Presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has taken a markedly harsher tone toward chief rival and Democratic front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) in recent days, and may be tarnishing his message of hope by doing so, according to analysts.

Monday’s third-quarter fundraising deadline showed that Clinton has moved out in front of the fundraising race, matching her leads in state and national polls.

Clinton now leads Obama in primary cash with nearly $35 million to Obama’s $32 million. Shortly after that was revealed late Monday night, Obama sent an e-mail to supporters with “Hillary’s Money” as the subject line.

In what amounted to a fundraising plea, Obama said Clinton was able to out-raise his campaign for the first time this year because of help from Washington lobbyists and special interests.

“Hillary Clinton aggressively seeks money from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs [political action committees],” the e-mail read. “She’s even said that these lobbyists represent real Americans. She’s wrong.”

That e-mail and a campaign “memo” released last week refer to Clinton as “the most entrenched political machine in Democratic politics” and “the greatest money machine in the history of American politics.”

E-mails mentioning Clinton by name have not been unusual for other Democratic candidates, specifically former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.), who has made similar remarks about Clinton for much of the year.

But the increase and intensified criticism out of the Illinois senator’s camp does seem to represent a new strategy. As recently as Labor Day weekend, Obama — on the stump in New Hampshire at the time — was refraining from criticizing Clinton by name, indirectly including her in his remarks with his attacks on Washington and “Washington experience.”

The Clinton campaign repeatedly has responded to Obama’s criticisms by accusing him of running a different campaign than the one he promised.

“It’s unfortunate that Sen. Obama continues to abandon the politics of hope and embrace the kind of attack politics he used to deride,” Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said Tuesday. Singer added, “It’s clear that Sen. Obama spent last week attacking Sen. Clinton, and he is continuing that tactic this week.”

In a speech Monday in Wisconsin, Obama seemed to be spreading the criticism, reportedly denouncing “triangulation and poll-driven politics,” which appears to be a shot at former President Clinton as well.

Steve Elmendorf, a Democratic strategist supporting Clinton’s campaign, said that by including President Clinton in his criticisms, Obama “runs a real risk that you’re going to turn off Democratic voters.”

“She and her husband are very popular with Democratic voters,” Elmendorf said. “You have to be very careful.”

In speeches early in his campaign, Obama refrained from criticizing Clinton altogether, instead saying that his rivals would not be the other candidates or the other party, but cynicism.

“Over the next year of a primary and the next two years leading to the election of the next president, the campaigns ... shouldn’t be about making each other look bad, they should be about figuring out how we can all do some good for this precious country of ours,” Obama said at a Democratic National Committee meeting in February.

For its part, the Obama campaign has responded by saying that it is merely highlighting the differences between the campaigns.

“Sen. Obama believes in leading by example, which is why he has not only refused to take a dime from federal lobbyists or PACs, but why he has fought for the most sweeping ethics and lobbying reforms in both the Illinois state Senate and the U.S. Senate,” spokeswoman Jen Psaki said in an e-mail. “Obama was able to raise more primary dollars than any other candidate in the race by tapping real people and the thousands across the country who are committed to changing the country.

“I would hardly call pointing out the difference an attack.”

What’s clear is that with the Iowa caucuses rapidly approaching, possibly as soon as Jan. 3, if not sooner, the Obama campaign is upping the ante as it seeks to gain ground on Clinton.

Political analyst Charlie Cook told The Hill on Tuesday that Obama has to start throwing long bombs because there is “no prize for second place.”

“Obama has the ‘hope’ voters, but that’s only about a fifth of the Democratic electorate,” Cook said. “At third–and-long yardage, the quarterback sneak, while safe, isn’t likely to produce much yardage.”