by TruthMatters, Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:40:13 AM EDT
well that right there explains why she lost.
Times went over the 5 mistakes that the Clintons made
I think the 2 that really did it for her
2. She didn't master the rules
Clinton picked people for her team primarily for their loyalty to her, instead of their mastery of the game. That became abundantly clear in a strategy session last year, according to two people who were there. As aides looked over the campaign calendar, chief strategist Mark Penn confidently predicted that an early win in California would put her over the top because she would pick up all the state's 370 delegates. It sounded smart, but as every high school civics student now knows, Penn was wrong: Democrats, unlike the Republicans, apportion their delegates according to vote totals, rather than allowing any state to award them winner-take-all. Sitting nearby, veteran Democratic insider Harold M. Ickes, who had helped write those rules, was horrified -- and let Penn know it. "How can it possibly be," Ickes asked, "that the much vaunted chief strategist doesn't understand proportional allocation?" And yet the strategy remained the same, with the campaign making its bet on big-state victories. Even now, it can seem as if they don't get it. Both Bill and Hillary have noted plaintively that if Democrats had the same winner-take-all rules as Republicans, she'd be the nominee. Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign now acknowledges privately:
3. She underestimated the caucus states
While Clinton based her strategy on the big contests, she seemed to virtually overlook states like Minnesota, Nebraska and Kansas, which choose their delegates through caucuses. She had a reason: the Clintons decided, says an adviser, that "caucus states were not really their thing." Her core supporters -- women, the elderly, those with blue-collar jobs -- were less likely to be able to commit an evening of the week, as the process requires. But it was a little like unilateral disarmament in states worth 12% of the pledged delegates. Indeed, it was in the caucus states that Obama piled up his lead among pledged delegates. "For all the talent and the money they had over there," says Axelrod, "they -- bewilderingly -- seemed to have little understanding for the caucuses and how important they would become."
By the time Clinton's lieutenants realized the grave nature of their error, they lacked the resources to do anything about it -- in part because:
make no mistake her Husband won TWICE under these rules, there is no excuse for her campaign NOT to be filled with people who 100% knew how to work this system. Bill should have been there explaining the importance of caucuses, at least he should have known.
to bad Penn was contracted so she has to pay that $4 million, because that man should not be allowed around Democratic politics again.
by Lefty Coaster, Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:05:37 PM EDT
During the Primaries Hillary's Campaign has had Mark Penn's company Burson-Marsteller do $14 Million in polling and consulting of which $4.5 Million is still owed by the campaign.
Clinton still owes about $4.5 million to her former chief strategist, Mark Penn, who resigned amid a controversial relationship with the Colombian government earlier this month. There has been talk that Clinton may even need to lend her campaign more money, something she did in late January as she was being outspent in February 5th states.
Penn is probably even happier than Clinton that the money is rolling in again.
by TruthMatters, Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 11:24:42 AM EDT
ok on the confrence call today Howard wolfson finally settled this whole fired, resigned stepped down thing and gave us Mark Penn's new role with the campaign.
Mark Penn isn't going anywhere.
On the Hillary campaign's conference call moments ago, Hillary spokesperson Howard Wolfson left zero doubt: Camp Hillary will not be heeding the Obama campaign's demand that they fire Penn completely.
Asked about reports that Penn is still participating on internal campaign strategy calls, Wolfson said, "I'm not going to send out a daily email about who's on which calls and who isn't," clarifying: "Mark is no longer senior strategist, but he will be playing a continuing role in strategy."
Pressed by a reporter to explain the difference between Penn's former and current status, Wolfson said: "The difference would be between the editor in chief of your newspaper and one who plays an important role at your newspaper."
He added that "anyone at a workplace" would understand "the difference between someone who is playing the key role" and "someone who is playing an important role."
So there you have it: Penn will continue playing an "important" role.
so there you go, he is now in an "Important" role no longer a "Key" role. I think this is punishment enough and I hope he has learned his lesson.
by LindaSFNM, Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:47:37 PM EDT
We start the week with another fine example of true Leadership. News reports surfaced the end of last week that strategist for the Hillary Clinton campaign was talking with the Columbian government on Free Trade.
It turns out Mark Penn appears to have been acting in his role as chief executive of the international communications and lobbying firm, Burson-Marsteller Worldwide. Reported by the Wall Street Journal of a Monday meeting.
by TruthMatters, Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:34:42 PM EDT
I can see why she is "firing" him (read as less work, but same amount of money"
Here's an interesting postscript to the saga of Mark Penn, who stepped down from his role as Hillary's chief strategist yesterday:
Penn had an earlier version of the infamous 3 A.M. ad that was much more of a negative spot attacking Barack Obama, and the attack prompted objections from other senior Hillary advisers, a Hillaryland source familiar with internal discussions over the ad tells me.
Among those senior advisers who objected to the ad's negative content was senior ad guru Mandy Grunwald, who's clashed with Penn in the past, the source says.
so the 3 a.m. ad was meant to hit Obama directly but got toned down.