Obama's campaign management

[Von Tonner]

Love him or hate him, you have to admit this guy has managed one hell of a campaign. Books are going to be written on it and studied. Appart from the minute attention given to cauces states as well as primary states, the huge amount of money collected, the organizing of thousands of helpers, the correct reading of the political landscape, the bulls eye damage control - all of this and more is impressive. It needed to be, to knock out what was possibly the toughest opponent he could be faced with.

But what has really impressed me is the campaigns timing on the fly. The rolling out of Richardson after PA, Edwards after West Virginia and now we have Bush's comments in the Knesset about engaging in talks with the likes of Ahmadinejad. McCain is into the attack on Obama immediately and what does the Obama camp do? Simple, refer McCain to Bush's Defence Secretary.

"When asked to respond to McCain's charge about Ahmadinejad, one of Obama's senior advisers simply forwarded a comment by Defense Secretary Gates from today's Washington Post. "We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage," said Gates, "and then sit down and talk with them. If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us." That's Obama position, articulated by Bush's defense secretary, say his aides.

Really guys, if Obama has the skill to pick a team/cabinet half as good as the team he picked to run his campaign I would think the White House is going to be in safe hands.

[TDK1044]

You very eloquently make a point that I made in another post, VT. You don't need Foreign Policy experience to be the President, what you need is the ability to surround yourself with the right people. Bill Clinton did that brilliantly. While his advisors were servicing the Country, Monica was servicing him.

Obama's stategic approach to the campaign has blown the arrogant Hillary off the map. Just look at the most recent example. Bush makes a statement about not siiting down with terrorists. The Obama people immediately see the opportunity to cement in the minds of the American people who the Democratic nominee is. Obama responds to the Bush statement. McCain responds to Obama's statement....anyone notice who was missing from any involvement in the issue? Hillary. And not because she chose not to be involved....but because she's no longer relevant in terms of presidential discussion. She was on the stump in Kentucky rallying her troop. I understand her troop is getting very tired.

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by TDK1044

Obama's stategic approach to the campaign has blown the arrogant Hillary off the map. Just look at the most recent example. Bush makes a statement about not siiting down with terrorists. The Obama people immediately see the opportunity to cement in the minds of the American people who the Democratic nominee is.

You are quite right TDK (see below). This latest spat is getting much more interesting than any up coming primary - and dare I say it, I think with much more substance as to the choice to be made as to who gets to be president.

This just came through:

" ---------------------------------------------------------
First Read: The day in politics by NBC News for NBC News
---------------------------------------------------------

FIRST THOUGHTS.
*** Bush's Gift To Obama: When President Bush -- thousands of miles away in Israel -- decided to fire his thinly veiled shot at Obama yesterday, it was a giant gift to the Illinois senator and his campaign. Why? One, it essentially kept Clinton on the sidelines just two days after her big West Virginia victory. Two, Obama's opponent was no longer Clinton or McCain, but the man with the 27% job-approval rating. And three, it rallied Democrats to Obama's side. Even neutral Dems, like Joe Biden, Rahm Emanuel and Harry Reid, quickly leapt to Obama's defense. Some Democrats might be deeply divided right now. Pro-choice women are angry at NARAL's endorsement of Obama; Clinton supporters are upset that Obama is looking like the eventual nominee; and some African Americans are unhappy with the Clintons. But what's the best way to unify them all? Give them an excuse to turn their attention to Bush. And this will all play out another day -- and will likely extend into the weekend -- as Obama will respond this afternoon to Bush at his rally with Tom Daschle in South Dakota, NBC's Andrea Mitchell reports. Obama will react to both what he considers Bush's politicization of foreign policy and the substance of Bush's attack.

*** The Power Of Bush: Regardless of whether you believe Bush yesterday did the right thing or not as far as the unwritten rules of partisan politics, it is a reminder of how the president can toss an issue grenade into the middle of the campaign and change the narrative in a nanosecond. But we have to ask: Did anyone in McCain's orbit get a head's up on this? After all, Bush's remarks -- and then McCain's response to them -- overshadowed McCain's big "2013" speech that he gave to put more room between himself and Bush. They also undercut that very speech after McCain essentially agreed with Bush's assessment. As the Obama campaign pointed out, McCain delivered "a lofty speech about civility and bipartisanship in the morning, and then embrace[d] George Bush's disgraceful political attack in the afternoon." Now, McCain's past (and possibly contradictory) statements on Hamas are gaining fresh scrutiny today with an op-ed by Jamie Rubin in today's Washington Post."



This is one of the things I love about politics - the discourse. It can turn on a dime. From "bitter" to "Hard working whites" to "100 years in Iraq". Throw a stone into the political pond and you never know how strong the ripple.

[geetrue]

What if someone stood up and said that the early cacus results had been rigged by the Obama campaign directors to be influenced by paid or un paid young college students.

I actually heard this on a well known news show, but I can't provide a link due to the newsman in question was just having a off the record third person talk with his co-host. The seed was planted so to speak.

If Mrs Clinton can't prove any tampering by August then the question on who (if anyone) rigged the inital cacus for the democratic party could be brought up by Senator John Mccain.

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by geetrue

What if someone stood up and said that the early cacus results had been rigged by the Obama campaign directors to be influenced by paid or un paid young college students.

I actually heard this on a well known news show, but I can't provide a link due to the newsman in question was just having a off the record third person talk with his co-host. The seed was planted so to speak.

If Mrs Clinton can't prove any tampering by August then the question on who (if anyone) rigged the inital cacus for the democratic party could be brought up by Senator John Mccain.

I would have to say prove it. That is too big and damaging not to be backed up by evidence and a rock solid source.

[Von Tonner]

Looks like some have a hard time explaining what "appeasement" really means and like Bush, need a refresher course in history.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_102020.html