Hillary Goes For The Kill (100+ staffers sent to Iowa)

[Herman Munster]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/27/hillary-goes-for-the-kill_n_70118.html

The decision of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign to send 100 or more new staffers into Iowa demonstrates that she and her aides have determined to their own satisfaction that she can cripple Barack Obama in the first-in-the-nation caucus.

Iowa is the only state where current surveys show Obama to be within shooting distance of Clinton. In late August, Clinton took a small lead of 5.2 percent in a poll of likely Democratic caucus goers. That lead, the smallest Clinton holds in any early primary or caucus state, has held up through seven of the eight most recent polls, increasing the willingness of the Clinton team to gamble on a new offensive.

The Obama campaign has already described the January 3 Iowa contest as a must-win event. Clinton's burst of hiring is a declaration that she intends to go for a knockout punch.

There clearly is some risk for Clinton in this strategy: if her campaign is perceived as laying down the gauntlet in Iowa, a defeat would become all the more damaging. Clinton aides remain unwilling to discuss the significance of the upgraded Iowa staffing, resolved to dodge high expectations.

Until now, Clinton has pointedly maintained a comparatively low-key Iowa operation, spending substantially less money than Obama on in-state television, and maintaining a smaller contingent of local campaign workers.

Clinton's calculatedly discreet Iowa staffing commitment was designed to provide the candidate with cover in the event of a loss. Her slim advantage in Iowa polls now allows her to adopt a more aggressive strategy. The campaign hopes to do much of the new hiring on Sunday and Monday.

[gateley]

1. Damn. My poor candidate! nt

[Tellurian]

2. By doing so she has eclipsed Obama band of workers

"As Edwards' standing in Iowa nosedived over the summer and fall, his staff investment has also been eclipsed by Obama. In an October analysis of third-quarter reports to the Federal Election Commission, the Des Moines Register reported that Obama had more staffers in Iowa - 145 - than any of his competitors, with Edwards at 130 and Clinton at 117. Clinton's new hiring is likely to eradicate Obama's personnel advantage."

Hiring 100 new staffers brings Hillary's total to a staggering 217 new staffers, moving the mountain closer to Hillary. And this estimate may be conservative. It could be more in line with 150 staffers. Seeing If Hillary summarily defeats Obama in Iowa, the contest and the wondering would just about be over. Obama doesn't stand a chance in NH and is virtual dead in Nev... She would then have an indisputable lock on the nomination.

And adding just a little dishing:

"At the Beacon Theater,(Hillary's B'day bash) Terry McAuliffe announced that as of that night, the campaign had raised over NINETY-TWO MILLION dollars."

:That would seem to indicate that Hillary raised around *12 MILLION* or so in the first month of Q4. If so, that is phenomenal. She beat him by over 30% in Q3, and would seem to be on the way to doing even better this quarter. Just another indication of the unstoppable momentum of the Clinton campaign."



GO HILLARY!

[DemFemme]

3. Not for long. Obama's Q3 primary $$ CoH was #1 in the entire field after debt was accounted for

I'm sure she won't be the only one beefing up their staffing count. Obama has the funds and means
to do the same if he so wished, only he has an army of dedicated local volunteers that Hillary hasn't
got. She's hiring from the Washington, DC area from what I gather of the job application I've seen.

Orange hats, anyone?

[Tellurian]

7. I haven't seen the final accounting...please post it..

that would be great!

[DemFemme]

31. The Q3 FEC filing will have the details.

Billary had $2+ million in Q3 debt while Obama had none, which brought her down
to below Obama's overall take. A number of news reports dug deeper after the Q3
numbers came out and reported on it (I didn't bookmark any of the links).

[Tellurian]

38. Hillary's net was ahead of Obamas' by a million

So far, in the first 3 weeks of this Quarter, Hillary has raised $12 million. I doubt Obama's total even comes close to that as we type. If anything, Obama is operating in the *red* at this point in time.

[DemFemme]

40. She had $2M+ in debt, while Obama had none.

I doubt Obama is operating in the red at this time. He had more primary CoH after Q3 than the rest of the field (Democratic
and Republican) and raised more than $2M in four days soon thereafter from small online grassroots contributors.

We'll see how Q4 shakes out. Hillary has PAC and lobbyist money pouring in while Obama has more grassroots donor
contribution under $200 than the entire field (Democratic and Republican) combined. It will be interesting. Not that it
will matter all that much by mid-January, when the numbers come out. The ground game in Iowa is what's paramount
now.

[Tellurian]

56. Face it...Obama is just about BROKE!

He will be applying for Public funding before the end of the quarter, just as is Edwards.

[DemFemme]

74. LOL - uh, no

Tellurian, you're just trying to be silly and outrageous now. But I appreciate your humor.

[Tellurian]

76. Keep your CC handy...

those Obama memo's will be coming in Monday am...pre-debate! :hi:

[DemFemme]

85. What's a CC?

:shrug:

We unpaid candidate defenders don't get campaign memos like you do. We don't have to because the truth
is our friend.

Say hello to Peter Daou for me. I knew him before he sold his soul to Billary. His $1.5M Internet budget is
being strategically spent, I see.

[...of J.Temperance]

110. A CC, it involves Motorcycles....it's rather complex....

Speed and whatnot....like 1500CC and stuff like that.

He's telling you to keep a Motorcycle handy for after the debate on Tuesday!



:)

[DemFemme]

116. Oh, all that stuff that escapes me (well, I am Femme!)

Thanks, JT, you're sweet for explaining that to me. ;-)

I probably will stay out of the debate spin wars here, unless forced to intercede. lol

[peace frog]

4. Well, that tears it!

The aura of inevitability has hardened into a permanence. Edwards, Obama etc should just throw in the towel and give up right now. Election's over, folks - Hillary has already won.

Uh huh.

[Tellurian]

10. Looks like your prediction is coming true!

we'll know for sure after Tuesday's debate..

[peace frog]

20. Silently folding their tents and slipping away

As inevitability gives way to complacency. Heckuva job.

[Tellurian]

24. Obama's ego won't let him go until the bitter end.. I'm sure.

[peace frog]

26. The 'bitter end' is here and now

Goodbye Barack, we hardly knew ye.

[...of J.Temperance]

5. The woman IS awesome!

Gosh this story got me all excited....Hillary is going to kick Obama's ass....he's going to be so crushed by February, that he'll drop out the game completely by late February-early March.

[Benhurst]

9. Yeah, that's a great way to bring the Democratic Party together

for the general election.

[...of J.Temperance]

11. IF Hillary becomes our Presidential nominee, then you WILL vote for her

Because the alternative WILL be TOO scary to risk letting in.

[burythehatchet]

70. I wouldn't vote for her under any circumstances. Never.

[Nedsdag]

143. Don't ever tell anyone who they should vote for.

This isn't Cuba or North Korea. This isn't the old Soviet Union. If a person wants to vote for someone besides your candidate then that's his or her choice.

[HughBeaumont]

151. I don't have to do shit except pay taxes and die.

This isn't Nazi Germany.

The alternative is getting a good candidate, which Hillary isn't.

[cobalt1999]

6. I like Hillary, but I'm uncomfortable with Iowa.

I preferred her earlier strategy of protecting her lead in the later states and doing just enough to keep it close in Iowa.

Why get down and dirty fighting in the only state she can lose in? Of course, if she wins there, the primary is over in one swoop. However, if she fights hard and loses badly, it may cripple her campaign.

Oh well, she knows more about campaigning than I ever will, so I'll just have to trust her instincts.

[...of J.Temperance]

12. Hillary knows what she's doing, don't worry, she's VERY politically savvy

I trust her judgement and her political instincts.

[Benhurst]

16. Yeah. If she hadn't been VERY politically savvy,

we wouldn't have universal health care now and be at the mercy of the big insurance companies.

I hope she's learned.

I'll be convinced when she comes out for a single-payer health care plan.

[...of J.Temperance]

17. How you arrive at blaming Hillary for that, I'm not entirely sure

Also, as a DLCer I can tell you that the DLC is opposed to single-payer health care....so Senator Clinton won't be advocating a single-payer health care plan.

[Benhurst]

19. She got rolled by the health insurance industry. If she had been more

experienced, she would have opened up the process, built support for her proposals by taking the time through PUBLIC hearings to expose the health care system as the horror story it is, and might very well have succeeded in getting decent health care for this pathetically backward dump. The World's Only Superpower! Yeah. Sure. We're number 32 (or 51, depends on who's counting) in health care and falling.

Oh, the DLC doesn't want it? Dear God, that's a surprise. We sure wouldn't want anybody who would stand up to those corporate enablers and profiteers as our leader.

[Tellurian]

23. At least she tried...thats more than any Republican's ever done!..

[...of J.Temperance]

35. Word! n/t

.

[...of J.Temperance]

34. Hillary's heart was in the right place, her heart still IS in the right place

With regard to the DLC alternative to single-payer health care:

"Health Coverage For All":

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254475&kaid=111&subid=137

"Democrats Getting Health Care Right":

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254444&kaid=131&subid=192

Senator Clinton's own Health Care plan, it's jolly good as well:

http://www.ideasprimary.com/?p=309


The single-payer health care thing, would be too expensive, it would also have the possibility of being damaging to small businesses.

The DLC alternative and Senator Clinton's plan, which for all intents and purposes, follows both the DLC belief and the PPI belief on healthcare, are very logical, pragmatic and fair to ALL.

[Benhurst]

41. Allowing "insurance" companies to continue to rake in unconscionable

profits (up to 30 percent) is what we cannot afford. We ALREADY spend more per capita than any other nation on earth and still manage to have almost half of our people either uninsured or under-insured. We're number one in cost, number 32 at best in services provided.

It's time for the corporate ripoff to stop.

The burden of single-payer would be spread out over the country as a whole. Small business would in no way be hurt, unless you count the indentured labor they benefit from which is unable to leave for better employment for fear of losing what little crappy health care they have.

The DLC was wrong on NAFTA and they are dead wrong on this. Republican Lite is not good enough.

[populistdriven]

44. you are never going to get these hillbots to address these issues directly

Hillbots, now thats a dysphemism I can sink my meme into!

[Benhurst]

45. Which does not bode well for the future.

[Tellurian]

55. And sink you will, dysphemism and all!

[...of J.Temperance]

115. "Hillbots"....what about the Cult of Obama....the "Obamabots"

They are actually worse, at least us Hillary supporters can criticise our candidate and admit that she's NOT perfect and has made some decisions that we don't agree with.

The Cult of Obama are incapable it seems of criticising Obama or saying that he's anything less than perfect and right about EVERYTHING.

[Tellurian]

54. Yes, typical Kucinich think...and why nothing ever gets done

single payer will never be passed by Congress.

Anymore brilliant ideas?

[Benhurst]

57. Yeah, let's all become Repulican lite, go along with their wars and

continue to let the corporations rip us off. The country will remain a fascist dump, but at least it will be OUR fascist dump.

[Tellurian]

58. Hey, elect Kucinich Mayor again. See how long it takes to Bankrupt Cleavland this time..

[Benhurst]

62. Not everyone who is disturbed by the Republican lite policies of

of the DLC and still holds traditional Democratic values is a Kucinich supporter; but I am beginning to see how DLC members might feel such is the case. I, as of yet, have not chosen a candidate.

One can still be a Democrat and support traditional progressive values. Enabling the Neo-cons, aiding in the shredding of our Constitution, supporting the corporate fascist agenda of privatization and going along with immoral foreign adventures is not compulsory, nor is getting in bed with the health insurance industry.

[Tellurian]

65. Well then as intelligent as your post

purports to be, I assume you know the difference between a Congressional majority and the effects of a Veto.

[Benhurst]

66. Just because one can't get a bill past a veto is no excuse not standing one's ground.

The Republicans, although almost always on the wrong side of every issue, at least have learned to hold their ground and then scream bloody murder about their temporary setbacks, holding fast to their principles, dubious as those principles may be.

Our leaders' enabling Bush's illegal and immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq was naif at best. Giving him cover to repeat his actions in Iran was inexcusable.

Voting for the so-called "Patriot" Act was a direct assault on the Constitution, and close to treason; but renewing it, would have made even Vidkun Quisling blush. How sad it is that Bob Barr, the former right-wing Republican Congressman from Georgia, took a vocal stand against the "Patriot" Act in defense of the Constitution when our own senators and congressmen were either too ignorant or cowardly to do so.

We have not been served well by our "leaders."

Winning high office means little if one's principles are lost in the process. Holding one's ground against a powerful opponent creates a record upon one can stand and eventually carry the day. Going along only creates the kind of muddied situation in which we now find ourselves.

Unfortunately, in both political parties, it has been only the mavericks who have stood by the Constitution and the Republic and fought against the fascist policies of the war criminals running our executive branch.

How many of our "leaders" could truthfully state what Henry Clay said so many years ago: "I'd rather be right than president"?

[Tellurian]

75. Where or when has Hillary demonstrated a loss of principles?

I don't know how you can deny Bill Clinton didn't hold his ground during the Impeachment hearings.

I hope you've learned your lesson and will vote for a Democrat in the next election.

[Benhurst]

77. Learned my lesson, indeed! How insulting.

I have worked in Democratic campaigns since JFK's successful run for the presidency in 1960.

I have officially worked on Democratic campaigns for city council members, mayors, state representatives and Senators, governors in three states, U.S. representatives and senators, and two national presidential campaigns, serving on the congressional steering committee of one.

Just what is your experience, other than sniping at others from the comfort of Democratic Underground?

You might consider doing Senator Clinton a favor and stop posting as if you were representing her campaign. If she is going to be the party's nominee, which is still not settled, then she is going to need to bring the party together.

Efforts such as yours will prove counterproductive in the extreme.

[Tellurian]

86. I don't promote Republicans...too bad you can't say the same

you said:

"The Republicans, although almost always on the wrong side of every issue, at least have learned to hold their ground and then scream bloody murder about their temporary setbacks, holding fast to their principles, dubious as those principles may be."

(...)

"We have not been served well by our "leaders."

Why don't you do the Democrats a favor and stay home rather than supposedly working for them!

[Benhurst]

95. I guess some find satisfaction in being mindless, simi-literate groupies.

If you think the first sentence of mine you quoted is supportive of the Republicans, you need to return to grammar school.

As for the second, anyone who reveres the Constitution would not think we have been well served since the Bush junta took control. The inexcusable support given the so-called "Patriot" Act by members of our own party, is proof enough of my contention.

Fortunately for Senator Clinton, I'm sure she must have some literate followers who can plead her cause, all evidence to the contrary on this particular thread.

And by the way, just what work, other than your disservice here, have you done for the party? From the tenor of your posts, I would guess you haven't so much as licked a postage stamp for a precinct committeeman. All hat and no cattle like someone else we know.

[...of J.Temperance]

117. "Mindless, semi-literate groupies"....more insults from you

Up thread you were going on about being "insulted"....yet here you are AGAIN, hot on the heels of slurring the DLC and DLCers as being "Republican Lite"....now it's "mindless, semi-literate groupies"

Maybe next time you get your knickers in a twist about being "insulted" for *gasp* being thought of as a Dennis Kucinich supporter....here you have been hurling insults yourself.

[Benhurst]

125. If you'd bother to READ the exchange, you'd find I was in no way

saying I was insulted at being called a Kucinich supporter, merely that I had not yet chosen a candidate.

I was insulted by the totally unfounded statement stating, "I hope you've learned your lesson and will vote for a Democrat in the next election" coming from an individual who in all likelihood has never even bothered to lick stamps at the precinct level.

[...of J.Temperance]

128. What and....

Calling the DLC "Republican-lite" when we're clearly not and calling us Hillary supporters "mindless, semi-literate groupies" AREN'T insults?

I have a perfect ability to think for myself, and I find your comments most unbecoming and rather unfortunate.

[Benhurst]

136. That was directed at one individual who was doing a pretty

good job of mimicking a mindless, semi-literate groupie; but feel free to continue to appropriate it you wish.

[...of J.Temperance]

114. What's ALSO insulting is you referring to the DLC as "Republican lite"

When we're plainly not "Republican lite", I wish people would actually read more and educate themselves more about the DLC....there's a lot of misunderstanding about the DLC.

[hedgehog]

78. Please, it is very unkind to lay such temptation in front of someone who is trying

to avoid descending into nasty language.

[Tellurian]

88. Nasty language? I'm not an Obama supporter! NT

[hedgehog]

90. OK, the temptation is too much - can't hold back any more -

when has the Queen of triangulation ever had any principles to lose?

[Tellurian]

93. Define Triangulation...if you can, that is?

[Benhurst]

98. Google it. You might learn something,

in the unlikely event you understand the material to which you are referred.

[DemFemme]

108. *Zing*

:rofl:

[...of J.Temperance]

118. Do you EVEN KNOW what Triangulation is?

I've always found that when people say "Google it", it tends to mean that they're unable to give the definition of what they were actually asked.

[Tellurian]

120. And someone will always engage in a premature *Zing*...

:rofl:

[...of J.Temperance]

126. Well yeah

The Zing Thing is SOOOOOOOOOO last Century!

;)

[Benhurst]

121. Yeah. Sure.

[...of J.Temperance]

123. Okay then, tell us what Triangulation is, go on....n/t

.

[Tellurian]

135. *BUSTED*

:rofl:

[Benhurst]

140. Obviously those supporting Clinton are trying to distance themselves from it,

just as the Clintons distanced themselves from Dick Morris, its author.

[Tellurian]

142. Actually, we're trying to distance ourselves

from a Gore Vidal impersonator! :P

[crickets]

146. I got your lost principles right here

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/200601017_hillary_equivocates_on_torture/
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2006/10/clinton_equivocates_on_torture.html

^^
This is where she lost me, for good. Torture is immoral. The "it's okay if we do it, if we have a rilly, rilly good reason" camp we've got parading around in our government right now, including Hillary, can KMA.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2141037

I cheered on reading this. If Hillary were ever in a position to condone such actions, and if she ever did so, I would cheer just as loudly to see her get the reception Rumsfeld received in France this week. She would deserve it. The fact that she's left the door open, even a crack, to allowing or ordering torture if elected President, speaks volumes.

My answer is a resounding NO.

[Tellurian]

147. Ridiculous!

I remember when Hillary made that remark concerning torture. She meant it, as in a matter of life or death. She was answering with brutal honesty. Your response is an oversimplification of a yes or no answer and ridiculous in the face of a threat of terror.

[crickets]

148. Terra! Terra! Terra!

The ticking clock question Hillary was asked was bogus. She should have said so and refused to answer it in the way it was framed. Even so, she had every opportunity to speak against the crime of torture. She did not. If you read the discussion from one of the above links - or any informed discussion - about torture, you would recognize that it is not useful as a questioning technique. People will say anything to stop the pain, anything the questioner wants to hear. It is sadism. The way to deal with terror threats is not to BECOME the terrorist by torturing a prisoner but to gather intel all along, to cultivate a trustworthy network of contacts and keep an ear to the ground. Good intelligence provides the opportunity to thwart a terrorist attack beforehand. A government which makes every honest effort to do this and still fails cannot be blamed for moral crimes. The torturer is always morally guilty, hands down.

Domestic law, international law and the Geneva Convention all bar torture, with good reason. It is barbaric and unacceptable in civilized society.

The oversimplification is yours. There is no justification for torture. None.

[Tellurian]

149. Anyone in a position of power should never speak in absolutes.

You, my friend are doing just that. Hillary was not going to allow herself to be entrapped by any form of absolute, not in the case of torture. There are always exceptions to the rule. That is why we have a court system in place to Judge those that test the rule as justification for the exception or implement the rule for enforcement and condemnation.

I agree with your point on torture as a rule, but to state that rule in the form of an absolute, no, I do not agree.

[crickets]

150. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

We aren't talking about fashion, or our taste in beers. This isn't about some nebulous philosophical preference.

Torture is AGAINST THE LAW. It is a WAR CRIME.

Yes, that is absolute. It is supposed to be, by definition. I don't want a President who cares to "test" that. The tests that brought about these laws have already occurred throughout history; to repeat them is baseless.

The use of torture in the next administration would be a continuation of some of the most heinous behavior of the current administration, behavior which has lowered us to the level of mud in many if not most of the eyes of the international community, behavior which has appalled and infuriated much of the country, especially in our own party. I will not advocate, much less vote for, a candidate who tells me beforehand that she will flout the law of our land, the law of civilized nations around the world, and the international pact guiding military conduct that will protect our own soldiers from abuse.

"Hi! I'm going to pick and choose which laws I will obey!" sounds sickeningly familiar. "Hi! I'm a future war criminal!" isn't a good pose for a Presidential candidate.

That is why we have a court system in place to Judge those that test the rule as justification for the exception or implement the rule for enforcement and condemnation.

The court in question is called The Hague.

I want a candidate who will put a STOP to these things. Apparently, Hillary can't commit to that. And this doesn't bother you. I am not your 'friend.' You and people who think like you are certainly not mine. Therefore, I have nothing left to say to you or to your candidate.

Ignored.

[Tellurian]

152. thrilled to be on IGNORE!

the torture is OVER!

[Silence Dogood]

153. Well then-

If, one of cricket's children is kidnapped and taken hostage by a domestic terrorist and the kidnapper is subsequently captured by the authorities. The kidnapper refuses to divulge to authorities where the child is hidden. A week has gone by. The police are unable to extract any information whatsoever as to the child's whereabouts. The kidnapper has maintained the child is alive, but without food and water, how long can the child survive?

M/M Cricket refuse to allow any form of abuse or torture as an inducement for information from the kidnapper. Everyday that goes by, the chances of finding the child alive grow slimmer. Time is of the essence. What to do, what to do?

[Tellurian]

154. GREAT Point...BUT, BUT, BUT...

It doesn't matter if they refuse each and every avenue at their disposal including extreme means (torture) to get their child back. Eh, they can always have another one, right!

[crickets]

157. Lookit the purty straw man

The pain and horror of suffering the kidnapping of a child has absolutely nothing to do with my disapproval of a political candidate's views. You're setting up a hypothetical situation where it's assumed that torture is on the table for police officers. It isn't, of course. Police officers follow laws too, just as Presidents are expected to. To suggest that police officers would have no other tools at their disposal than torture to find a missing child is doing a disservice to the officers in uniform.

Two of the many reasons why people can't stand Bush include his disregard for the law and the fact his Presidency condones torture. Hillary has publicly stated that she will not rule out more of the same. It doesn't make it right just because she has a D by her name.

[crickets]

145. Thank you!

Winning high office means little if one's principles are lost in the process. Holding one's ground against a powerful opponent creates a record upon one can stand and eventually carry the day. Going along only creates the kind of muddied situation in which we now find ourselves.

Exactly. Everything you said in your post is so on the mark, this is one of those times I wish I could rec it all on its own.

[...of J.Temperance]

113. How are we "going along with their wars"?

If you haven't noticed the Republicans are chomping at the bit to start War With Iran, and probably after that War With Syria.

The Democrats want neither of those things.

[Benhurst]

130. Hillary's vote on Iraq was a mistake, as was Edwards' vote, but

he at least has had the grace to admit his mistake. Her vote on Iran compounds her first mistake and, despite her protestations, may very well be used by Bush for another unprovoked war.

[...of J.Temperance]

131. What about Barack Obama's mistakes then?

Yes?

[Benhurst]

141. And their relevance?

[...of J.Temperance]

111. The DLC wasn't "wrong" on NAFTA, there's nothing wrong with NAFTA

And in fact *gasp* Senator Barack Obama has even now said that he intends to vote in favor of the NAFTA expansion.

The DLC was right way back then, and we're still right now about NAFTA.

The DLC Health Care policy, did you EVEN read the articles that I linked, you probably didn't....you just see the letters "DLC" and immediately go into Off Mode.

The DLC Health Care policies are completely logical and fair to ALL.

[Benhurst]

133. Check out our balance of trade with both Canada and Mexico. NAFTA has

surely worked wonders. Still fewer than a million jobs lost so far. A raging success.

Obama's position is hardly a surprise, despite his requesting his name be removed from the DLC's list of supporters.


As long as insurance-for-profit companies have a stranglehold on our health care system, we shall continue to rate poorly on national health and shall continue to spend more than any other nation on earth. At present we're routinely rated even lower than the United Kingdom.

[cuke]

112. It was Sen Byrd who killed Universal Health Care in 1993

He decided that Clinton's managed care proposal could not be a part of the budget, which meant it needed a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate, which was impossible with the republicans in the senate. If Byrd had let it be part of the budget, it would only need 50 votes (which they had) because budgets can't be filibustered

[Tellurian]

13. Hillary has been running a positive campaign all along!

Obama is the one on the attack. Hillary won't get down in the mud with HIM.. She'll pull him up short. And we'll have to watch him mumbling and stumbling issuing clarifications until next Sunday. Hillary has hardly lifted a finger against Obama. He has yet to feel any major effort from her. His puny debate performance and the resulting low poll numbers are forcing Obama to go on the attack in a last ditch effort to define himself as any type of leader.

[...of J.Temperance]

15. My prediction from a few days ago still stands

That Barack Obama is done, stick a fork in him....he'll never recover from the gay-bashing Preacherman FU.

For all intents and purposes, Obama is just wasting money, he ain't going anywhere, come January 20th, 2009, he'll STILL be Senator Obama....whereas Hillary Clinton is going to be number 44....she's not getting BIG MONEY donations for NO reason, the BIG donors feel that Hillary Clinton is going to be number 44 as well.

[cobalt1999]

18. I've always said Hillary is running a "Microsoft" campaign.

Microsoft tries to never mention a competitor. They let competitors mention them. It's a great strategy when you are a front runner as talking about your competitors puts them on the same plane as you and gives them credibility. A very smart campaign strategy.

Iowa is just a weird place to campaign and win in, and Obama has the cash to match her staffer for staffer, so I don't see the upside of this move from a strategy perspective UNLESS something is showing her she can win big there.

[Tellurian]

22. Obama doesn't have the CA$H Hillary does...

Just in the first month of this 4thQ, she's taken in $12M. Last week Obama had only $3M in reserve and sent out an e-memo begging for donations.. He raised a little over $2m in a day. I haven't heard about any startling cash numbers flowing to Obama, in fact his Finance Chairman just resigned and fled to the Hillary Camp, because he's is Gay and will not support the way Obama is disrespecting Gays for VOTES!

I admire his principled move.

[cobalt1999]

27. I wasn't aware of the Finance Chairman move, but...

he's got enough cash (or can raise it), to keep up with Hillary staffer to staffer in Iowa. In fact, he probably needs to focus his money there and South Carolina and, if he runs low, exclude other states for the time being.

Still, Iowa can be a problem for Hillary. I don't expect her to win there, but I think she'll be close even without the effort.

[Tellurian]

29. Obama has been burning through money on tv ads in Iowa

For all intents and purposes, he is just about as broke as Edwards. I doubt his SC Gospel tour is going to be a successful advertisement for future donations unless because of it he picks up Republican sponsorships.

[DemFemme]

100. Wrong. Obama had more CoH than Hillary after Q3 according to FEC filings.

He made up the $1.5M difference (that was before Hillary's $2M+ debt was figured in) with that $2M+
in four days from online grassroots donors (not big business, lobbyists, and special interest PACs).
He had no debt entering Q4 and he's got plenty of dough according to the FEC.

Obama's National Finance Chairman did not resign. A guy who raised only $50K resigned. Big deal.
I also haven't read anywhere that said the reason he left was because he's gay and/or upset.

[Tellurian]

134. Hillary has about $15 M more COH according to the FEC Filing than Obama

Obama's COH= $14,375,822.30 LESS than Hillary
Obama has little over $1mil for the GE

Sorry! :hi:

[Benhurst]

8. We should consider holding a direct auction of the presidency on the steps

of the U.S. Senate.

The results would be the same, time would be saved, and the money would go directly to the U.S. Treasury, instead of into the pockets of "consultants" and the corporate media.

SPQR: The more things change, the more they remain the same.

[Tellurian]

14. The Treasury = Bush

How about Ebay?

[FreeStateDemocrat]

21. Corporate whore buys it with blood money.

[wyldwolf]

25. wait..

:rofl:

[...of J.Temperance]

37. Hilarious!

Lol! :rofl:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

28. Forget staffers, how many volunteers do the candidates have?

Staffers are poli sci grads in nice shoes who order the volunteers around. Most of the ones I've known wouldn't be caught dead pounding the pavement or making phone calls.

Here in my state the Obama campaign has thousands of volunteers, many of whom are volunteering for the very first time. Their enthusiasm is infectious. Clinton has more of the party insiders and big donors, but not many of the kind of people who do grunt work. I predict her campaign will be hiring professional canvassers.

[Tellurian]

32. Thats not what I heard..

She has almost doubled her staffers in Iowa and there are plenty of volunteers at the ready. If she needs more
volunteers on the ground, all she has to do is bring them in from nearby states for the final press in the last two weeks before the caucus.

No worries here. She's run a strategically flawless campaign from the day she announced.

[ElizabethDC]

47. The staffers I know work incredibly hard - they stay late to make phone calls

and give up their weekend time to go door to door. That's been the case with most campaigns that I've worked with.

I also know loads of people who are volunteering for Hillary, including me. I've been into the HQ to make phone calls, and I'm certainly not lonely when I'm there. I know some volunteers who are so committed that they're flying to Iowa over Christmas break to volunteer for Hillary. I wish I could do the same, but I'm (temporarily) moving to London in January.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

48. The main job of a staffer is to get people to volunteer to do that stuff

If a staffer is making phone calls or knocking on doors, they're not doing their job. That's a sure sign that there aren't enough volunteers.

[ElizabethDC]

49. This is the way it's been on all the campaigns that I've volunteered/worked on

and most of them have been successful and had plenty of volunteers. I think the main reason for it is that on most campaigns (from local to national) many of the staffers are transplants from other parts of the country, so they wind up spending their free time on the campaign, because those are the people they know.

My experience as a volunteer on Hillary's campaign is that, while the staffers do make calls, they're usually to volunteers such as myself, who come in and make other calls to folks in other parts of the country. I can't speak for canvassing, because (to the best of my knowledge) there hasn't been any canvassing in the DC area or in FL, which are the two places where I spend the most time.

[CoffeeCat]

30. As an Iowan...

I'd like to say that it doesn't matter if Hillary ushers in an army
of "staffers".

She's my last choice.

[Tellurian]

33. Hillary is doing very well in Iowa Polls.. She leads at the front of the pack!

October 18, 2007

Strategic Vision Iowa poll:

Clinton 28%, Obama 23%, Edwards 20%, Richardson 9%

[calteacherguy]

61. Still nearly within the margin of error. An extremely tight race, indeed. nt

[Tellurian]

63. Hillary treats every poll as if she's 20 pts behind..

even when she's showing a 30 pt lead.

[DemFemme]

106. Ouch.

:thumbsup:

[acmavm]

36. Don't like Hils at all, really I don't. But even I know that she's not in the

race to lose.

This just makes sense from the point of view of someone running for office. What's she supposed to do? I would think anyone would be for doing whatever it takes to win.

Again, don't like the woman, don't like her at all. But why this is even news I don't understand. It's only logical.

[Tellurian]

39. Stay tuned...Obama's planning on flexing his muscle Tues night..

:popcorn:

[ginchinchili]

42. Just serves to demonstrate that the winner is the one who can raise the most money.

What is less celebrated are the strings that come attached to that money. Make no mistake, they do exist and Hillary will fulfill her end of the bargin. In this respect there is little difference between her and Dubya.

[Tellurian]

52. Hillary isn't supported by Republican donors..

or Republican operatives running her campaign!

[ginchinchili]

137. Make no mistake; many of the same donors who supported Dubya are supporting Hillary

It's called hedging your bet. I never said Republican operatives are running her campaign. I don't know where you got that from. My point was that she is taking huge corporate donations and she will pay them back with legislation that is favorable to their industry, as did George W. Bush.

[Debi]

43. I just hope her campaign doesn't call this 'The Perfect Storm'

Not many Iowans appreciated being swarmed by staffers and volunteers four years ago...

[Cameron27]

46. That's a beautiful pic.

[madfloridian]

50. Nor did they like phone calls saying he did abortions and she was a Jew.

We have a daughter and granddaughter there, and they got the calls.

Let's not blame it all on the orange caps, after all.

BTW that is a video, did you know that? That picture is on the cover. It is professionally done. Called Take it Back.

[Debi]

51. Oh, mad, you know I'm not blaming it ALL on the orange caps

but this thread is about adding over 100 MORE staff members to Iowa. That's what made me recall the Perfect Stormers.

Some of us Iowans don't appreciate strangers from out of state showing up right prior to the Caucuses to tell us who we should stand with. Several of Clinton's staffers and volunteers have grown up here, lived her and worked in politics here. It's different when they want to talk with us about their loyalty to Clinton or their desire to see her President, as compared to someone from New York or California coming here late in the game and being paid to tell us the same. (Kind of like getting paid robo-calls from Ohio :eyes:)

I just got a letter from a woman in my town telling me why she supports Barack Obama - much more personal that a stranger calling me or knocking on my door.

Just my two cents :hi:

[madfloridian]

53. Here's the video link page with trailer.

http://takeitbackfilm.com/

[Debi]

99. Thanks n/t

[calteacherguy]

60. My sense is she has a different style. nt

[calteacherguy]

59. Hillary does not have to be concerned with any other states much

since she is so far ahead everywhere except Iowa. She can pour massive amounts of resources into Iowa at a time of her choosing.

Obama is not in that position. He can't afford to neglect other states because even if he wins Iowa, he has to be strong enough in the other states for the Iowa results to propel him to the lead elsewhere. So, we may actually see Hillary in the end putting more resources into Iowa than Obama, or forcing Obama to put all his resources into Iowa. Either way, it makes it very tough for Obama.

[Tellurian]

64. Obama is almost broke..

He's spent his donor money foolishly and as a result has little to show for it!

[Ethelk2044]

68. That is a fucking Lie. Hillary has spent more money than Obama

You need to start fact checking your posts. You are making yourself look really stupid. Obama last release shows him spending a lot less than Hillary. You are a fool for posting this comment.

[Tellurian]

71. Prove it! Obama is operating in the RED...or can't you count?

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[calteacherguy]

87. I'd respect you more if you took a more objective view.

You have little credibility because you refuse to acknowledge anything not beneficial to one candidate, even to the point of lying.

[Tellurian]

96. Do your own math..and figure it out for yourself!

Obama hasn't even filed a detailed report of his expenses yet. It was due to be filed 2 wks ago.

[DemFemme]

102. The FEC has all the facts. We can all do the math.

As for hotel and meal expenses, that's par for the course in many campaigns because of the number of receipts
that need to be tallied (as any businessman doing year-end taxes on an IRS extension understands) and the FEC
had no problem with it.

Try again.

[Tellurian]

107. You mean when they push their payroll over to the next quarter's expenses...

and remain in non-compliance because they haven't filed a detailed breakdown. Whats the hold up?

And put out a memo 2 days after filing to their supporters... HELP we NEED MOney!

Yeah, tell me about it.

[DemFemme]

109. Do you make it up as you go along? Wrong again. It's called a Q3 FEC filing extension.

Similar to a tax filing extension. Campaigns do it all the time.

Oh, and the Obama campaign decided to call on their grassroots to counter the big business, lobbyist,
and special interest PAC money that Billary is raking in now that put her a llittle ahead in Q3. That Obama,
Edwards and others have both decided not to sell themselves to the highest bidder is good for the little
guys, who have had enough of that under Bush.

[Tellurian]

119. Of which I provided the definition thereof..

Obama and Edwards are having a hard time finding new (lg.)donors.

Ah, thanks for the explanation..

[Ethelk2044]

69. Obama has enough ground offices and support. Also, get this he is not having to pay for

them to work in his campaign. They are doing it because they believe in him.

[Tellurian]

72. They're called VOLUNTEERS, Ethel...everyone has them..

non paid workers = volunteers

[ElizabethDC]

79. Ethel, Hillary has plenty of volunteers who believe in her

in Iowa and elsewhere. She and Obama both also have paid staffers, as do the other campaigns. It seems to me you aren't too familiar with on-the-ground political work, or how things are going in this campaign.

[eweaver155]

82. That is why she has to ask for 100 more and willing to pay. All Obama has to do is send an email

for volunteers. No pay involved

[ElizabethDC]

84. That doesn't mean that he doesn't have paid staffers.

Paid staffers and volunteers aren't mutually exclusive. Campaigns have both.

[Tellurian]

94. Shhhh! Obama hasn't told them there is a difference..

[ronnykmarshall]

158. psst! psst!

Talking to La Ethel is like talking to a brick wall.

[DemFemme]

103. He has a few paid staffers (at the top) but the vast majority are volunteers.

Ergo, Hillary's 100-150 paid staffers with job applications everywhere in political Washington, D.C.
and NoVa (northern Virginia).

I haven't heard/read that she's offering to hire Iowa locals, though. Obama and Edwards probably have
the majority of all the Iowa Dem volunteers/activists at this point, while Billary has to put out a "Help
Wanted" sign in Washington, D.C., that bastion of grassroots fervor. :rofl:

[Ethelk2044]

67. She could not get someone to work for her because they believed in her. She had to put out a want

ad.

:rofl:

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Benhurst]

83. If they are, they are even bigger fools than I had feared they might be.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[calteacherguy]

89. What do you like most about Obama? nt

[Tellurian]

92. I like that I am not one of his supporters..

who are you supporting THIS WEEK?

[calteacherguy]

144. Are you too insecure to answer the question?

[DemFemme]

104. Good one. LOL

And oh so true.

[NewHampster]

80. Awesome

[BlueIris]

97. Geeze—DESPERATE much?

Good luck, Hil. Snerk.

[zulchzulu]

105. Good luck with that...

I just got back from a day in Dubuque, Iowa and can tell you firsthand that the support for Hillary Clinton is pretty small. The support for Obama and/or Edwards is stunning.

[sampsonblk]

122. No surprise: Flawless campaign, going for the jugular early

This thing may be over almost before it starts.

[...of J.Temperance]

124. It's politics, what do you expect?

Politics isn't a pretty business, it's often Dog Eat Dog....I don't think Senator Obama is tough enough to handle Senator Clinton, I mean last week we had him acting like a wimp by issueing a statement demanding that people stop criticising him, so what the heck does that say?

[mike from ri]

127. there is a better way: Richardson

iowa dems will go for a governor; a proven executive; a tested diplomat

[...of J.Temperance]

129. I'd be happy with a Clinton/Richardson ticket....Hillary must

Go on top though, because well....girls like to go on top afterall :)

[bigdarryl]

132. All campaigns increase staff as the election nears closer. So whats all the noise about Clinton....

sending in more staff.

[Capn Sunshine]

138. People have been asking about when the elitist drones from the NE will be showing up

Thanks for playing to the base :hi:

[William769]

139. K&R!

[hedgehog]

155. Too many, too late? nt

[BenDavid]

156. Well now that is great and she will go to Iowa a

few more times and one of her last visits she will bring the Big Dawg with her to "seal the deal".....

A lil preview of when HRC will bring Chelsea into the campaign. Remember when in 96 Bill got on the train and Chelsea was there with him. You can look for this to happen with HRC and Chelsea will be with her......Not until she wins the nomination and most likely in August, September 08.

Ben David