Theory: HRC has decided to finish campaign on high note 3/5 with huge warchest

grantcart

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-29-08 03:14 AM
Original message

Theory: HRC has decided to finish campaign on high note 3/5 with huge warchest

Closer examination of today's announcement that HRC had raised $ 35,000,000 in February brings forth the possibility of a different explanation of why the candidate has continued the campaign at full speed until atleast Mar 4th

First some assumptions
Summary
Because of the following

1) Clintons are smart
2) Not power obsessed but have back up plan
3) Impossible to make up delegate flow
4) Dramatic increase in Revenue
5) Attempt to grab control of media last weekend fails/polls drop - Debate emphasis fighter+informercial for money
6) After Debate nothing harsh that would neg impact GE
7) Ad buys are modest even though revenue is huge

Thesis

The best explanation for all of the facts above is that the Clintons have come to the conclusion that there is no way to stop Barack Obama. With the huge increase in donations there is no incentive for them to stop campaigning and stop the revenue flow. In this theory, the Clintons have decided to maintain the campaign to Mar 4th so that they can continue to generate revenue so that they can pay off their debts, repay the loan and leave the campaign with a significant war chest for the future.

They are not throwing in the 'kitchen sink' and going super negative nor are they going heavy in media buys.

That war chest could be used for her future campaigns but also as a PAC to support other candidates that would help build support for her next political move (majority leader of the Senate if Obama wins or seeds for Pres 08 if he loses). If this scenario is correct, it would be logical that she would end her campaign on Tuesday Mar 4th with a strong concession speech and leave the campaign on a high note with a grateful party and a huge $ warchest.

Details
1) The Clintons are not Uber-driven to the point that they do not know what the facts are. I do not accept it that they are so power hungry that they will continue the campaign until it is ripped out of their 'cold dead fingers'

2) The Clintons are smart and know more about strategic planning than anybody in the country (except for a skinny kid in Chicago and his bunch). They always have a plan b in the alternative.

3)They know that there is virtually no that they can reverse the flow of delegates to Obama. This is detailed her in some length

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4806123 but more interesting is this from Sen Schumer

(http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoiding-self-destructive-end-clinton-vs-obama)

a) Cannot make up delegates
quote
Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it."
unquote

The point here is that everyone talks about winning states - delegates are not won at the state level they are won at the Congressional District Level. In other words for Hillary to win back 100 delegates (her current deficit) she would have to get 65%++ in 50 6 delegate districts to get a 4-2 split. There are very few if any of these districts that she can do that in.

b) Schumer goes out of his way to send a signal that people do not need to worry about HRC doing anything to damage the chances in the GE.

quote
"The number one thing that people worry about is that the candidates will cut each other up and make it harder to win the general," he said. "But I think that is not going to happen.
unquote

4) Now comes a dramatic increase in revenue

quote
Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama continued to rewrite fundraising records this month, with Clinton announcing yesterday that she had rebounded from a disappointing showing in January to raise $35 million in February, by far her biggest one-month total of the campaign

The display of fundraising muscle came even as Clinton (N.Y.) slipped in national polls and suffered several setbacks at the ballot box. She said more than doubling what she had raised in January has left her well positioned for another primary-season comeback.
unquote

5) Last weekend she makes several well publicized attempts at changing the media perception and grabbing control of the media cycle but these attempts do not fair well and polls go down in Ohio and more importantly Texas.

At this point plan B makes more sense: Her debate is framed on a couple of key points that she is a fighter, she is fighting and she needs money to keep the fight going. Interestingly enough when it comes to the tax release question she flips from her previous position and kind of says sure why not after Mar 4th, almost like she knows that after Mar 4th it won't matter

6) After the debate no real negative attacks - nothing coming out that could be interperted as causing harm for the General Election.

7) Even though they have a vast increase in cash, their reported media buys are modest - a little over 10% of what they raised.

ibid quote
Evan Tracey, chief operating officer of the Campaign Media Analysis Group, said this week that Obama has spent more than $7 million in the two states and Clinton has spent about $4 million. Factoring in cable television ads, Obama has run more than 57,000 30-second spots and Clinton has aired about 31,000, according to an analysis by Tim Kay, director of political strategy at National Cable Communications
unquote

6/7 above simply do not reflect on a campaign that is going "all in" or "throwing in the kitchen sink"