E. J. Dionne: How 'Inevitable' Got Outmaneuvered

[babylonsister]

How 'Inevitable' Got Outmaneuvered
By E. J. Dionne


WASHINGTON -- What happened to Hillary Clinton?

Last fall, she was the "inevitable" nominee whose "machine" would raise scads of cash and push her to an early victory. She demonstrated poise and knowledge in debates, and party leaders lined up behind her, fearful of missing her fast-moving train.

But this narrative was flawed from the beginning. Her campaign has suffered from profound organizational failures, small mistakes that took on larger import, and miscalculations that have put her in a position where to survive, she must defeat Barack Obama in both Texas and Ohio next month.

The major flaw in the early story line is that there never was a Clinton machine in the sense of a well-populated organization skilled at turning out votes. Clinton campaigns have always been top-down operations focused on message and media. The Clintons have never lived in a world of precinct captains.

Obama, by contrast, was shaped by his early work as an organizer for the Industrial Areas Foundation and his political life in Chicago, a place where people still talk about ward committeemen and harbor memories of something that was called "The Organization."

While the Clintonites dispensed large amounts of cash on polling, media and the other accoutrements of a modern campaign, Obama combined post-modern online savvy with old-fashioned organizing.

more...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/clinton_struggles_to_find_a_me.html

[OzarkDem]

1. Clinton never said she was "inevitable"

That's an unfair way to characterize her campaign. She's been in the fight competitively from the beginning.

We need to get past the point of assuming Obama is a better candidate simply because he hasn't been tested in the media. The public doesn't know much about him.

[babylonsister]

2. She certainly must have thought she was inevitable. Her campaign

had no ground game for any states after Super Tuesday. That sounds like she thought she didn't need to make the effort. That's kind of backfired on her, hasn't it. Now she's playing catch-up, and by all indications, they're doing a half-assed job of it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4591034

[mwb970]

3. She's just emulating Rudy's successful strategy.

Lose many contests in a row, then withdraw for weeks to plan a "comeback" based on one or two states while your opponent gallops ahead. This should work for her just as well as it did for Rudy.

[OzarkDem]

4. That's an outsiders opinion

None of the candidates originally expected this primary race to go on so long. Both Obama and Clinton had to do additional fundraising to keep going.

And if you think she's not running a good campaign, you haven't paid attention to her work here in Ohio.

Hillary On the Campaign Trail in Ohio

http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/02/campaign.html

[babylonsister]

5. This isn't...08 (D): Caught flat-footed?

CLINTON: So how did Clinton find herself in this predicament? The New York Times attempts to answer that question: "She and her team showered so much money, attention and other resources on Iowa, New Hampshire and some of the 22-state nominating contests on Feb. 5 that they have been caught flat-footed -- or worse -- in the critical contests that followed, her political advisers said." More: "She also made a strategic decision to skip several small states holding caucuses, states where Mr. Obama scored big victories, accumulating delegates and, possibly, momentum. Her heavy spending and relatively modest fund-raising in January compounded the problems, leaving the campaign ill-equipped to plan after Feb. 5, advisers and donors say."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/14/664071.aspx

[Spider Jerusalem]

7. Yes, she did.

It's not unfair at all. She thought she'd have it in the bag after Super Tuesday. It was supposed to be a coronation.

An appealing sense of confidence or an obnoxious sense of entitlement? How you view Hillary Clinton's exchange with Katie Couric last night probably depends entirely on how you view Hillary Clinton herself.

Couric asked Clinton how disappointed she'll be if she's not the Democratic nominee. "Well," Clinton said, "it will be me."

Clinton said, as she has before, that she'll support the Democratic nominee, whoever it may be. So that means that Clinton has at least considered the possibility that she won't be the nominee?

"No," she said, "I haven't."

Source: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2007/11/27/clinton/index.html

[jgraz]

8. The best thing about Hillary losing

is that we'll NEVER have to hear this "she never said <exact wording>" bullshit again. I am so sick of the Clinton parsing machine. :puke:

[Skittles]

10. THANK YOU

and I never thought that either

[underpants]

6. Dionne flat out nails it

the single best analysis or commentary on this race I have yet read.

[JPZenger]

9. Links about Clinton Strategist Mark Penn's Company

Penn is the Worldwide CEO of a company that also represents Blackwater USA, that has been involved in union-busting efforts and that has represented Exelon (which Hillary attacked Obama about).

Here is a link to a great article about the company, from Nation magazine:

http://unfilterednewsnetwork.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=899

They also have a lobbying subsidiary, which is run by a top Republican strategist. That company worked for Ahmad Chalabi, Cheney's best hope for running post-invasion Iraq.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=BKSH_%26_Associates