Clinton weighs staff shake-up after New Hampshire
Source: Politico
Hillary and Bill Clinton are so dissatisfied with their campaigns messaging and digital operations they are considering staffing and strategy changes after whats expected to be a loss in Tuesdays primary here, according to a half-dozen people with direct knowledge of the situation.
The Clintons -- stung by her narrow victory in Iowa -- had been planning to reassess staffing at the campaigns Brooklyn headquarters after the first four primaries, but the Clintons have become increasingly caustic in their criticism of aides and demanded the reassessment sooner, a source told POLITICO.
...
Theres nobody sitting in the middle of this empowered to create a message and implement it, said one former Obama 2008 aide. They are kind of rudderless
occasionally Hillary grabs the rudder, but until recently she was not that interested in [working on messaging]
Look, she going to be the nominee, but shes not going to get any style points and if she isnt careful she is going to be a wounded nominee. And they better worked this shit out fast because who ever the Republicans pick is going to be 29 times tougher than Bernie.
...
But from the beginning, there have been deeper issues simmering within the cheerfully-decorated Brooklyn headquarters -- and much of that had to do with a disconnect between the candidate and her campaign. Over the summer while her campaign was bogged down in the email controversy, Clinton was deeply frustrated with her own staff, and vice versa. The candidate blamed her team for not getting her out of the mess quickly, and her team blamed Clinton for being stubbornly unwilling to take the advice of campaign chairman John Podesta and others to apologize, turn over her server, and move on. The entire experience made her a deeply vulnerable frontrunner out of the gate, and underscored a lack of trust between Clinton and her operatives, many of whom were former Obama staffers that she didn't consider part of her inner circle of trust.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-staff-shakeup-218955
Worth a read - the four paragraphs do not do it justice but you get the gist
Sounds like they're in a mess.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)There were conflicting camps of advisers within the Clinton campaign and Hillary had a tendency to put off making decisions. Why wasn't this sorted months ago?
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Also like 2008 she values loyalty and yes-people among her staff, aides, and entourage, rather than competence.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Given all the money she's taken from big corporations, why on Earth should I believe that?
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)To hire people to at least get a start on replacing lead pipes, installing home filtration systems and supplying some temporary bottled water to the people in Flint.
Oh wait, she forget to do it, must be a staffer's screw up (fired now I am sure) she did hire a photographer for a photo OP, that should help them much more than giving them drinkable water which is far less tangible, especially with the harsh words added during the photo op.
Giving them water would be like forcing people to receive welfare rather than the dignity of extreme poverty, remember the 90's? She knows how to help those in need by NOT helping them, she is a Zen master that way.
NCjack
(10,279 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)On the left and right, a very common perception is that the people can elect whomever they wish, but it will not change policies. This has led to a desperate search for "authenticity" in candidates.
As for the internal issues in the campaign, I know nothing and so any comment would be worthless.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)... but this turned into a slow bleed.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Works for me!
californiabernin
(421 posts)I feel sorry for the aides.
It's no their fault.
sarge43
(28,941 posts)She had eight years to define mission objectives, strategy and tactics. The emails?! She should have been ready and set to deal with the problem before she even announced. Did she think there wouldn't be blowback?
If the troops don't have positive, clear eyed leadership, they can't get it done.
Wibly
(613 posts)She can change her crew as much as she likes, but until she stops pandering and changing her story to appease those who she thinks are listening, her campaign is going to continue to tank.
The problem is the candidate, the the campaign staff.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)"Hillary and Bill Clinton are so dissatisfied"
"The Clintons" (plural)
and yesterday Bill served as an attack dog on someone for her.
Billary is not what I want................
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)mikehiggins
(5,614 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Senator Tankerbell
(316 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Z_California
(650 posts)This has been the most inept, tone-deaf, and history blind campaign I've ever seen for a candidate who is the front-runner for ANY national office.
There may or may not be enough time to save her nomination, but the damage has been done.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)I heard around here that she is closing the gap in NH and has an insurmountable firewall just waiting for her in SC.
kath
(10,565 posts)SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)Albright - Steinem
Jarqui
(10,126 posts)which makes her more of a follower - not a real leader. She follows the lead to a policy position that will get her the most votes. If that position wanes, then she flip-flops to the new policy position.
Her last campaign suffered similarly.
She doesn't communicate a vision. She's more of a policy wonk. Her vision is "I'm going to tweak these laws with these add ons" It rings hollow.
If she can't fix that, she's not going to win a general election.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)cannot run a campaign how is she going to run a country. And this OP still does not get the real problem. People are not interested in a candidate who has a ton of corporate and Wall Street money and no really progressive issues that we can believe.
That is her message - "cut that out" and "trust me". And we do not believe either of them.
Blus4u
(608 posts)"cut that out", "no we can't", and trust me".
Peace
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)I don't think anyone running a campaign or in a political leadership position tolerates their staff speaking to the press.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)When you're having trouble selling your shit sandwiches, maybe you need to devise more attractive packaging!
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)thereismore
(13,326 posts)for Clinton.
ProfessorGAC
(65,056 posts)What if it turns out closer than currently predicted? Wouldn't this move look ridiculous?
4139
(1,893 posts)The real problem is Hillary!
jeff47
(26,549 posts)I'm pretty sure they know what's coming.
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)Myrina
(12,296 posts)Yeah, isn't that sorta the job of the candidate? The (implied) LEADER of the Party, (campaigning to be) LEADER of the Free World?
To LEAD?
OMFG..
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Well, here she is again, ignoring the advice of her campaign manager, Podesta, and causing the email mess to be dragged out for months and, according to her own campaign staff, causing much damage to her campaign.
But from the beginning, there have been deeper issues simmering within the cheerfully-decorated Brooklyn headquarters -- and much of that had to do with a disconnect between the candidate and her campaign. Over the summer while her campaign was bogged down in the email controversy, Clinton was deeply frustrated with her own staff, and vice versa. The candidate blamed her team for not getting her out of the mess quickly, and her team blamed Clinton for being stubbornly unwilling to take the advice of campaign chairman John Podesta and others to apologize, turn over her server, and move on. The entire experience made her a deeply vulnerable frontrunner out of the gate, and underscored a lack of trust between Clinton and her operatives, many of whom were former Obama staffers that she didn't consider part of her inner circle of trust.
Her advisers were also frustrated by having to play roles they hadnt been hired for and were ill-suited for. From the beginning, Benenson was frustrated that he was forced to split his time between defending his boss on emails and defining a path for her candidacy. Clinton, meanwhile, longed for a chief strategist in the Mark Penn mold who could take on a more expansive role than playing pollster.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-staff-shakeup-218955
jwirr
(39,215 posts)using this method?
Response to Jarqui (Original post)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)Blus4u
(608 posts)Peace
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)the Titanic hit the Bernie iceberg
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Oh, I'll bet that makes the staff in the crumbling Tower of Power, wanna work real hard.
It's over Hill and Slick Willie...it was fucked up from the start...add all the baggage from 30+ years...
Over.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)so either it's a crisis, or she's less pleasant with the volunteers
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)She did nothing illegal.
Jarqui
(10,126 posts)Last edited Tue Feb 9, 2016, 05:05 PM - Edit history (1)
The State Department admitted last week that they (folks on Clinton's server) sent emails with information that was classified at the time of transmission. That does not mean emails classified after the fact. The CIA has submitted at least two declarations confirming that.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2016/02/252161.htm
QUESTION: Right. So are you challenging sworn declarations from the CIA that they were top secret at the time of transmission?
MR KIRBY: As I said last week, it was at the request of the intelligence community that we specifically upgraded that traffic to top secret.
QUESTION: Okay, so you dont dispute that.
MR KIRBY: If we had disputed it, we wouldnt have upgraded it --
Information on Clinton's server that was classified at the time of transmission was emailed. That is now a fact admitted by everyone except Hillary. And it's against the law.
The FBI is still reviewing. The CIA still seems involved.
Like I said, we don't know what is going to happen.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Putting "nt" at the end of your title line implies you have no text in the message box. This saves people clicks when they are checking responses to their posts.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)a security heading and transmit. That's a crime.
There was information on the server that was supposed to be automatically classified. And then that email, which is a smoking gun showing that she didn't have any intention of operating under the regs. That ties it to her so very directly.
And then there are hundreds of emails classified after review, with the classifying agencies saying some of them were classified at the time.
There should be a special counsel on this matter. As Secretary of State, she had the responsibility to ensure that this information was properly handled. The server was set up at her behest and was wholly under her control. Then the email saying to copy the communication, remove the security notification and transmit unsecured. Then the hundreds of classified emails. Lastly, the failure to comply with the records statutes, which now looks to be more than just oversight.
For most people, that would be an evidential chain which would stand in court and more than warrant a serious criminal investigation.
As it stands, the "presumptive" nominee treated highly confidential information more casually than a secretary at a doctor's office is mandated by federal law to treat your blood test results. Every health care worker receives HIPAA training requiring that they don't do what Hillary did. There are millions of people in this country who understand the seriousness of the situation. Simply repeating a lie is not going to quash this.
Because of who she is, I do not expect charges. But if there is not a special counsel, a real possibility exists that information could be exposed after an election which would form the basis for impeachment.
Further, the rest of the party should not be tarred with this. That's why we need a special counsel.