Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
Full Post
Posted Wednesday, March 26, 2008 2:45 PM

Obama Plays the Passive Delegate 'Poaching' Game, Too***

Andrew Romano

UPDATE, March 27: According to Obama spokesman Bill Burton, the post card in question was mistakenly sent to a Clinton delegate--not, as I previously believed, to the entire list of Texas county delegates, regardless of affiliation. "The Texas Democratic Party gave us a list of delegates that indicated him as an Obama delegate--which is why he got the errant post card," he says. "The suggestion that we have a passive strategy of trying to flip Clinton's pledged delegates by sending one postcard to one guy is pretty ludicrous on its face." If that's what happened, I absolutely agree. I'm double-checking with the Texas Democratic Party to confirm that the delegate in question was listed as a Clinton supporter and find out whether others also received the mailing. I'll post another update when I hear back.

UPDATE II:  No word from either campaign, but here's what the Clinton supporter in question has to say.

UPDATE III, MARCH 28: So I've finally gotten to the bottom of this--or as close to bottom, it seems, as anyone can get.

Advertisement

Turns out that the Obama campaign is correct to claim that the Clinton delegate in question, Christopher Cohen, was misidentified on their working list as an Obama supporter. I have obtained a copy of the spreadsheet and double-checked his entry. Not only that, but three other Clinton supporters who have contacted me to complain about receiving Obama postcards are ALSO identified on the aforementioned spreadsheet as Obama delegates. So the Obama campaign was, in fact, working off a flawed list, and that explains why Cohen and his fellow Clintonites received Obama postcards, which the Obama camp maintains were intended only for their own delegates.

That said, Cohen and the two of the other delegates in question are listed correctly--that is, as pro-Clinton, not pro-Obama--on the website of the Travis County Democrats. Why the discrepancy? Blame the middleman. According to spokesman Hector Nieto of the Texas Democratic Party, "the information that we gave to the campaigns was information given to us by the individual precincts. We then sent that information to a contractor to key it in to a spreadsheet. There's a possibility that an error was made when the information was keyed in." In other words, the precincts reported the correct candidate affiliations to the state party, but the outside contractor hired to enter those affiliations into a single spreadsheet screwed up--meaning that the Clinton and Obama campaigns received lists that showed at least a few Clinton delegates pledged to Obama (and perhaps vice versa).

***I was basing my original item off of the affiliations posted on the Travis County Democrats website, which list Cohen (and two other delegates who received Obama postcards) as Clinton supporters; at the time, it appeared that Obama was knowingly asking his rival's delegates for support. But it's now clear that the Obama campaign received a spreadsheet indicating that these three delegates were pro-Obama, and thus it's only fair to conclude thatObama is not, as my headline indicated, playing the passive delegate 'poaching' game. Only Clinton--with her robocalls, which started in Iowa and continue in Texas--is on the prowl.

ORIGINAL ITEM: Bad news for all you Obamaniacs who reacted with righteous indignation when I reported on March 14 that Iowa county delegates pledged to your candidate were receiving robocalls from the Clinton campaign in the run-up to the coming county conventions (when such delegates can switch their allegiances): 

Team Obama is doing pretty much the same thing.

Earlier today, blogger Ann Althouse reported that her son, a county delegate from Austin, Texas, received a postcard from the Obama campaign urging him to "Support Barack Obama at your county convention!" (which takes place this Saturday). Here are the pictures to prove it:

front of flier

back of flier

Seems innocuous enough--a friendly reminder, perhaps? The only problem is that Althouse's son is pledged to Clinton--and identified as such on the list of county delegates sent to both campaigns. Apparently, Obama has mailed these postcards to all Texas county delegates, not just his own. This is precisely what the Clintonites did in Iowa. If you'll remember, Clinton spokesman Phil Singer told me at the time that the Iowa Democratic Party had provided the campaign with an incomplete list of delegate affiliations, meaning that "the point of the call is to identify our delegates." But a quick check with the IDP revealed that "80 percent" of the county delegates were, in fact, linked to their chosen candidates on the lists sent to the campaigns--including at least one Obama supporter, Lance Jenkins, who specifically reported receiving the Clinton robocall.

That means that both Obama and Clinton are, in effect, asking their rival's delegates for support.  

Now, don't get me wrong. Both the Clinton call (which included a "press 1 if you support Hillary" option) and the Obama postcard are serving another purpose--roll call and reminder, respectively. What's more, wooing delegates at the county level--or, for that matter, the national level--is part of the game (although both campaigns have forsworn the practice, at least nationally); campaigns are supposed to make sure that the maximum number of supporters show up at each level (county, district, state). And there's almost no chance that such subtle seduction would work to any significant degree. I mean, anyone swayed by a robocall or a postcard--especially the hardcore supporters chosen to serve as delegates--doesn't deserve to vote in the first place.

But these under-the-radar "outreach efforts"--which essentially say, "By the way, vote for me"--are worth remembering. Because if neither Obama nor Clinton clinches the nomination by the end of primary season in June, they'll be forced to spend the summer jockeying for any possible advantage--and this is exactly the sort of passive, grey-area poaching that you can expect to see.
 

You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: Illinois Voter (March 31, 2008 at 3:09 PM)

All of the previous posters who have first hand information about uncivilized, questionable or illegal actions by Obama supporters and caucus organizers must report these irregularities to your state party leaders and must report directly to Howard Dean and DNC headquarters. Demand investigations into voter fraud in all caucus precincts. This type of fraud is unDemocratic and will result in Obama as a  nominee that is not legitimate. Here is some information about how Obama has conducted his previous campaigns to get elected in Illinois.

Obama Knows His Way around a Ballot by David Jackson & Ray Long, Chicago Tribune http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070403obama-ballot,0,1843097.story?,page=1

Some say his ability to play political hardball goes back to his first campaign….His overwhelming legal onslaught signaled his impatience to gain office, even if that meant elbowing aside an elder stateswoman like Palmer…Obama’s first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career…first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it…

Karl Rove already has been speaking at conservative venues on C-span discrediting Obama as a nominee in the General Election. The GOP are ready and waiting to tear Obama apart and throw him back to the Democrats in the General Election.


Posted By: Voltron1 (March 30, 2008 at 12:46 PM)

I was a Clinton delegate to the Senate Dist. 10 convention in Fort Worth, TX yesterday.  In the week leading up to the convention, I was sent postcards, unsigned hand written letters and phone calls asking me to vote for Obama.  Since this was happening in Austin, too, I don't see how it could be a mix up as reported.

During the badly organized convention, it was apparent that the Obama supporters had been instructed to shout down any speaker supporting Clinton.   I have never seen a group at anything other than a WWF match act as obnoxious.  Their speeches were overbearing and patronizing to the point that I almost had to leave.  They made it sound like any opposition to Obama is race based.

I hope Clinton continues to fight to end.


Posted By: HCC929 (March 30, 2008 at 2:31 AM)

Ever since the Potomac Primaries, I have noticed an ever-increasing level of anger among Clinton supporters. - to the extent that until recently, I was sure that many of them were Freepers posing as Clinton supporters in order to discredit her.  The comments here are par for the course.  I am really afraid that because of this paranoia and shrillness, we really risk not having a woman president for a few more decades.  The irony is that most of the shrillness seems to be coming from males....


 
The Peek
 
 
PROJECT GREEN

A startup is betting free coffees and groceries will encourage reluctant recyclers.

Sponsored by
 
 
 
 
Sponsored by
 
 
 
loadingLoading Menu