.

For her part, Hillary seems confident. "I'm overwhelmed by the support from the women of Club44," she said about the events that had yet to take place. 

(When asked about the episode, a Clinton spokesperson called Newsweek's interest in it "a tad absurd.")

Full memo after the jump:

   HANOVER, N.H. -- I am here in the student union at Dartmouth waiting to see if Hillary Clinton has chance to smother this Democratic presidential race before it begins. I just came from a dinner with a top strategist from a major campaign (not Hillary's) who put her chances if of winning the nomination at 8-out-of-10. And yet, having been through this drill more times than I can count, I find it hard to believe that this race will end before it really has begun. Somebody is going to challenge Clinton for real. The physics of politics and media make it inevitable. The question is whether the main challenger is Sen. Barack Obama or, as seems increasingly possible, somebody else.

   Right now the Democratic and Republican parties have changed personas. The Democrats usually tear each other limb from limb; the GOP generally has an orderly coronation. Right now, Hillary is approaching the throne all but unscathed; the Republicans have only begun to go after each other in earnest. The GOP has no ideological unity; the Democrats have a lot.

Welcome to the Taco Bell primary.

A few years ago, the storied purveyor of such authentic Mexican delicacies as Cheesy Beefy Melt and Nachos BellGrande launched an ad campaign based on three simple words: "Change is Good." At the time the slogan struck me as both sub-literate, like something from a self-help book for cavemen, and unreasonably optimistic--the changes in Michael Jackson's face, for example, have not been so good. But now four of the leading 2008 presidential contenders are making essentially the same argument to convince us to vote for them. What's good enough for chalupas, it seems, is good enough for Mitt Romney.

The Change Wars began on Sept. 5, when both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton launched ads called, conveniently enough, "Change." Obama's was business as usual--as the new kid in town, he'd built his entire campaign around hope and the audacity thereof. But Clinton's was widely seen as strategic shift meant to neutralize Obama's appeal to "change" voters. Her new slogan: "Ready for Change, Ready to Lead." Obama, Clinton was arguing, may talk about change, but he isn't "ready" to make it happen. And in case you missed the point, Clinton has spent the three weeks since then repeating a single catchphrase -- "'Change' is just a word without the strength and experience to make it happen"--over and over again. And then over again.

What a tease. Last night, Hillary Clinton spent the first hour of her New York fundraiser running through her usual talking points before revealing that she had a surprise for the 1,200 assembled supporters, who surely paid at least $50 a head for more than the usual litany. "I have a great privilege," she said, smiling and slipping into the mode of girlish flirtation that she deploys occasionally on the trail, most famously in March when she thanked a firefighters' convention them for their warm welcome and then—raising an eyebrow—said, "and thanks for last night, too." Her surprise guest, Clinton continued, is "someone whom I'm incredibly fond of, who I admire enormously, who is a man of great distinction and honor who has served our country well for so many years..." Here, people nudged their neighbors and, mouthing the word "Bill," began to applaud. "...Whom I'm very proud has endorsed me for president..."—big laughs, because, you know, what else are husbands for?—"who is here, and I want to invite him out join us for this conversation." A collective gasp. "General Wesley Clark." Well, at least it was a silver-haired Arkansan.

The night's most entertaining moment came when Clinton compared Dick Cheney to the Dark Lord of the Sith. "Vice President Cheney came up to see the Republicans yesterday. You can always tell when the Republicans are getting restless, because the Vice President’s motorcade pulls into the Capitol, and Darth Vader emerges," she said. Oh snap.

But a later moment was more characteristic. "This is question from a New York City schoolteacher," said former Iowa Governor and current Clinton national campaign chair Tom Vilsack, who served as Clinton's interviewer. "What can you do about the growing and aging school systems, not just in New York, the city, but across the country?"

"You mean like, the buildings and the facilities and everything?" Clinton replied, excitement in her voice.

"I would broaden it a bit to talk about what you think needs to be done in education in general," said Vilsack, who is, by all accounts, a better natural campaigner than Clinton. 

Sorry, Tom--she wasn't having it. "You know, I'll start directly with her question about school facilities," she said, launching into a long disquisition on schools with "coal-fired boilers," "mold" and "ceiling tiles falling" and proposing a "fund that can be used to help local districts...get long-term loans to build and renovate and modernize facilities." Give Clinton a choice between barnstorming and wonking, and she'll wonk every time.

Where's Bill when you need him?