Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Morning Shorts
Next Post: Governor unpopular
Posted in:
* The New Republic has an excellent look into why Hillary Clinton’s campaign stumbled so badly these past few months. This point, in particular, deserves notice because it is an easily avoided mistake I’ve seen too many times in the past right here in Illinois…
Probably our second biggest mistake was much more operational: Making our chief strategist [Mark Penn] our one and only pollster. It is impossible to disagree and have a counter view on message when the person creating the message is also the person testing the message.”
That is exactly right. The same thing happened to Ron Gidwitz in the 2006 GOP gubernatorial primary. His pollster and his media guru were the same people. Gidwitz ended up spending about a million dollars for every percentage point he received in that primary. Bigtime candidates absolutely must have a robust debate over message and over what the polls really mean.
* Penn was an absolute disaster. Case in point…
“[Hillary Clinton] never embraced the mantle from the beginning of being a different kind of candidate. Why did the campaign not do that? Because Mark Penn wanted to do it a different way. Read his book. He thought that you have a list of policy prescriptions. Voters are into that, and that’s how you win. This came at the expense of–and it’s a decision he really pushed for–saying to folks, ‘Yes, she’s a pretty inspiring figure herself.’ … There’s no reason why she’s not a change agent also. But once the CW is set, it just doesn’t change.” […]
“Our message in fact was working very well through September. What we failed to do is pivot when we needed to. We stuck on the same thing. … We didn’t say, ‘OK, everybody gets that she can do this job.’ We never pivoted to what kind of change she could bring. We repackaged the old message and sent it back out. Instead of ‘Ready on Day One,’ we changed to ‘Solutions.’ It was a very IBM approach
* And the coup de grâce…
“Penn was preoccupied with the national polls. We were up in the national polls, but Iowa was always a challenging thing for us. Early, early on, our internals showed us a significant number of points behind. … In Iowa, Penn consistently would show polls that were of the eight-way. That was basically meaningless because it wasn’t going to be an eight-way race. The candidates that were the second-tier candidates were not going to reach the threshold [of 15%]. The real race was the three-way. But he always focused on the eight-way when we’d start going over the numbers in Iowa. It was frustrating to the state staff and other people as well. It just showed a lack of understanding and a disconnect.”
When your pollster has as much power as Penn had, he can’t be overridden. That’s a very dangerous thing. Pollsters have their place on a campaign, but giving them total control over message and strategy is never a good idea.
* Meanwhile, the New York Times takes a look ahead at who might be the first female president…
Mrs. Clinton seemed to have the most success in the last months, fighting like a mama bear for her cubs. So some people look to women who have earned reputations as tough fighters: Lisa Madigan, a Democrat who is attorney general in Illinois, and mentioned as a possible successor to the embattled governor, Rod Blagojevich.
That’s getting a bit ahead of the game, but it’s a thumbsucker piece, so the prediction can be excused I suppose. Madigan has yet to show that she can win a Tier One race, even though her 2002 primary and general election contests were extraordinarily heated affairs. I’ll have more on Madigan’s intentions for subscribers later this week.
* More political stuff…
* Suburban Republicans fear an Obama ballot: “Republicans should take into account that Obama has proven he can attract new voters,” said [Republican state Rep. Ed Sullivan] of Mundelein. “And if you fail to realize you have to get in front of these new voters, the potential is you’re going to lose the election.”
* Ozinga to face questions in downstate feud
* Ozinga lays foundation for campaign
* Bobby Rush recovering after tumor surgery
* Judge: Depose candidate
* Sauerberg answers the prolife question again
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, May 19, 08 @ 9:39 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Morning Shorts
Next Post: Governor unpopular
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Also with a local angle is this anonymous quote:
“[Original campaign manager] Patti and [her deputy] Mike [Henry] sat up there in their offices and no one knew what they did all day. Patti’s a nice person who was put in a job way over head. She was out of her element. Mike Henry was hired because he was the flavor of day, the catch everyone wanted. I’m sure he was really great, but presidential politics require a unique skill set and knowledge.”
After the magnificent performance of Blair Hull’s Senatorial bid, I do wonder why Mike Henry was “the catch everyone wanted.”
Comment by ZC Monday, May 19, 08 @ 10:10 am
But does not this choice by HRC demonstrate poor judgment? The case against her has always been questions about her ability to make good judgment decisions. This is more then just a bad idea for her campaign, it shows her lack of judgment when it comes to critical staffing decisions.
Comment by Ghost Monday, May 19, 08 @ 10:15 am
=== I do wonder why Mike Henry was “the catch everyone wanted.”===
He marketed himself as the guy who knew how to beat Obama, despite being trounced by the guy in 2004.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, May 19, 08 @ 10:21 am
The caution about the national polls is one that I’m sure the Obama campaign has taken to heart. As things stand now in state-by-state McCain/Obama matchups, McCain looks to have an easier path than Obama to 270.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 19, 08 @ 10:38 am
Word, the fascinating thing about Obama, is they have mad comments like that everytime he runs. When he started his presidential bid he was an unknown who did not really stand a chance of stopping HRC inevtibale nomination based on the polls… then he begain to campaign, and the rest, as they say, is history.
So far, he has only just started his national campaign, so I would not count him out yet.
Comment by Ghost Monday, May 19, 08 @ 11:00 am
That’s getting a bit ahead of the game, but it’s a thumbsucker piece, so the prediction can be excused I suppose. Madigan has yet to show that she can win a Tier One race, even though her 2002 primary and general election contests were extraordinarily heated affairs. I’ll have more on Madigan’s intentions for subscribers later this week.
“Thumbsucker piece”. I love that! However, I must disagree about Lisa and the tier one comment. If her race against Birkett wasn’t a tier one, I don’t know what is. I saw polling on that race, and it was back and forth, and nuclear negative at times.
Comment by Moderate Repub Monday, May 19, 08 @ 11:43 am
Ghost, I don’t count him out at all. Given Bush fatigue, Iraq, gas and food prices, you’d think it should be his year. But that Electoral College can be a funny thing — just ask Pres. Gore.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 19, 08 @ 11:48 am
When campaigns make mistakes, the candidate should be the first person to take responsibility. If an individual wishes to persuade voters to support them for an office, then that individual needs to show maturity and accountability during the campaign when things go sour.
I am very tired of watching Obama and Clinton finger-point. Obama must have the world’s worst campaign because he claims his aides have caused errors at least 14 times. When asked by fund raisers why he is doing so poorly in Pennsylvania, he blamed the economy causing voters to become bitter, instead of himself. This is utter nonsense.
Same with Clinton. Mark Penn is not to blame. She is. However we are watching this former Clinton aide, or that former Clinton backer exposed as forcing Hillary Clinton to lose her party’s nomination.
We can all accept that candidates are human, but why do they hide behind a false image of infallibility? Their campaigns are their responsibility and their campaigns are far easier to manage than the Presidency.
If these people cannot run for president without sloughing off blame onto others, how can we expect them to behave presidentially?
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, May 19, 08 @ 1:15 pm
Rich
Hull was 10 points up 6 weeks out! In any regular primary that is a done deal! Then Erik Zorn made it his job to knock Hull out of the race because of the problem with Hulls former wife. I believe he had some battery charge for hitting his wife in the shin. Obama was in 2nd place and falling or better yet Hull was in the lead and rising until the Zorn articles started to take effect. That’s why some of us were upset at the pass Zorn has given to Foster when 2004 it was the most important thing in the world to him. (I sent Erik the info on Foster and he said he “gave it to the news guys” Thats that Republican Tribune again.
Comment by RAI Monday, May 19, 08 @ 1:15 pm
Looking back Hull was up by 10 with less than 2 weeks to go. Big fall in such a short time way to go Erik
Comment by RAI Monday, May 19, 08 @ 1:33 pm
I agree that Penn’s contributions to Clinton’s campaign were less than helpful. For years, party insiders have been complaining about his stranglehold on the way that Democrats run their races. But it isn’t fair to lay the entire blame on Penn. It seems that the remaining staffers are trying to pin all their failures on the guy who isn’t there anymore.
Obama won because he simply out-organized Clinton. He was able to run up a bunch of early victories (particularly the caucus victories) because he was able to get the voters out to the polls.
Message and image are certainly important. But most elections turn on such things as fund raising and get-out-the-vote efforts. It is a bit ironic that the candidate who was touting her superior executive skills was running the inferior campaign.
Comment by duck duck goose Monday, May 19, 08 @ 1:48 pm
“Madigan has yet to show she can win a Tier One race.” - Rich Miller
Didn’t they (used to) say the same thing about Barack Obama?
“to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.” - Sun Tzu
“Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all!” - Sun Tzu
“Thus, though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays. There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare.” - Sun Tzu
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” - Sun Tzu
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, May 19, 08 @ 2:13 pm
I’ll add that the problem with the Clinton campaign, the Bush Administration, the Blagojevich Administration and the Daley administration is all the same:
Not one person of authority who is willing to stand up and say: “Is this really such a good idea?”
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, May 19, 08 @ 2:18 pm
===In any regular primary that is a done deal! ===
No, it isn’t a done deal. Obama didn’t even hit the TV airwaves until about 3 weeks out. People tend to make up their minds late. Have you not been paying attention to the preznit primaries at all? C’mon.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, May 19, 08 @ 4:36 pm
And it wasn’t Eric Zorn. Lots of people were writing/airing stories about Hull in Chicago. If you think that numbers can’t be moved late, then you don’t know much about politics.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, May 19, 08 @ 4:37 pm
http://www.ilsenate.com/
While we are on the subject of Hull . . .
While Hull seems to be holding thus far in the polls (see below) he may be taking on some water. Eric Zorn started the drumbeat and has been pounding away on the story of Hull’s divorce, order of protection, subsequent cover up, and the final release of records. Here is the timeline:
Feb 15 - Trib does bio piece on Hull notes order of protection Brenda Sexton his former wife took out on him during their second divorce.
Feb 19 - Zorn: Public entitled to know about Hull’s History
Feb 20 - Hull releases statement, “We had an argument and Brenda called the police . . .The police report from that night says that I hit her shin. I would never intentionally harm Brenda, and I regret the incident.”
Feb 22 - Bernard Schoenburg: Special-interest foe Hull helps ex-wife land state job details the Illinois Film Office job Blair got his ex-wife, also details some of the order of protection info.
Feb 26 - Zorn: The real Hull slips out from behind the ads
Feb 27 - Hull and Sexton agree to release previously sealed divorce records:
I am in great fear if this court does not enter a protective order in my favor and against Blair, as well as exclude him from my residence in which I am residing with my child, (name withheld) age 11, Blair will continue to inflict, mental emotional and physical abuse upon me as he has done in the past.
Blair is a violent man with an ungovernable temper, and the violence recently been escalating.
At this point, I fear for my emotional and physical well being, as well as that of my daughter.
Feb 28 - Zorn: Hull’s biggest mistake isn’t in divorce file Trib: Hull’s ex-wife called him violent man in divorce file and the Times puts their crime reporter Frank Main on the story: Hull’s stormy divorce records unsealed:
Blair Hull in Brenda Sexton’s words:
*Sept. 25, 1997: “Blair threw a remote control across the room and called me a ‘f—— c—.’ ”
*Dec. 2, 1997: “Blair and I were calmly talking about trust issues, and I remarked everyone has a trust issue with him. Blair suddenly responded by saying, ‘You evil bitch. You are a f—— c—,’ repeatedly. He then hung on the canopy bar of my bed, leered at me and stated, ‘Do you want to die? I am going to kill you, you f—— bitch.’ ”
*Jan. 12, 1998: “He went ballistic on me, started cursing, told me I was a ‘f—— c—’ and ’shark’ and kept threatening that he would punch me in the face.”
*Feb. 9, 1998: “He then held one of my legs and punched me extremely hard in the left shin. After that, he swung at my face with his fists a couple of times in a menacing manner just missing me.”
We will have to wait and see how this turns out. For her part, Brenda Sexton says she now supports Hull’s candidacy and that the two are friends. In fact, the Sun-Times reported on the 17th:
Dem senatorial candidate Blair Hull, who has been married and divorced three times — twice to the same woman — showed up with that woman, Illinois Film Office honcho Brenda Sexton, at a fund-raiser for John Kerry this weekend at Lou and Susan Manilow’s house.
It caused tongues to wag, although the two are now just good friends.
Hull for his part, is busy touting the endorsement he received from former Congresswoman Cardiss Collins of Illinois’ 7th District and his “Title IX Dad of the Year” award.
And I think I know a little about politics and 10 points and rising is a win UNLESS something bad happens. The numbers might have been closer but Hull was going to win that race if not for the Tribune and Zorn.
Comment by RAI Tuesday, May 20, 08 @ 1:10 am