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.
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:

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.