Politico: "Clinton supporters urged to caucus ... 11 days late"

[ClarkUSA]

Politico's Ben Smith has the story here:

My sharp-eyed colleague Josie Hearn picked up this card at one of Bill Clinton's stops in Iowa yesterday, where others like it
were being handed to Clinton supporters.

The error: The date on which supporters are urged to caucus, Jan. 14, is 11 days after the caucuses.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1207/Clinton_supporters_urged_to_caucus11_days_late.html

Oops! ;-)

[TwilightZone]

1. The article indicates that the date was crossed off and replaced with the correct one.

At least they reused them instead of printing all new ones.

[tammywammy]

2. Agreed, it's better to reuse the ones they had

I hope it doesn't confuse any voters.

[TwilightZone]

7. Agreed. Though, with all of the media coverage and ads...

most are probably aware of the correct date.

[K Gardner]

3. Can you see THAT headline? "Clinton declares war on trees to make new flyers" n/t

[TwilightZone]

5. "Campaign screw-up leads to deforestation!"

And, of course, the word "lead" has a double meaning, insinuating that she's responsible for the lead in Chinese toys, too!

Hehe....

[K Gardner]

6. LOL ! Good one :-)

[ClarkUSA]

4. That was at the "second event" the reporter went to... not the first event

And who knows what might have happened before that? I wonder how many who would have caucused for her will now not be there come the 3rd.

I'm all for recycling, though.

[MonkeyFunk]

8. I suspect

the date of the caucus will get a little more publicity than just a card handed out at a flyer.

[ClarkUSA]

10. Well, of course... but it is an "odd organizational glitch"

I've never heard of another campaign making this kind of mistake before.

[MonkeyFunk]

12. I'm sure such mistakes aren't all that infrequent....

you didn't hear about them in the past because there wasn't an army of Clinton-haters who gleefully rush to the internet to post every little negative thing.

[ClarkUSA]

14. How can you be sure?

Because I'm sure if this had happened to Obama, an army of Hillaryworlders would have posted a dozen threads about this throughout DU by now.

"you didn't hear about them in the past because there wasn't an army of Clinton-haters who gleefully rush to the internet to post every little negative thing."

Oh, did Hillary run for president in the past? Are you from a parallel universe? ;-)

[MonkeyFunk]

16. I've seen little mistakes like that

on printed materials before. This one was evidently caused by the re-use of older cards. The dates were crossed out, the cards re-used. There's nothing wrong with that. And as others have pointed out, if the cards were dumped and new ones printed, the campaign would be attacked for that.

No, Clinton did not run in the past. My point was that there weren't dedicated slimeballs whose job it was to publicize such minor things in the past.

[hayu_lol]

9. This was obviously due to the change in caucus dates...

however this came up frequently during Kerry's campaign in most of the targeted states. Phone calls and snail mail went out to different sets of Dem voters.

Despite the waste, it might have been better to have printed new ones...provided there had been enough time to do so.

What if this had been an official ballot? Would crossing out be allowed in any state except Florida and Ohio?

[ClarkUSA]

11. Good questions and thoughts.

I wonder what other campaigns have done regarding supporter cards?

[CoffeeCat]

13. They'll use this to...

...explain why she comes in 4th.

[ClarkUSA]

15. heh

Good one. Who do you think will come in first, second, and third (you seem to know a lot about what's going on on the ground)?

[CoffeeCat]

17. I wish I knew...

I told my husband that I'm expecting ANYTHING, because you just never know what will
happen.

My sense is that Obama and Edwards will be in a dog-fight for first place. I say this
because they've both run exceptional Iowa campaigns. Just remarkable. They've both really
connected with Iowa voters, and have been very honest, open and willing to dialog with
Iowans.

Hillary has run a shoddy, embarrassing campaign. You know the details.

Biden has some strong support, which seems to be increasing a bit, as caucus day draws near.

Richardson had some support, but it seems to have dwindled, and I think Biden may have
picked up some of his people. Dodd has run a respectable campaign, and I like him, but
he's at 1 percent.

What will make a difference is the supporters of those second-tier candidates. It is
likely that Biden, Dodd, Richardson and Kucinich will not have enough supporters in
each of the caucus sites (there's more than 2,000 caucus sites across Iowa, that
all meet at 7:00 p.m., Jan 3. After each caucus meets and does a head count,
people split off into groups, based on which candidate they're supporting. If a
candidate has fewer than 15 percent support, those supporters must join up with
another candidate group--or not be counted.

You always have a hold out or two---but the vast majority of non-viable caucus-goers
will join another candidate group.

My estimation is that the supporters of Biden, Dodd, Richardson and Kucinich will
go mainly to Obama and Edwards. Most of the two-tier candidates are more progressive
and their politics jive more with Obama and Edwards. Furthermore, those gravitating
toward those two-tier candidates really want change, and HRC certainly doesn't
represent change to most people.

My guess if that Obama and Edwards both do very well--fighting a tight race. Third
place may go to Clinton or even to Biden. I predict the third-place candidate will
not fare well at all--garnering a small number of delegates and having a poor
showing because it's going to be all about Obama and Edwards. That's my 2 cents,
but who knows--on caucus night it may be worth about half of that! :)

[ClarkUSA]

18. Very interesting...

You're better than David Yepsen. This part was interesting because of your
conclusions about second-tier candidates' natural leanings towards Obama
or Edwards rather than Clinton, something confirmed by all the recent polls:

"My estimation is that the supporters of Biden, Dodd, Richardson and Kucinich will
go mainly to Obama and Edwards. Most of the two-tier candidates are more progressive
and their politics jive more with Obama and Edwards. Furthermore, those gravitating
toward those two-tier candidates really want change, and HRC certainly doesn't
represent change to most people."

I like this scenario, too:

"My guess if that Obama and Edwards both do very well--fighting a tight race. Third
place may go to Clinton or even to Biden. I predict the third-place candidate will
not fare well at all--garnering a small number of delegates and having a poor
showing because it's going to be all about Obama and Edwards."

It is strange how the latest ARG poll has Hillary at 34% with Edwards and Obama trailing
with 20% and 19% respectively. But I'll go with a genuine Iowan's gut feelings over a
questionably weighted poll, anyday!

Thanks for taking the time to spell things out. I appreciate your giving me your
time during this holiday season. I've always enjoyed your on-the-ground observations.

I hope you're having a lovely holiday break and eating lots of great food surrounded by
family and friends. :hi:

[ncabot22]

19. This just proves she's not ready for prime time

She's too inexperienced, too green. Yep. Definitely not ready for prime time. In 2016, yes. She'll be ready then. But now? Nope. Too green. Much too green.

Sorry. I couldn't resist. :)

[ClarkUSA]

20. My thinking exactly.

;-)

You KNOW that's what Hillaryworlders would say if this had happened to Obama, right?