FLASHBACK: Mike Henry (now resigned) authored leaked memo proposing Hillary skip Iowa

[jefferson_dem]

May 23, 2007
Text
Clinton Campaign Memo on Iowa
The following is the text of a Clinton campaign memo obtained by The New York Times.

To: Interested Parties

From: Mike Henry

Date: May 21 2007

Re: An alternative nomination strategy

Issue: The 2008 campaign for the Democratic nomination will be unlike any other election in history. In past presidential campaigns smaller states, like Iowa and New Hampshire, played a more prominent role in securing the nomination. That process was based on the momentum that was created from winning Iowa or New Hampshire. Thirteen of the last 14 major-party nominees have won Iowa, New Hampshire, or both. Senator Clinton's husband is the only exception. But I think this old system is about to collapse and it will happen this year because of the impact of primary elections that are being held on February 5th. In effect, the Democratic Party is holding a national primary with over 20 states choosing a no our overall strategy and assess where our time and money are best spent.

Proposal: I believe we need a new approach to winning the Democratic nomination.

This approach involves shifting the focus away from Iowa and running a campaign that is more focused on other early primary states and winning this new national primary. More specifically, I propose skipping the Iowa caucuses and dedicating more of Senator Clinton's time and financial resources on the primary in New Hampshire on January 22, the Nevada caucus on January 19, the primaries in South Carolina and Florida on January 29 and the 20 plus state primaries on February 5th.

I assessed this proposal across three key dimensions:

Cost: Where are the campaign's dollars best spent? What is the cost relative to the benefit of dedicating significant funding and other resources to Iowa?

Scheduling: Where is the Senator's time best spent? What impact will dedicating significant time in Iowa have on our overall campaign strategy? How it will impact our ability to raise money?

Impact of Feb 5th: What is the overall relevance of Iowa given that half the country will be voting on one day and several hundreds of thousands of voters in California, Florida, and Texas will be voting before the Iowa caucus on January 15?

After assessing this proposal against core elements of our plan, my recommendation is to pull completely out of Iowa and spend the money and Senator Clinton's time on other states. I believe that the changes to and the volatile nature of setting the Democratic nomination calendar has changed the way the nomination will be won in 2008. I believe the "small state first" approach that we are familiar with, that bases winning nomination on momentum is about to be turned on its' head this year. It used to be protected by party rules and the lack of a national primary day. We no longer have either. The party has no leverage to maintain scheduling discipline and we now have a national primary on February 5th with 20 states choosing their nominee on the same day.

Key Points and Take a ways:

1. Iowa will cost over $15M and require 70 + days of Senator Clinton's time. Campaigning in Iowa will demand Senator Clinton to spend a minimum of 75 days and over $15 million in Iowa. The caucus process in Iowa, once grounded in grassroots and volunteer organizing, has out priced itself (estimated campaign costs = minimum $15 million between field and TV). We will not have a financial advantage or an organizational advantage over any of our opponents. Further, the results are likely to be inconclusive on caucus night (first, second, and third place decided by a point or two) and they will provide little or no bounce for anyone.

Worst case scenario: this effort may bankrupt the campaign and provide little if any political advantage

<SNIP>

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/23/us/politics/23text-clinton.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

[Joe the Revelator]

1. I've worked for Mike Henry before

He's a super-smart guy, and should have been listened to regarding Iowa.

[MADem]

2. Is he in the habit of leaking memos to the media? NT

[Nailzberg]

5. I don't think he leaked his own memo.

Someone else in the campaign was likely positioning against him.

[MADem]

6. Who could have done it? Who had access to it? NT

[Nailzberg]

7. It was an internal memo. I honestly couldn't say who. nt

[MADem]

8. Find the leaker, and you've got a motive. And maybe a mole...? NT

[Nailzberg]

3. I've worked for him, too. You're right.

It doesn't seem like they listened to him much.

[Barack_America]

4. The problem with that plan was Florida...

...and what, I'm guessing, subsequently happened to their delegates.