Clinton Campaign Strategy

The Atlantic has quite an interesting piece on Hillary Clinton’s campaign strategy, as well as some of her memos.  These are fascinating looks behind the scenes at quite a dysfunctional campaign, and are well worth the time to read them.  Mark Penn’s strategy seems to have been correct — Clinton’s coalition toward the end was exactly what Penn laid out — but he didn’t see the threat from Obama soon enough.  He thought the real threat would have been John Edwards.

Penn did lay out a way to attack Obama — to paint him as not American enough.  He wanted to raise voters’ doubts in Obama due to his “lack of American roots” — the time spent in Indonesia and Hawaii — “his roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited.”  Penn went on to say:

I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values. He told the people of NH yesterday he has a Kansas accent because his mother was from there. His mother lived in many states as far as we can tell—but this is an example of the nonsense he uses to cover this up. 

How we could give some life to this contrast without turning negative: 

Every speech should contain the line you were born in the middle of America to the middle class in the middle of the last century. And talk about the basic bargain as about the deeply American values you grew up with, learned as a child and that drive you today. Values of fairness, compassion, responsibility, giving back. 

Let’s explicitly own ‘American’ in our programs, the speeches and the values. He doesn’t. Make this a new American Century, the American Strategic Energy Fund. Let’s use our logo to make some flags we can give out. Let’s add flag symbols to the backgrounds.

That’s quite a striking strategy.  Penn wanted to paint Obama as un-American.  It’s astonishing, really, that a serious candidate and campaign for the presidency would think about trying to paint a rival this way.  Clinton didn’t do this, though, to her credit.

The Atlantic piece (linked above) chronicles well how Clinton’s campaign burned through money, suffered from infighting, and suffered because many people simply didn’t like the candidate.  For all that, though, this was Clinton’s election to win.  She didn’t count on a once-in-a-lifetime candidate like Obama, either; but even allowing for that, if she’d spent her money wisely we would be talking about Hillary Clinton’s acceptance speech in Denver later this month.

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance


  1. August 12, 2008 at 10:32 am | #1

    I’m so tired of hearing the crap from the Clinton campaign and also having the MSM focus so much attention on them. And now Howard Wolfson comes out with his comment about how if Edwards had admitted his affair before the primaries, Hillary would have won Iowa. (Never mind that most Edwards supporters there would have voted Obama). If Obama wins, it’s not going to be because the Clintons helped him. I wonder if they truly even want him to win. If the Democrats lose this election, I’m moving to Canada.

  2. August 12, 2008 at 10:42 am | #2

    I might be there with you. (Wolfson, obviously, was incorrect about that assumption.) I’m over the Clintons … I’m having second thoughts about thinking that having her name in nomination wouldn’t be bad. I’m getting a little sick of her disappointed supporters who just won’t wake up.

  3. my2bucks
    August 12, 2008 at 12:15 pm | #3

    Mark Penn’s comments are interesting. I read something very similar from McCain’s campaign strategist – Charlie Black. That isn’t surprising really, considering Penn and Black are both lobbyists for subsidiaries of the same company.

    We’ve already seen the McCain campaign adopt some of the Clinton campaign style – taking it up a notch. (Big speeches, celebrity, not experienced, etc)

  4. August 12, 2008 at 1:10 pm | #4

    Oh, absolutely. Clinton’s campaign certainly showed the way forward for McCain.

  5. August 13, 2008 at 5:34 am | #5

    I don’t get it either…it was a primary…Clinton lost…now put your support behind the chosen candidate and move to elect him. As a woman, I did have this fantasy of a woman president, but I can see that African Americans have this same feeling for Barack Obama. Both these reasons being just an empathy factor that someone who “physically” matches you might become president. The simple fact is that the issues are still there and Barack Obama represents an incredible step in the right direction in this aspect also. I recently got an email announcement for women’s issues that Clinton is still working on in Congress. I’ll take that as a sign that she’s focusing her attention on the greater good, the Democratic party, and the issues that need to be addressed from eight years of a Bush administration’s mess, and I think it’s time for her PUMA supporters to do the same. Holding onto the delegates…hmmm, I see her thinking towards her political future in that move, but I just don’t understand how. I also want to think that the Democratic leaders are working the best angle towards a convention and Obama election, but a general lack of backbone in issues and stances towards the Bush administration keeps me wondering what they are thinking. I know I’m no politician, so it may be I’m just not that scheming…I’m with Bruce, though…I can’t take another Republican 4 year nightmare…

  1. No trackbacks yet.