Clinton Adds Staff To Iowa

News yesterday that Sen. Hillary Clinton is adding up to 100 staffers to her Iowa field and political operation does not surprise her Democratic rivals.

They see it as a sign that Clinton's campaign has failed to lower expectations for her and has concluded that victory in the lead-off state is necessary for her to survive until later contests.

Clinton aides have done their best to lower expectations. Clinton herself, in an interview with David Yepsen, called Iowa her toughest state. Advisers like to say that Tom Harkin's participation in the 1992 presidential race precluded Bill Clinton from building a campaign there and therefore that Hillary Clinton hasn't had the opportunity to present her tires for kicking.

Well -- the Clinton general election campaign went to Iowa several times in 1992. Several times (at least) during his presidency. Several times during the 1996 re-election. Hillary Clinton was the keynote speaker at the 2004 Jefferson Jackson dinner.

The more staff in Iowa, the better, right? Not necessarily.

(1) Clinton's Iowa team is renown for its ability to parrot her campaign message. It's taken the campaign months to instill this discipline in the team. The sudden influx of new staffers means more time training them in the ways of selling Hillary Clinton.

(2) Mastering the complicated Iowa caucus math -- there are at least three levels of complexity -- isn't necessarily easier with more staffers.

(3) If previous patterns hold, about 60% of caucus goers are expected to be legacy caucus goers; about 40 percent are expected to be new. Most of the Clinton campaign's energy will be focused on those 60% -- all of whom are identifiable because each campaign has purchased access to the state party's voter list. Winning them over requires personal contact with the candidate and the quality of a message -- not necessary the quantity of door knocks, a lesson that Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt learned in 2004.

Comments

You are making a lot of assumptions about Clinton hiring staff and how they will be used (i.e. wandering around aimlessly knocking on doors).

It is quite likely that November 1st is the date the campaign penciled in long ago for ramping up the staff for the final push the caucus.

I think it is a risky assumption to assume that Clinton is focusing on prior caucus goers. Almost certainly she is, but the consistent theme from the Clinton campaign is bringing new women to the voting booth. As Mark Penn has said, women are 54% of the electorate and have never elected "one of their own". Clinton threw down the gauntlet to Iowa women this week in her Yepson interview, effectively asking them if they want Iowa to be lumped in with Mississippi as the only two states that have never elected a woman as governor, Senator, or Congressman. She said she didn't think the people of Iowa she'd met were like that.

Unlike an insurgent candidate, Clinton is not counting exclusively on new caucus goers. However, is probably a fair assumption that many of these new staff will be focused on get-out-the-vote efforts targeted at single women.

Posted by hwc | October 25, 2007 12:03 PM

Hillary needs that many more staffers because she can't get people to do the jobs that volunteers normally do. The thrust, the demeanor of her campaign has always been:"We'll win with you or without you." To which I decided,"Well, it'll be without me." It seems lots of Iowans have decided the same.

Posted by Michael's Mom | October 25, 2007 12:57 PM

"Clinton threw down the gauntlet to Iowa women this week in her Yepson interview, effectively asking them if they want Iowa to be lumped in with Mississippi as the only two states that have never elected a woman as governor, Senator, or Congressman."

LOL.

Posted by Korha | October 25, 2007 2:31 PM

Campaigns generally hire field staff as early as they can afford to, since field work requires the most time to get accomplished. A campaign that finds itself with extra cash down the stretch almost always puts it into additional media -- more tv, radio or mail.

So this move is rather surprising from a Clinton campaign that has stuck to its game plan all year. It means either their messaging -- she's mailed at least 8 times already and been on the air for months -- is not getting the results they had hoped for, or their field is not getting the targets they feel they need to assure victory.

The problem with using field to make up for missed targets is that targets are almost always ephemeral. Good campaign managers generally plan for 40% of your identified supporters -- your 1s -- not to show up or to show up for another candidate (esp in a multi-candidate primary).

Campaigns that opt for field staff late generally believe that they need to win through turnout, which -- as none less than Mark Mellman pointed out this week in an article intended to reinforce Clinton's siupposed inevitability -- is rarely a winning strategy.

Obviously the Clinton camp knows all this. My guess would be, therefore, that the additional staff will be intended to try to hold onto their id'd supporters presuming an onslaught of attacks on her positions will be coming from Obama, from an Edwards who has stockpiled his money for a late blitz, and from the possibility of independent expenditure campaigns against her. In short, they are trying to learn from Dean's mistake, which was to try to conitnue to build support when he was ahead rather than focus on holding onto his supporters down the stretch.

Posted by Gus | October 26, 2007 3:14 AM