The Chicago Machine and Hillary Clinton's Campaign

[Tatiana]

I am reposting this response as an original topic of discussion per the request of a DU member

*****

Hillary is trying to run a Chicago democratic machinery campaign where you have a tight organizational structure of "ward bosses" and "precinct captains" to maintain discipline (no breaking of ranks for any outsider candidates), as well as patronage to reward supporters.

The problem is that this sort of system relies upon discipline and loyalty. Loyalty comes when you know that someone has stood by you and will stand by you, so it is no surprise that women are going for her overwhelmingly. She's proved herself with her work on behalf of FMLA and women's issues. Females make up somewhere between 51-56% of primary voters. So this style of campaign serves her well in populous states like NY and California. It also bodes well for Ohio and Texas.

But Obama is using a hybrid strategy of the Chicago machine (he does have a Daley on staff, after all) and Dean's strategy. Chicago politics says use the organization to get a high turnout in the cities and win the state by a slim margin with the high voter turnout in metro areas overwhelming the rest of the state. Obama won this way in Missouri; JFK won Illinois in 1960 by 9,000 votes (over 450,000 votes coming from Cook County). So, this is how Obama can win those bellwether/swing states. He is combining this with Dean's 50-state strategy: putting people on the ground, buying ads, organizing volunteers, and sending mailers to be competitive in every state. There were only two Feb. 5th states that Obama failed to get at least 40% of the popular vote in: Oklahoma (31%) and Arkansas (27%). On the other hand, Hillary failed to get at least 40% of the popular vote in nine states: Alaska (25%), Colorado (32%), Georgia (31%), Idaho (17%), Illinois (33%), Kansas (26%), Minnesota (32%), North Dakota (37%), and Utah (39%).

It should be noted that many of the states Obama won were caucus states. But he still won there by having a stronger presence and people on the ground. Additionally, he's adopted Dean's strategy of netroots fundraising, which is quite literally bringing him millions of dollars.

It's my own belief that Obama's campaign strategy would win the general election and provide a strong boost to increasing the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. From a purely strategic political perspective, Obama really does look like a winner.

[TexasObserver]

1. He's a better candidate with a better organization.

She's still trying to win in 1992, with a game plan designed to build a rickety old bridge back to the 20th century.

He's got the organization, the brain power, the energy, the message, and the presence to win. She's got Bill and the DC lobby.

[ursi]

2. he's got a posse

[Kittycat]

3. Great analysis. Thank you for sharing.

[WCGreen]

4. Out of all those states where Obama beat Hillary you cite above...

Only Illinois is pretty safely in the dem's camp in November...

Only Minnesota, perhaps Colorado and an outside shot for Kansas, are in play...

Do you really think that a democrat, any democrat, can win North Dakota, Alaska, Utah, Idaho, Georgia...

I don't think that's possible...

I really like the idea of a fifty state strategy...

But remember back to 1960...

Nixon vowed he would visit all fifty states after the convention...

And while he was off in the wilderness, JFK was putting together a great GOTV machine in the states he needed to win...

First you cement the base...

Then you head for those on the fence...

Then if all of that is certain, then you try to energize Idaho and the rest of those really really really red states...

Remember, in a general presidential election, there are limits to what you can spend...

[RaleighNCDUer]

5. Spoken like a true DLCer. nt

[WCGreen]

7. Give me a fucking break...

I am being realistic...

You have to allocate resources...

[sniffa]

10. Spoken like a true ignored to me

:D

[Tatiana]

6. We absolutely can win in N. Dakota and Alaska.

Do you realize how many republican scandals are coming to light in Alaska? I think the voters there are ripe for regime change.

As far as North Dakota is concerned, since 2005, it has been trending Democratic.

Minnesota and Colorado are pretty clearly Democratic at this point. Kansas is very close and will likely go Dem as well.

We shouldn't just give up on states that are clearly dissatisfied with the Republican party.

[WCGreen]

8. Let me get those Ruby Slippers...

Seriously, I am just being realistic...

[Tatiana]

11. You are not being realistic. You are ignoring the data. n/t

[WCGreen]

12. Primary data does not translate into general election data...

So he won amongst democrats...

If the dem's are outnumbered 2-1, every democrat, including the dead one's could vote and the party's candidate would still lose...

Look at history and see how JFK did it...

she how Nixon was criss crossing the country trying to keep his campaign pledge of campaigning in all fifty states...

If Nixon would have concentrated where his base was, he would have won the election...

[Tatiana]

13. I'm not looking at primary data.

I'm looking at polling data regarding presidential approval and direction of the country, among other things.

If we took your view, we'd never have put John Tester (D-Montana) in the Senate. Look at his message:

<snip>

But as we traveled the state and talked to people, we found we weren’t alone in wanting a better future for our kids and grandkids. And from those conversations began the greatest grassroots campaign for change that Montana has ever seen.

You built that campaign. You believed. And now, 100,000 miles later — here we are. Real Montana is ready for Real Change.

I cannot thank you enough for everything you have done. Words cannot express how deeply grateful and deeply honored Sharla and I are for the hard work and support that grassroots and netroots Democrats gave to this campaign. You opened up your schedules, opened up your wallets, and opened up your hearts to make Montana and our country a better place.

And because of your hard work and efforts, hundreds of thousands of Montanans joined you and our call for change on Election Day.

This never would have happened without you.

The message sent by Montanans in this election is clear: it is time to get to work. Time to make government work again for ordinary Montanans. Time to fix health care. Time to achieve energy independence. Time to find a plan to end the crisis in Iraq and bring our troops home. Time to restore the Montana values of honesty and integrity to the United States Senate. And time to end destructive party politics and work together for real solutions and real change in Montana and this great nation.

And so now — after I finish up a few chores on the farm this weekend — it is time to roll up our sleeves and get to work.

<snip>

But most of all, I want to thank the people of Montana and you for all of your hard work. There aren’t many places in this great country where a small family farmer with just a few acres could make it to the United States Senate.

I will never forget all the work you have done to make this victory possible. In fact, I will remember it every day. I know the trust and hope you have put into this campaign, and I will always do my best to honor the work you have done.

This campaign has always been about the people of Montana, about neighbors talking to neighbors about what we can achieve together.

And we have proven that when we work together, Montanans can achieve what many believe to be impossible.

Winston Churchill said that politicians work for the next election, and that statesmen work for the next generation. I will do my best to work for the next generation of Montanans, and to get this country moving forward again for the benefit of Montana’s working families.

http://www.testerforsenate.com/

Notice any familiar themes or topics in his winning message?

[WCGreen]

14. I'm not saying not to try and win....

But, in the general election, the presidential candidates are limited in how much they can spend...

There is only so much money to go around...

A campaign haa to allocate wisely or it will run out of money...

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. They are just parroting the standard anti-populist DLC line

that you don't fight the good fight, you concentrate you corporate donations in the states that give you the biggest short term return.

What it does, it prevents recruitment to the party, it undermines the party in purple states and generally erodes the ability of the party to reach anyone who ISN'T a big corporate donor. And, as shown by Hillary's recent financial difficulties, once those corporatists have maxed out, you are in trouble because you don't have a populist base to go back to.

It is what resulted in the Dems being overwhelmed after the Clinton years, because the Clintons and the DLC lost us our base.

[KittyWampus]

9. this is one of most insightful bits posted here in a long time. Telling Hillary was so weak in so

many states.