The Errors Haunting Clinton
By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008; Page A19
....Clinton's surprise comeback in New Hampshire looks ironic in retrospect. Many attributed the victory to an emotional and revelatory moment in which Clinton choked up at a campaign event and declared: "This is very personal for me; it's not just political." Defying the false assumption that she was an unfeeling political automaton was one crucial element to Clinton's victory. Her win may have saved (Mark) Penn's job at the time. Yet, according to his critics inside the campaign, it was Penn who had resisted counsel that Clinton needed to show her human side.
Penn may also be the one and only political consultant who hurt himself by publishing a successful book in the course of a political campaign....(T)he book -- co-written by E. Kinney Zalesne -- underscored Penn's skepticism of large and overarching themes. "Grandiose" is one of Penn's preferred epithets, and he believes passionately in accumulating small subgroups in the electorate into a majority. His book describes more than 70 trend groups with pithy names such as "Modern Mary Poppinses," "Social Geeks," "Archery Moms," "Shy Millionaires" and "Numbers Junkies." One of Penn's groups, "Impressionable Elites," has proved to be mightily impressed with Barack Obama. When Obama started winning on the basis of a sweeping message of hope, inclusion and national unity, the merits of micro-politics came into question.
And Penn committed another sin that, in truth, affected the entire Clinton apparatus: believing that Obama would be trumped by Hillary Clinton's "inevitability" and that media messaging could overpower organization. This meant that the Clinton campaign was, to be charitable, underorganized....Obama's team is well known for its use of new technologies to raise money, engage volunteers and spread his gospel in unorthodox ways. Yet equally important has been Obama's own old-fashioned version of micro-politics. He built local organizations all over the country, especially in the overlapping groups of smaller states and those holding caucuses. He won most of the small states that voted on Feb. 5, the Super Tuesday primaries that the Clinton camp thought would secure her the nomination, and he swept the states that voted in the weeks immediately after. Much of Obama's current lead was amassed in that period.
Not all of these problems can be laid at Penn's feet. But he did come to symbolize a campaign that was much given to infighting and failed to understand the new energies unleashed in the Democratic Party by the reaction against George W. Bush. It did not grasp early enough how much politics has changed since the Clinton '90s. The post-Penn Clinton campaign has only a little time and a narrow window to make up for these mistakes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/07/AR2008040702192.html?nav=most_emailed