Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:08 PM
Original message |
Obama Campaign: Outline of the campaign strategy after South Carolina |
|
Edited on Thu Jan-24-08 04:35 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter
I don't know if basing campaign strategy on the assumption that voters will feel sorry for you because the Clintons are so mean is going to be effective or not, but time will tell. That's why we hold the elections. The fact that the Clintons so obviously don't care whether people feel pity for Barack suggests to me that the Obama campaign strategy is flawed. I don't see Bill Clinton making such a BIG campaign error, and he does have a track record of solid instincts about campaigning (which is different from governing), so the result of their attacks will probably be mixed at worst. Obama's Feb 5 Strategy Develops.... 24 Jan 2008 12:22 pm
So how does Barack Obama campaign after South Carolina? The outlines of a strategy are becoming visible. Obama and his surrogates will operate under the assumption that the more aggressive Hillary Clinton campaigns, the more outbursts Bill Clinton has, the more voters in interior red and purple states will find the Clintons off-putting and that the negative feelings will obscure the Clinton mantra that only she (and he) can stand up and protect their interests.
Advisers believe that the more the Clintons poke at Obama, the more sympathetic he becomes, and the more she plays into his contention that she's a divisive, polarizing figure; Obama's polling shows and his campaign's strategists sense that it reminds Democrats in the interior of the country of the Clinton of yore: cold, unlikable, sarcastic -- and coastal. In states like Arizona, Kansas and Idaho and Missouri, Clinton will scare off independents and will lose support among younger women, in particular.
Also: Obama's brain trust believes that Clinton's decision to essentially cede South Carolina to him will backfire, as it will allow him to demonstrate that Iowa was not a fluke -- he can turnout young voters everywhere -- and, that African Americans will resent her refusal to participate in "their" primary.
SNIP -- MORE AT LINK
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/01/obama_and_clinton_to_clintons.php _______________________
On Edit: I'm gonna cheat a bit on the paragraph limit because it is an unusually substantive blog entry, and we can use all the substance we can get in the GDP dungeon
The coastal prizes of California and New York will be tough, but Obama may well do better in enough congressional districts to keep the margins close -- better, Obama's team believes, than Clinton will do in the interior of the country. Purple and Red-state surrogates abound: Gov. Janet Napolitano and Sen. Claire McCaskill will argue, in subtle terms, that only Obama can unify the country, which will be interpreted as a knock against Clinton's downward pull on other Demcorats on the ballot. The concern is out there: one reason Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, carefully tended to by the Clinton world, has stayed neutral is that she fears that having Clinton on the ticket would hurt other Democrats in her state, a Clinton adviser who spoke to Sebelius said.
Once again, the campaign has one theory and the national political press corps has another. The coverage so far has centered on the notion that Obama allowed Bill Clinton to break his stride and mess up his head, forcing him to spend half of his stump speech reciting and rebutting Clinton allegations. His unsurprising assumed victory South Carolina would reinforce the perception that Obama appeals only to young, rich, white people and to black voters. Obama's campaign manager and surrogates are hosting a conference call later and will fill in some of the details.
|
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:11 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Uniter...of the Clinton haters. Mercifully, there won't be much "post SC" campaigning |
|
Florida, Super Tuesday will settle that
|
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Reading it, I thought, "I hope his campaign staff aren't reading the internet too much" |
|
Edited on Thu Jan-24-08 04:18 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter
I expect real-world campaign strategy to differ from DU, which is not representative of much of anything, but the strategy sounds very DU to me.
Maybe a lot of Obama supporters on DU get their talking points straight from the campaign, which would explain the familiarity of the campaign theory of the race.
|
pampango
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
8. I doubt that Florida will settle anything, but Super Tuesday might. |
|
Hillary certainly will win most of the states and all of the big ones. Realistically, Obama will have to win several smaller states and show an ability to cut into her margins in California, New York, and other large states. If he can do that, he can minimize the numerical advantage Hillary will win in delegates that day.
That would enable him to survive and provide him the opportunity to see if the strategy mapped out in the OP will work. It is possible that public sentiment could start to swing in Obama's favor at that point, if the Clintons overplay their hand in terms of their attacks. But that does not appear very likely, since, as the OP noted, Bill rarely makes such a mistake in campaign strategy.
|
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
11. Florida won't settle anything but will make SC old news before Super Tuesday |
|
So, whatever the outcome, it won't curtail Hillary's MO much. If Obama loses - whomever the winner is, the nomination is hers.
|
sunonmars
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
Hillary winning Florida by a mile is going to be the big news going into Super Tuesday, they just refuse to see it.
Florida is Sooooooooo important.
|
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
14. Yup. Strategic timing. Might sink Rudy in NYC as well (double humiliation as |
Lucinda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
15. I agree it WILL drive the news. And if the margins don't tighten it will have a big effect |
sunonmars
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
16. well they wont, you know about the early postal counts |
|
70% to Hillary so far in the early voting apparently.
|
Lucinda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
19. Yep. I'm not expecting a lot of change. But Obamas ads are running there now |
|
so there may be some movement.
|
sunonmars
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
20. doubt it with the make up of florida |
Lucinda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
21. It certainly appears that way! No complaints from me about it either. |
|
I'm just trying to look at things impartially. The process fascinates me. I'm a true election geek!
|
sunonmars
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
|
none of this lot can see that this is going to mega news and wipe out the SC results in one go, it will be Clinton, Clinton Clinton all the way into ST.
|
Lucinda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
23. Yup. The only "unknown" that I am seeing, between now and super Tuesday, |
|
Edited on Thu Jan-24-08 06:39 PM by wlucinda
is what the media will do with JE's results in SC. And how that spin will be played out re:Obama. Other than that...I think we're correct, unless there is some HUGE unforseen event to change things.
|
sunonmars
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:18 PM
Response to Original message |
3. It all depends on what happens in SC |
|
Edited on Thu Jan-24-08 04:20 PM by sunonmars
The polls are shifting again in the last day and i bet again tomorrow.
1 : If Edwards was to somehow win this, its a huge embarrassment for Obama, and i mean huge huge huge after holding such a huge lead in the last few weeks. It would mean that he cannot capitalize on poll leads, total disaster.
2 : If it ends in a 3 way tie, which i'm thinking is not out of the realm of possibility at this point. Then Obama still has problems as mentioned previously.
3 : If Hillary somehow wins. Obama may as well concede immediately and go home to Chicago.
4 : If he wins by a large margin, it will depend on the breakdown of vote as to how this is spun by the MSM.
5 : If he wins then he's got some life back.
1 in 5 good odds coming into SC. I don't like those odds. I'm being objective here, Obama has to win big in SC and win well and not just the AA vote block. If he doesnt, i think the MSM will stab him right through the heart, fatally.
|
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. I expect a big Obama win in SC, and the media to spin it as a racial phenomena |
|
That's what they do. Race sells papers and ads.
|
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. I think any outcome is possible in SC (yours included). Lots of variables: |
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
17. I agree things are in flux |
Unsane
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:20 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Didn't need your asinine commentary at the beginning, but thanks for the link. |
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
7. Oh, noes! Sorry for delaying your absorbing the directives.... |
|
It's not like they were not using the playbook on DU already.
|
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:21 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Proof that it's in the works - this Lazio-like fundraising letter: |
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:25 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Can we assume that Arizona, Kansas and Idaho and Missouri are open primaries? |
|
I don't know whether they are or not, but if the Obama campaign is counting on Clinton alienating independents in Arizona, Kansas and Idaho and Missouri, they must be open.
|
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
13. I know Georgia was in 2004 - bushies voted Edwards them - 70% of his voters |
wildflowergardener
(863 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-25-08 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
Edited on Fri Jan-25-08 12:02 AM by mbergen
Missouri is - you don't register for a political party here, you can just ask for whichever ballot you want
|
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
Amanita
(73 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-24-08 11:07 PM
Response to Original message |
24. I am sure it's Clenis's fault... |
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-25-08 07:53 AM
Response to Original message |
26. Eek! Clinton hatred overestimated a bit? |
|
Edited on Fri Jan-25-08 07:55 AM by robbedvoter
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4185840&mesg_id=4185840"The outlines of a strategy are becoming visible. Obama and his surrogates will operate under the assumption that the more aggressive Hillary Clinton campaigns, the more outbursts Bill Clinton has, the more voters in interior red and purple states will find the Clintons off-putting and that the negative feelings will obscure the Clinton mantra that only she (and he) can stand up and protect their interests."
|
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-25-08 07:56 AM
Response to Original message |
27. And look: Clinton has 75% approval in SC! |
FrenchieCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-25-08 07:58 AM
Response to Original message |
28. Maybe this "letter" telling us all about Obama's campaign strategy |
|
is really from the Clinton camp!
I would'nt put it pass them!
|
robbedvoter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-25-08 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
29. Gee, you think? because Obama people were very eager to absorb the talking points |
|
Anyway, it shows the downside of living in an MSM created bubble
Obama: 47% positive, 16% negative. Clinton: 27% positive, 38% negative. McCain: 12% positive, 48% negative Giuliani: 28% positive, 37% negative JEDNE
Net numbers
Obama +31 Giuliani -9 Clinton -11 McCain -36 - it doesn't only works that way for Bush. Once one starts believing their own PR, they are likely to make mistakes.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 13th 2024, 01:54 PM
Response to Original message |