Free and Utterly Unsolicited Advice

by: Mike Lux

Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 16:45


So here's my advice to all sides about the Democratic primary:
Mike Lux :: Free and Utterly Unsolicited Advice
To my Obama friends who are full of joy, and are beginning to schedule trips to D.C. for the inaugural, I want to give some old man, don't count your chickens before they are hatched advice: it's not over yet. The Clintons are tough as nails, never give up, and get feistier and better when their backs are against the wall. They came back after Iowa to win New Hampshire; they came back after the Culinary Workers' union endorsement to win Nevada; they came back after the Kennedy endorsement to win Massachusetts. They were written off in the '92 primary fight, the '92 general, after the '94 election slaughter, after Monica Lewinsky. These folks are tough to beat. And Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are all states with many, many years of Clinton attention and history and relationship-building, with demographics that play pretty well for her. Don't forget that the media is looking for any excuse to keep this race going, and that we have some debates coming up, so any slip-up by Obama, no matter how small, will have consequences. I have a feeling that you Obama folks are backing the eventual winner, but you will need to keep your nose to the grindstone.

To my Clinton friends, who are gearing up their attack machine for a last all-out assault: your politics of pettiness strategy ain't working. And the results vs. rhetoric thing is not a winner for you, either- it's another version of the experience vs. change message that hasn't worked throughout this campaign. I know that Mark Penn's focus groups say that people are worried about Obama's experience and track record. The thing is, though, while they do have some concerns in that regard, when forced to pick, they are picking change and hope, not results vs. rhetoric.

The basic dynamic of this race is fundamentally wrong for Hillary Clinton: Obama is talking big, exciting things like hope and change and inspiration, she is playing gotcha. It doesn't work.

One trend that is telling: look at Chris' chart from yesterday. Obama hasn't underperformed compared to the pre-election polling since Super Tuesday. Yesterday in Wisconsin he added to that streak- the pre-election polls were an 8-point lead, and he won by 17. The enthusiasm of his base, the strength of his grassroots, and his better message are driving these big margins home.

In spite of all that I said in paragraph one about why this race isn't over, it is 100% clear that the basic message dynamic in this race overwhelmingly favors Obama. If my friends from Hillaryland continue on the path they are on, they are doomed to lose.

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Free and Utterly Unsolicited Advice | 22 comments
smart advice (0.00 / 0)
agree that the media loves that this keeps going, I bet their Tuesday spikes are awesome, and ratings for the next two debates will be colossal.

Many are trying to say it's over, Obama played it smart in WI and won big where Clinton should have made a stand in VA and WI but didn't, clearly due to utterly inept planning by her campaign staff.

Obama will clearly need to keep stepping it up, take nothing for granted and he'll do well March 4th.  Clinton will probably try to tee up something tomorrow during the debates that they can chip away at till Tuesday.  But that'll be fine, it will give Obama's team work and show how effective they are at swatting away Clinton's attacks, this is necessary for the fall.
Tom Hayden wrote an essay at Huffington Post that the magnitude of Obama's victory was diluted a bit because it appears that many Republicans may have crossed over to "help" Clinton.  If the GOP is betting on Clinton to salvage thier party then we will have a very good Wed in November.

Mike, a question (0.00 / 0)
I'd be curious to get your opinion about the thought process that goes on inside a campaign like Hillary Clinton's on going negative.  

For the Clintons, this is clearly her last best chance to become President.  However, if she continues to go negative, she may hurt her reputation (and Bill's).  How permanent do you (or they) see that damage being?  Also, what is the risk/reward calculation?

For her staffers, what goes through their head?  If you are Howard Wolfson or Phil Singer, do you worry that other Democratic candidates may be less likely to hire you next cycle because a President Obama may be less willing to help a campaign being run by someone who attacked him this late in the process?  

On a slightly unrelated note, I've got to believe there is a diminishing rate of return for the Clinton's to go negative.  Now that Obama is the front runner, it would seem that for every voter who may be concerned about any negatives the Clintons raise, there may be two who don't want to see the presumptive nominee attacked.      

John McCain hates children. Expose McCain!  

Please excuse the grammar (I need to start proofreading) (0.00 / 0)


John McCain hates children. Expose McCain!  
[ Parent ]
Campaigns. (4.00 / 1)
My experience in Presidential campaigns is that no one- candidate, candidate's family, staff, consultants- at this stage of a fight is thinking about anything other than how do you salvage a win. And the Clintons are always focused 100% on winning the fight, they are the most competitive, most win-obsessed people I've ever known.
I don't think staffers/consultants worry at all about offending the other candidate, figuring that their candidate will still be needed by the other side no matter what happens and can help protect them.
[ Parent ]
A good friend of mine is a (0.00 / 0)
passionate (and v. productive) Clinton-backer. She believes that this country will suffer profoundly if Clinton is not elected. She knows that Clinton is the right person to lead us out of this morass. She is utterly convinced that the (near) future of her country and her children depends on the election of Clinton.

My friend is playing for very high stakes. I'm not sure why she (or any of the Clinton campaign, including the candidate) would be concerned about anything less than winning.

I admire Clinton, though I voted Obama. I hope she stays in. If he can't beat her, he can't beat Two-Face McCain.

[ Parent ]
Sounds almost like a "cult" (0.00 / 0)
"passionate (and v. productive) Clinton-backer. She believes that this country will suffer profoundly if Clinton is not elected. She knows that Clinton is the right person to lead us out of this morass. She is utterly convinced that the (near) future of her country and her children depends on the election of Clinton."

All that's missing is the "hope".

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Long time reader, first time ... blah blah (0.00 / 0)
Hi everyone.

In the tradition of first comments ... love this blog! I've been drawn to comment given the email I just got from the Obama campaign. They're close to the millionth individual campaign donor. That's a helluva number, and augurs well for a general election. I think Kos has a good comment re: the next two weeks being a good period of seasoning for the Obama campaign, to reinforce its ground game in TX and OH, and to bring a "stronger-defense-against-attacks" game into the light. Will be interesting to see how they stake out the ground.

maybe you can shed some light on two recent additions (0.00 / 0)
to the blogosphere today, the video by TPM showing a pretty darn near word for word speech by McCain and Clinton targeting Obama, and with that the fact that the WaPo has an article with chart showing that Mark Penn is actually the boss of McCain's chief strategist.  Is this what Bill Clinton meant by them being close?

Tale of three speeches:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

WaPo chart (with link to article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Putting on my tin hat, it makes me wonder if there might be a pairing of these two after Obama takes the Dem nomination and most of Clinton's support finally decides its time to jump ship.


McCain-Clinton? (0.00 / 0)
1) She'd never go that far.

2) McCain, the annointed GOP candidate, won a smaller percentage of votes last night than Obama. Huckabee got almost the same percentage as Clinton. I don't think Republicans are going to stay home in November, but if he does pick a Democrat, even Joe Lieberman, that would just about guarantee a third party run.

[ Parent ]
It wouldn't happen. (4.00 / 1)
Hillary is too much of a Democrat, and she knows it would torch her future career in the party.
I think the reason they are launching identical attacks is that focus groups show that this kind of attack is the only one that carries much strength against Obama.
[ Parent ]
I'm curious... (0.00 / 0)
...since you know them, do you have a sense of how hard they will work in '08, for Obama and more importantly for down-ticket races, if Hillary does lose?  
[ Parent ]
Not in the Red states (0.00 / 0)
I doubt they want Hillary there.  Blue states maybe, but there aren't Senate races in too many of the states she won.  I think this is less of a factor than normally.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.
[ Parent ]
? (0.00 / 0)
It's really hard to tell with these things, because the Clintons have never been on the losing end of a primary contest. My guess, though, is that they will work pretty hard, because they have the Clinton legacy to think about, and because Hillary will want to be a major player in the Senate, and doesn't want to seem like she's dogging it.  
[ Parent ]
I'm not so confident... (0.00 / 0)
... If it comes down to Clinton getting into power and getting on the side of powerful interests then I think they would be willing to shed the Democratic label...

e.g. Mr Clinton supporting Independent Lieberman... and Mrs Clinton (obviously knowing what kind of cough Democrat Lieberman was) didn't bat an eyelid.

http://boston.com/news/local/c...

Also, it appears even Schumer (Clinton's buddy) was willing to put certain interests ahead of Party?

http://www.thewashingtonnote.c...

I just don't trust them... They've given me no reason to.

[ Parent ]
agree on both counts (0.00 / 0)
Obama (and Obamans) looking to confident feeds into the "cult of personality" nonsense that the MSM is starting to use, and the Clintons going desperate feeds into the "ruthless and unprincipled" nonsense that the MSM hasn't let go of for almost twenty years now.
With all Obama's momentum, any stumble or gaffe is just going to be amplified. Tweety and the rest of the herd are gunning for him now.
Hillary Clinton, if she does lose, can have a long and effective career in the Senate, if she doesn't adopt a scorched-earth strategy.
asdf (0.00 / 0)
the results vs. rhetoric thing is not a winner for you

"Reformer with Results" was already taken.

Free and Utterly Unsolicited Advice | 22 comments
Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox