To: Interested PartiesFrom: Mark Penn, Chief Strategist
Date: Wednesday, February 06, 2008
RE: A New Day
Americans in the twenty-two states that voted on Super Tuesday strongly reaffirmed their desire for a serious, substantive candidate who hears their voices and will deliver solutions to the challenges facing the country, especially the deteriorating economy and the healthcare crisis. It is Hillary Clinton who is seen as being both ready to be commander in chief on day one and is ready to deal with the big challenges we face as a nation.
Yesterday’s results confirmed Hillary’s strengths as a candidate and signaled that she made inroads with a number of key groups and demographics. As we look through the returns and the exits, there are a number of myth-busters that stand out:
a) Hillary can and does do well in rural areas. In Missouri, for example, she won 110 of 115 counties, including a string of rural areas.
b) Hillary can win the youth vote. Hillary swept the youth vote in California and Massachusetts, two states that can be a bellwether for how young people will vote in the general election.
c) Hillary had the momentum on the last day. After the largest national town hall in presidential history, voters who went into the polls undecided chose Hillary, breaking the momentum of Obama’s new establishment campaign. Details here.
d) The Gallup tracking showed a national upturn going into Tuesday, suggesting that it is not that Sen. Obama keeps closing in the polls but that he has bursts of momentum that fade when voters compare the two candidates on who is ready and able to make the changes we need starting on day one.
As we saw in New Hampshire, Sen. Obama was unable to close the deal with voters. After a week of wall-to-wall coverage of the Obama campaign’s big endorsements, money, and Superbowl ads, Hillary Clinton scored strong wins in big states throughout the country and is winning the popular vote. The margins in these big states were strong – Massachusetts by 15, California by 10, New York by 17, NJ by 10, Oklahoma 24, Tennessee 13. Polls predicting losses or close races turned out to be wrong when the actual votes were counted in these states.
Sen. Obama, in contrast, won with large margins in Alabama and Georgia, two states that have been in the Republican column in the last two elections. He also won with large margins in a string of caucus states with comparatively fewer voters – Alaska, Idaho, Utah, and Kansas – and have also been in the Republican column. Of course, he won his home state
If the Democratic Party used a "winner-take-all" system, Hillary Clinton would be en route to being the nominee given the pattern of her victories. But the proportional delegate system keeps this contest going with two candidates who have significant support.
We predicted we would be ahead in delegates overall and we are ahead in delegates overall.
As super-delegates consider which candidate to support, they will be looking at which one candidate has a base and can win the big states, including the crucial swing constituencies. We believe the impressive wins in NY, CA, MA, MI, FL, NJ, AZ suggest that Hillary is the one who can motivate a strong turnout in November. Several civil rights activists have recently written to Howard Dean to ask him to work out a solution to count the votes cast in FL and MI before the convention. More people voted in the Florida Democratic presidential primary (1.7 million) than in any other except CA.
In 2004, the Republicans peeled off close to 40% of the Latinos and many women concerned about national security – two groups that were pivotal in the 2004 general election. Catholics were another group Hillary swept that Democrats lost in 2004. The states and her strong diverse coalition of support presents a powerful case to the superdelegates looking at who can beat John McCain.The clock is also running out on Sen. Obama’s venue of choice – the caucus. There are only five remaining caucuses, the last one in early March. Hillary, on the other hand, has excelled in the large state primaries – the states that will have the most impact come November. Although the remaining February map will favor Obama, the remaining three large primary states -- Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania -- are states with a lot of delegates, strong support from elected officials there (governors of Ohio and PA), and who see Hillary as the candidate with the solutions to the problems they face.
Rather than accept the debate challenge we have made to talk about the issues, Sen. Obama last night launched attacks. We hope he will abandon that approach and instead sit down and discuss the issues with Senator Clinton in a civil and agreeable way as they did in California last week.
« Romney Clues... | Main | Clinton Loaned Herself $5M In January »
Clinton Campaign Memo: "A New Day"
06 Feb 2008 03:05 pm
Comments (45)
Marc,
People have often accused you of just parroting the Clinton talking points. I guess now you have proven them right by literally doing so with no analysis whatsoever.
Bravo to you!
I think Mark Penn is grasping wildly here.
It will be interesting to see the Obama rebuttal memo. Will you post that in its entirety, too, Marc?
The sheer audacity of this memo is stunning. The upshot of it is:
1) Hillary cannot organize for caucuses (no more "working voters can't make it crap")
2) Hillary's primary victories in large states somehow means that Obama wouldn't win those states in the general election. This is a laughable assertion as Ron says above.
3) Hillary will work the superdelegates to sway the race to her, even if she fails to win the pledged state delegates. Forget for a moment that such an event would effectively destroy the Democratic Party and lead to a McCain blowout.
If this is all Penn's got, Hillary is in big trouble. No talk about how she's going to compete in Wisconsin or Washington or Maine or Louisiana? Is she going to concede the rest of February and camp out in Ohio and Texas for March 4? Another New York politician tried that one and it didn't work out so well, as Rudy Giuliani can attest.
Hillary must stanch the momentum of Obama in FEBRUARY or face annihilation on March 4. Voters like both candidates. But they'd love for this thing to be settled by now. If Obama blows her away in February expect calls for to concede to grow.
Had she done what she was supposed to do - win Super Tuesday by more than 100 delegates - then this wouldn't be such a problem. But she blew it by ignoring the "small" states. Typical Terry McAuliffe strategy.
I don't trust men with combovers. Mark Penn is a man I don't trust.
"Hillary can and does do well in rural areas. In Missouri, for example, she won 110 of 115 counties, including a string of rural areas."
-- you don't think race might have been a factor in rural missouri (having spent most of my life there, it seems likely).
what attacks did obama launch last night? it would be nice if they specified. otherwise, they might just be labelling legitimiate policy differences as "attacks" in the hopes that it makes Obama look bad.
But they wouldn't mislead the public like that, would they?
BHO is going negative, again.
This time he is attacking the only two term democratic president since FDR, Bill Clinton.
But this is stupid on his part. Clinton is still wildly popular with the American people. His approval rating, even at the worst moment of his presidency, was higher than Reagans was at the best moments of his. And Clinton left office after eight years of peace and prosperity with the highest approval rating of any modern president.
Obama is an arrogant fool. How he expects to win a Democratic primary by attacking the best president Democrats have ever had is beyond me.
This just proves to me that she is unelectable and cannot win red states. Her strategy is so 1990's. She is a 50+1 state candidate. She doesn’t believe in overwhelming majorities. Clinton just wants to win at any cost. The primary shows that she only wins blue states that will go to any Democrat in November. Any Dem would take NY, NJ, Mass and CA. TN, AR and OK were gimmes because they were neighboring states and she was first lady.. Clinton wants to ignore us in flyover country.. She will end up just like Kerry if she is nominee.. I just want to know how many Indy’s voted for her..This country is so evenly split with the two political parties. The Indy’s determine who wins the election.. Too bad she doesn’t realize this. If she gets the nod we will again watch the Democrats lose the Presidency.. This proves she just can't..
"More people voted in the Florida Democratic presidential primary (1.7 million) than in any other except CA."
This statement is not accurate. CNN reports the following Democratic primary vote totals:
Illinois: 1,937,730
New York: 1,720,565
Florida: 1,684,390
You beat me to it, Ann. I'm from MN, and I was looking to see how Penn was going to tell us we don't matter either (as is, he didn't mention us at all). I would think that when one of your principle spin points is that your opponent did better in states your party should want to compete in, something's off in your analysis.
Here are a couple of problems I see for Obama.
The traditional Democratic base is not energized by Obama, as he claims. It is actually for Hillary Clinton. If Obama wanted to get independent votes, he should run in that primary, not the Democratic one.
Obama is saying he is anti-establishment, yet John Kerry and Ted Kennedy (60 + years in office combined) are everything that is wrong in Washington DC and in this country. Teddy and John's positions are what gave us George Bush. So either he is new and fresh, or he is going to continue along the same path.
Obama once again wants change, but all his policy positions point in the direction of continuing the same thing, specifically healthcare coverage. He wants to expand the current system, the current system that was given birth by the same washington establishment that he supposedly running against.
His wife said she would not support Hillary Clinton. The party is supposed to rally around their candidate. Think about it, Ann Coulter is saying that she would not support the Republican nominee becuase she doesnt agree with him, Michelle Obama is saying the same. While there is not comparison that Michelle is much nicer and smarter than Ann, the dilemma is they are both representing the extremism in both parties. We have governed from the far right in this country, and now they are proposing to go to the far left? So much for uniting. George Bush ran as a uniter, look what we got.
Barack Obama keeps saying together we can. However it is obvious in the result from Super Tuesday, not everyone agrees with him. And many people are questioning what does he actually know? George Bush did not know a whole lot either, all he had was vision, and boy did that vision really screw things up.
I guess this campaign is coming down to this, who is the democratic nominee and who is the independent nominee. As I said before Barack should have run in the independent primary, not in the democratic one.
Thanks, Brian for that snooze inducer....zzzzzz.
Oh yeah one more thing.
JFK's legacy was rejected last night because of Obama, his brother, daughter, and other family members. JFK served in the US Senate for 8 years and was also a congressman before that. Please do not compare JFK to Obama, there is no comparison.
Oh yeah one more thing.
JFK's legacy was rejected last night because of Obama, his brother, daughter, and other family members. JFK served in the US Senate for 8 years and was also a congressman before that. Please do not compare JFK to Obama, there is no comparison.
Thanks again, Brian....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
You're better than Ambien
Where do I sign up to vote in the independent primary? Do the have caucuses too?
Wake up Brian the Democratic base is not big enough to win in a national election! You need independents especially because of the electoral college.
Michelle Obama never actually said she would not support Hillary.
Where do I sign up to vote in the independent primary? Do they have caucuses too?
Wake up Brian the Democratic base is not big enough to win in a national election! You need independents especially because of the electoral college.
Michelle Obama never actually said she would not support Hillary.
In California, about 50% of voters receive a
mail-in ballot early January. Many were mailed
in by mid January and all who were mailing their
votes needed to have the ballots mailed by
January 31st to ensure they will be counted.
Because so many votes would be cast before
Obama's amazing recent rise, one would expect
Clinton to win California based on limited and outdated
information.
So much vitriol in people's writings about the candidate they don't like. Both candidates have similar policy and will work the same way, Senator Obama just brings an uplifting feeling to a new generation of voters that more is possible than just an efficient management of a presidency.
I don't think anyone will be like Nixon or Bush. Most president's behave decently in white house, some are pathbreaking others just complete 8 years without any major accomplishments.
So much vitriol in people's writings about the candidate they don't like. Both candidates have similar policy and will work the same way, Senator Obama just brings an uplifting feeling to a new generation of voters that more is possible than just an efficient management of a presidency.
I don't think anyone will be like Nixon or Bush. Most president's behave decently in white house, some are pathbreaking others just complete 8 years without any major accomplishments.
Brian,
You prove without a showdow of a doubt you have no business posting in this forum. Your arguments are not sound and seriously make you look like an idoit.
Point 1) "he is not supported by Traditional Democrats"-False, RE: polls, primary, caucus. But beyond that then you go onto tear down Kerry and Kennedy? -do they not represent "traditional democrats"?
I can't argue you're second point because I'm not exactly sure what your point is.
Clinton talking point 3)Michelle Obama would not support Hillary Clinton..well god bless her, but you got the quote and the question wrong. She was asked if she would work to support clinton..she said she would have to think about it...never was there a mention of vote...perhaps she would rather spend time with her family than work another campaign...Is John McCain's wife going to work on Mitts campaign if Mitt wins? solid point.
I'm also not sure what you are pointing out in your 4th point, other than trying to compare him to Bush...Please post "who many people are questioning what does he actually know" so that I can question them what they actually know.
Most president's behave decently in white house
Pancho...does that include getting head from interns in the Oval Office?
Spin cycle on over drive. The Clinton dynasty never expected a brotha from the South Side of Chicago with a promising message would win 14 out of the 22 states on Super Tuesday. They never thought he would tie them in pledged delegates. She won Cali..but she has to remember 1.7M in Cali voted for Obama. 2M voted for Hillary. 35% of the votes came in via absentee a month ago. I wonder...without absentee does she really win Cali? Doesnt matter. Obama got a ton of delegates from that state and thats what he wanted. The Clinton machine is out of money and never expected this kind of fight. They never knew that people really want change...not Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton.
Democracy is a wonderful thing when it is working and voters (not pundits shoving candidates down our throats) get a chance to vote.
Voters are taking a second look at Obama, but when the spine tingling speech is over, they are asking themselves, "but where is the experience, where are the plans, where are the policies". Voters are saying that we do have a strong desire for a serious, substantive candidate who hears our voices and will deliver solutions to the multitude of challenges facing our country. Hillary is doing a much better job of conveying what kind of president she will be. She is walking the talk, whereas Obama is just talking the talking.
Obama show us whatcha got! Debate Hillary on the issues!
Penn's such a douchebag:
"Obama's new establishment campaign" like Hillary is somehow the anti-establishment candidate. Penn is pretty much the entire reason I oppose Mrs. Clinton. If she's not smart enough to get rid of that slimy self-promoting idiot, she's not smart enough to be President.
Obama show us whatcha got! Debate Hillary on the issues!
Read: She's out of jack! We need some free air time!!
C'mon, grl...they've debated something like 17 times already...sheesh.
I love how, according to the Clinton campaign, if you're voting in a state that's not California or New York, your vote is irrelevant. Apparently Illinois is tiny and insignificant and Iowa and Missouri are no longer swing states. He's the only one that has a shot in hell against McCain. Obama knows it, Hillary knows it, and the voters are going to figure it out now that McCain's been crowned.
Oh, and the debates? She wants to talk about "issues"? Give me a break. She's loaning her own campaign money because Obama's killing her in fundraising and she's desperate for free media time.
Senator Obmama is the closest thing the Democrats have ever had to JFK and the Kennedys recognize this. The Clinton campaign have gone to great lengths to drag Obama down but in the process only show their dirty colors. Most upsetting to the Hillary campaign is the limited experience of JFK to that of the seasoned Richard Nixon.
As for Fox debates, Rubert Murock (of Fox) not only contributed to Hillary's campaign but held a fundraiser for her. I smell a setup.
Help! Mark Penn has sliced the political landscape into a million microscapes!!! LOL!
Whoa now:
so nice that you get to decide who can post and who can't post here: I quess I don't understand what open forums really are. Now you want to make them truth free zones?
you say Brian is wrong about Obama not being supported by mainstream democrats. This point has been made in the NYTimes, CNN and other commentators. Are they all wrong with their interpretation? Are only obama people allowed to interpret trends and patterns?
obama wins with a lot of new voters, independents and wouldn't be winning without them: how is brian wrong? once those people register as dems they are dems but they aren't the traditional dems. Does he peel off traditional dems? every third party-type candidacy does. Obama brags about this but you deny it?
Kennedy was deployed in Calif and he didn't get it. kennedy is old world and was the establishment when the clintons were new: it is a hitch in his message of newness and change to trot out kerry and kennedy. Brian is saying that is his opinion. it sounds right on our hillaryish side of the divide but we realize that the rules say you can accuse someone of hypocracy and we are not allowed to.
Brian also makes the point that Obama is not offering what he says he is offering, that Obama is damning the status quo and his positions do not stand the test of newness or change, and that rejecting Hillary and Bill but embracing kerry kennedy and praying for gore is laughably at odds.
And some of us who visit this blog agree with him.
regarding michelle's mis-step, you minimize her mis-step: it was graceless and petty: it was another unfortunate snub.
His forth point which you say you don't understand is that obama running as a visionary with a thin resume sounds like Bush jr., that their message is the same: uniter not a divider.
It scares some of us because it seems empty and a sales pitch of platitudes.
does he have your permission to blog here again?
Micheal C, you sound like a Brian sock puppet. You're both idiots.
I don't buy the arguement about Obama's inexperience. Hillary has only 4 years more experience. She was married to the President but she wasn't one.
Bush wasn't a terrible President because of inexperience but because surrounded himself with terrible advisors.
Using a Celine Dion song AGAIN, Hillary? Really?
Micheal C,
nope he doesn't have my permission and neither do you.
Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
Posted by Nate | February 6, 2008 3:12 PM
Mr. Ambinder, I have to agree with Nate, above. Seems to me that last Obama talking points memo you sent out had lots of snark added by you. And this one--well, what is this? Is this reporting?
I've been visiting this site more in the past month because I thought you were a source of objective information with insightful comments, but you seem to have changed with the outgoing tide lately. With all the emotional energy around here, we sure could benefit with more objective posts. Thanks, Beth
Winners don't talk about a new day or accept debate invitations from Fox News.
These debates equal free media. All of this is starting to make sense.
http://www.politicalinaction.com
Penn is hillarious! Or should I say, Hillaryous!
I very happily sent $50 to Obama last night. I think I will do that every time I hear Clinton beg for money so that she can pay back the loan she made to herself. Awww, poor millionaire Hillary.
if she's doing so well, why does her campaign have to keep listing FL and MI as great victories? Think HRC will ever consent to caucauses in those states now-to enfranchise those voters? Not after this memo. Why hasn't anyone compared HRC's "victory" in Michigan to the results in countries where dictators hold elections and then don't let the opposition run or appear on the ballot. It all smacks of weakness to me. She is also totally rejecting Howard Dean's 50 state strategy.
"if the Democrats used ... winner-take-all"...
I got news for you, Mr. Penn, they don't. Any credibility your memo might have had was destroyed by that utterly meaningless statement, which has as much meaning as saying "if Hillary won Iowa". If you'd wasted less effort on trying to "make Florida count" and spent more time on places like Idaho that did actually count, you might not be in the mess you're in.
Susan
Hillary won California because of a large coalition of groups that included absentee voters, women, Latinos, Asian Americans, older voters, and the working class. Brian is right, she appeals to a wide range of voters.
Whoanow & Jose
You have undermined the credibility of Obama's message of hope and change. Listen to yourselves. By insulting the non Obama supporters, do you think they will vote for him? Real smart!
what site do i use to support clinton's campaign. i was an edward's supporter.
It is always so laughable to see the same Obama staffers posting on all these blogs the same old tired crapola! Obama really needs to start rotating his staff assignments!
By the way, Hillary has completely exposed him to be the wussy we all thought him to be. He is an airbag who is too much of a coward to debate a woman! No sir, no crack smoking cowards get my vote!
Mark Penn is mad because Clinton is having a hard time paying him the millions he doesn't deserve. Obama 08
I do think Marc's spin is off-target, and the country is starting to decide we don't want to swap another Bush for another Clinton. She's showing she can carry her base, but little more. I know folks on the right who would sleep thru McCain's election day, unless she's on the Dem ticket. She's far more divisive than our current "uniter" in the White House. And she's not there yet.
I think we need to count not only the folks that will come out and vote for you, but those that will come out against you, in figuring who can win in November. Of course Rupert Murdoch would rather see HRC win the nomination. It's irresponsible to stick our collective heads in the sand and ignore the certain backlash that will come with her being the only other choice.
And even if she can barely pull off a win at all costs, does this country need another 4 years where half the country can't stand their president? And while they're deadly accurate at winning elections with a 50 + 1 majority, those divisive politics are not very effective at governing. Gridlock ensures nothing gets done but campaigning for the next election...
| 
So she's arguing that yesterday proved she is able to win NY, NJ, MA, and CA in the general election? Yeah those have really been tough states for Democrats in the last 2 decades. Weak stuff.
Posted by Ron | February 6, 2008 3:11 PM