How did this guy get hired, again? Really, what is his expertise? Spin? Then why 1) is he the chief strategist and 2) is his spin-product so awful?

Don't discount it - she's polling very strongly among carbon-based life-forms with opposable thumbs whose existence date to 1990 or earlier.

Haven't you heard- The Hillary campaign is going to retroactively change those three states to winner take all status.

What's so idiotic here? Do they need to win 100-0 ?  

"Hillary leads in Texas (IVR Jan 30-31), Pennsylvania (Franklin & Marshall Jan 8-14) and Ohio (Columbus Dispatch Jan 23-31). After March 4th, over 3000 delegates will be committed, and we project that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will be virtually tied with 611 delegates still to be chosen in Pennsylvania and other remaining states. This does not even include Florida and Michigan (where Hillary won 178 delegates), whose votes we believe should be counted."

Is this all you do whole day, trying to find any quote from Clinton land that can be reintepreted   as foolish  or racists?

Jacobt1,

The whole day? No. It usually only takes a few minutes.

"And in 1976, Jimmy Carter lost twenty-three states before winning the nomination, including: Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, West Virginia, South Carolina, Alabama, Illinois, Mississippi, Minnesota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, California, Arizona, Alaska, Hawaii, and Utah"

In mark penn's memo he said carter won despite losing all of the above states.  Doesn't this cut against the Clinton argument that Obama does not deserve the nomination because he lost the "big states."  I'm pretty sure, New York, New Jersey, Illinois and California were "big states" in 1976.

Fari points, jacob, but the man is paid to do nothing more and nothing less than craft words that move people. He botched the message, which is that HRC is still quite strong and may well come back, bigtime, in the big states. "It ain't over, folks". Hillary as the Comeback Kid, 2008 version.

Instead, Penn the supposed master-messager gets into the weeds, confuses the argument with misleading numbers, and risks raising expectations unrealistically by implying, again in a clumsy and confsing manner, that HRC's on track to lock it up. I mean, really, this guy is the master of the message? Huh?

"implying, again in a clumsy and confsing manner, that HRC's on track to lock it up. "

He didn't say it.

Here is what he said:

"After March 4th, over 3000 delegates will be committed, and we project that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will be virtually tied with 611 delegates still to be chosen in Pennsylvania and other remaining states."

There is nothing idiotic here, however, Penn migt be too optimistic.  

Ok  so I've done a bit of research and discovered an irony to end all ironies. Obama may "win," which is to say pull the most delegates out of, Texas because of that crazy hyper-partisan redistricting plan Tom Delay pushed through.

Go figure.

"Obama may "win," which is to say pull the most delegates out of, Texas because of that crazy hyper-partisan redistricting plan Tom Delay pushed through."

Yeah. That's gotta burn.

Tep -

I think the point is that you can do a better job at spinning, not that Mark Penn is spinning.

Chris Orr:

"The only reason Penn includes the phrase ..."

Krugman:

"I call it Clinton rules, but it’s a pattern that goes well beyond the Clintons. For example, Al Gore was subjected to Clinton rules during the 2000 campaign: anything he said, and some things he didn’t say (no, he never claimed to have invented the Internet), was held up as proof of his alleged character flaws."

So today they finally finished counting the votes in New Mexico, which voted on Super Tuesday, and (unsurprisingly) Clinton stayed ahead and won.  Prepare for the next Mark Penn press release:  "See, Obama's not winning ten in a row after all!"

Chris: It's "is there any spin,"  not "is their any spin" -- come on man, you're a professional journalist!