<< Previous Post | Main | Next Post >>

More On Movements v. Campaigns

Judging from everything I have read today, there seems to be a concerted effort by the Clinton camp to portray Obama as the new frontrunner, allowing Clinton to try and claim the role of underdog.

Leaving aside the obvious weirdness of the long-standing, front-running establishment candidate trying to claim the underdog role....

And leaving aside the weirdness of the fact that this is an obvious admission that they are losing this race...

How is this supposed to help her exactly?

Obama is, as I said previously, building a movement. That's hard to do on a local level, and its damn near impossible to do nationally. But its much, much harder to hold a movement together when it is losing than when it is winning. Movements run on emotion, not intellect. They need momentum to hold together, and momentum only comes from wins. Does anyone really think that Obama's supporters are going to be less likely to support him if it looks like he is winning? Really? Because that's what the Clinton campaign's strategy seems to suggest.

Movements by and large collapse for two reasons: either they fail to achieve measurable success, or they succeed to the point that they no longer have a reason to exist. The goal of this movement is first and foremost to win this election. Signs of victory won't undermine movement-building activities. They will reinforce them.

I know Mark Penn is clueless, but still... do they not yet realize what they are up against? This isn't about Obama the man. It's about Obama the movement.

UPDATE: OK, some clarification. Penn isn't trying to portray Obama as the frontrunner. That's too dense even for him. No, instead he's trying to paint Obama as "the establishment candidate."

Remind me to never doubt Penn again. He really is a genius, isn't he? Speechless....

UPDATE II: Go read Chris Orr.

it's all just so fourth grade. Obama makes headway by framing himself (accurately) as a change agent? Clinton abruptly starts pitching herself as a change agent, too. Obama describes Clinton (again, accurately, at least in relative terms) as the status-quo candidate in last night's speech? This morning we have Penn's I'm-rubber-you're-glue routine. Next thing you know, Clinton will start attending rallies in a men's suit and skinny tie and talking about how much she loves "The Wire," too.


Silly, obvious fibs like this are one reason that so many in the media are skeptical of anything that comes out of the Clinton camp. It's an insult to the intelligence of the people being spun. (Massachusetts was an upset win for Clinton? Obama's the establishment candidate?)