Pardon The Interruption

Pardon the interruption on blogging; I have several meetings off campus today.

One bit of information I'd like to write about is the news that the Obama campaign has hired Patti Solis Doyle to be chief of staff for the vice presidential candidate, whoever she or he may be, and Stephanie Cutter to be Michelle Obama's chief of staff. Solis Doyle's hiring is best seen in the context of her longtime friendship with David Axelrod, her admiration for Obama (which was palpable even when she was Hillary Clinton's campaign manager) and her Chicago roots. Not for nothing will she be the campaign's highest ranking Latina. Stephanie Cutter and Michelle Obama both seem the type of people who disdain nonsense and silliness and silly journalism. Cutter is sharp, has solid relationships with many national political reporters, and knows how to harangue journalists she considers to be unfair. Michelle Obama has long needed a bigger team, and Cutter would seem to be an ideal choice to lead it.

Comments

Of course you are dodging the big bullet here which is to pass judgement on whether PSD's choice as VP chief of staff is a sign of where things are heading on the Hillary as Vp front.
My sense is that this is a cunning way to make it really unpalatable to Hillary behind the scenes while publicly looking as if you are seriously considering it.
In any case, it is an interesting parlor game to see which journalists read that particular piece of information which way

Posted by benjamin | June 16, 2008 2:06 PM

Is it normal to appoint a COS to a VP before appointing a VP? I.e., isn't it bizarre that the veep doesn't get to choose their own chief?

Posted by Geoff | June 16, 2008 2:15 PM

Geoff,

You bring up a good point. Marc, is this standard-operating-procedure?

It seems a way to send the signal that everyone in the campaign, including the VP, reports to the chief.

Posted by Dan | June 16, 2008 2:18 PM

Wasn't standard for Cheney, that's for sure.

Posted by P.M.T Barnum | June 16, 2008 2:22 PM

If Hillary IS NOT CHOSEN VP, this will make it clear that Patti Solis Doyle may have been an Obama bug or spy at the very top of the Clinton campaign. Why did she spend so much money so fast and yet at the same time have "admiration" for Obama and maintain her longtime friendship with Axelrod? Seems fishy.

Posted by John | June 16, 2008 2:28 PM

John,

Solis Doyle was one of Clinton's best friends and closest advisers since the early 1990s. She is not an Obama spy.

Posted by Daniel | June 16, 2008 2:43 PM

As a former Clinton supporter and donor, this is the kind of thing that Obama should not be doing. Making her the CoS for the VP is snide and obnoxious.

Posted by Andrew | June 16, 2008 3:09 PM

Andrew,

I don't get it. Should Obama shut Clinton loyalists out of his administration? And isn't PSD entitled to a job?

Posted by Geoff | June 16, 2008 3:24 PM

Picking Solis-Doyle means one thing: It's going to be Sebelius, Napolitano, or McCaskill.

He's using Hillary supporters to prop Hillary up so that when he picks Sebelius he'll be able to defend himself by pointing out all the Hillary campaign alums he has hired to his VP team.

He has the Clinton dynasty by the balls, now he's moving in for the final killing blow.

Posted by Abe | June 16, 2008 4:03 PM

Thanks for the take on "Why Cutter is a good fit for Michelle, and what we can expect from her" rather than "why they must be worried about Michelle's image" that I'm seeing elsewhere. It seems a given that as he's secured the nomination all staff beefs up, including Michelle's.

As for Solis Doyle--I expect most top Clinton people (not Mark Penn) to eventually have roles with the Obama people. And many people who know more about such things than myself have opined that SD is very good at, say, public relations, but not a good choice to have run the campaign.

Hillary will not be veep. I'm with Al Giardano that this was spelled out to her in the final weeks of the campaign; I also believe that on reflection she may not want it. Just as choosing another woman as veep is not Unacceptable And An Insult to Hillary, choosing a top Clinton staffer for a role is not Unacceptable And An Insult to Hillary. It's not about Hillary any more.

Posted by Deborah | June 16, 2008 4:09 PM

To Deborah, citing Al Giordano on this is laughable. He also "reported" that 40 superdelegates were going to declare for Obama en masse right after Dennis Cardoza endorsed Obama near the end of the primary season. There was no "Cardoza 40" declaring at once, even though Giordano claimed his anonymous sources said there were. In fact, nowhere near 40 supers endorsed Obama at that time, as a few dripped out the day of South Dakota, but nowhere near 40 endorsements before South Dakota/Montana.

Now, will Hillary Clinton be VP? Patti S. Doyle as chief of staff means either (1) this is a clear indication Hillary Clinton will be VP; or (2) it is a slap in the face to both Clinton and Solis Doyle (she gets to run some other person's VP election?).

Posted by Chris | June 16, 2008 4:37 PM

"To Deborah, citing Al Giordano on this is laughable. He also "reported" that 40 superdelegates were going to declare for Obama en masse right after Dennis Cardoza endorsed Obama near the end of the primary season. There was no "Cardoza 40" declaring at once, even though Giordano claimed his anonymous sources said there were. In fact, nowhere near 40 supers endorsed Obama at that time, as a few dripped out the day of South Dakota, but nowhere near 40 endorsements before South Dakota/Montana."

Chris, you clearly didn't pay any attention to the content of Al's reporting. What he actually said was the Cardoza was the first of 40 who were *prepared* if Hillary insisted on dragging things out long into June to switch support to make sure things didn't remain unresolved going into Denver.

Whether he was accurate or not, we'll likely never know, but you're blatanly wrong to say he reported incorrectly. Cardoza was a warning shot, and it's in fact fairly likely Hillary got the news that more were prepared to do the same and gracefully stepped aside to avoid being publicly pushed out by her own supporters.

Posted by Adam | June 16, 2008 4:50 PM

No, it's a clear indication that Obama is about to stick a knife right into Hillary's back(and I say this as a supporter of his). He about to teach Hillary a lesson by picking Sebelius as his VP. He'll justify his decision by touting "executive experience".

Then, after he's off the stage he'll engage in a long and maniacal evil laugh after destroying any possibility that Hillary would ever serve in the White House again.

Posted by Abe | June 16, 2008 4:52 PM

PSD didn't exactly leave the Clinton campaign on her own terms, or with a great amount of grieving from the Clinton campaign folks. Is it too far-fetched to imagine that she actually wanted the CoS of VP position to a) stay relevant; b) learn what it takes to be on a winning team; c) signal women voters in some fashion (yet to be determined, exactly)?

Posted by purplestatewoman | June 16, 2008 5:48 PM

To Adam: You can believe what you want, but he "reported" that 40 superdelegates were going to declare on one day before the final voting occurred. He may have scrubbed his web site to protect his shred of credibility, but he was wrong, no matter if you want to pretend otherwise.

While I'm at it, here are some other "reports" that were from only anonymous sources during the primary that never came to fruition:

-Hillary Clinton would use the "nuclear option" on the Rules Committee (reported wrongly by Tom Edsall, showing why he no longer works for a respected journalistic organ like the Washington Post and instead works for a nutty, though popular, blog). Of course, if anything, Obama had the votes on the Rules Committee, not Clinton.

-The mainstream media picking up on Drudge's likely fabricated story that the Clinton campaign sent around a picture of Obama in Muslim dress. Most reports suggest the TN Republican party did this, and there has been no independent verification that Clinton had anything to do with this.

-And on and on. Truly, don't cite 'reporting' from anonymous sources as fact. It's usually something else, like an agenda under the cloak of anonymity.

Posted by Chris | June 16, 2008 5:52 PM

Marc, I would also welcome clarification about whether this is standard, or unusual. Surely the VP candidate would ususally pick her/his own COS, in coordination with the presidential candidate but not prearranged by the top of the ticket?

I cannot imagine any reason why Obama would want to send a negative message to the Clinton folks now, so don't see that as a motivation. Is it just that they wanted to announce her arrival and didn't have anything else that sounds quite senior enough for her? This seems a bit weird, frankly.

Posted by lostintranslation | June 17, 2008 12:35 AM