TNR BLOGS

July 24, 2008 | 6:54 PM
July 24, 2008 | 6:53 PM
July 24, 2008 | 6:53 PM

July 24, 2008 | 6:37 PM
July 24, 2008 | 4:58 PM
July 24, 2008 | 2:31 PM

July 23, 2008 | 7:28 PM
July 23, 2008 | 7:06 PM
July 23, 2008 | 3:04 PM

July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM
June 19, 2008 | 2:54 PM

July 23, 2008 | 1:31 PM
July 23, 2008 | 11:49 AM
July 22, 2008 | 8:06 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
05.03.2008
Whither Penn?

So, now that Hillary's won in Ohio and Texas, does Mark Penn go back to calling himself her "chief strategist"? Or is he still a mere "outside message advisor with no campaign staff reporting to" him? And, more importantly, what does Hillary consider him. Before the votes came in, it sure sounded like opinion in Hillaryland was running against Penn. To wit

As Tuesday's primary elections we getting started, Terry McAuliffe, one of Clinton's highest ranking advisors, was asked to respond to recent comments Penn made in which he significantly downplayed his role in the campaign.

"Why are you paying so much money to a guy that's doing nothing but licking stamps?" MSNBC's Joe Scarborough asked jokingly.

"People ought to quit talking to the press," McAuliffe said, before adding, "When we get through with Texas and Ohio, I'll go talk to Maggie Williams, our campaign manager, about that."

On Monday night, on Tucker, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, a Clinton supporter, offered a similar non-endorsement for the campaign's chief strategist.

"I'm not worried about Mark Penn, she said. "We'll deal with him later."

Later is now.

--Jason Zengerle

Posted: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 2:50 PM with 10 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

jm_rice said:

Penn reimnds me of a campaign I worked for, where a notice was posted, that workers and volunteers must refrain from writing "Staff" on their name tags.

March 5, 2008 10:39 AM

tembrach said:

I think you are being snide. Frankly, Penn is close  to being a genius. He is definitely street savvy, and understands the collective consciousness of America  far more than those so called ‘pundits’ who frequent Georgetown Cocktail Parties.

When Hillary was being written off as dead, he creates the 3 o'clock am commercial, which revives her flagging fortunes.

None too soon, I might add. Does anyone have any idea what a mess it would be if Barack became our nominee?

Hillary Clinton is now the presumptive nominee for the Dems (IMHO). Barack is now going the way of Howard Dean and Ned Lamont.  

March 5, 2008 11:11 AM

rachels said:

If they kick Penn out now, they run the risk of having him reveal all sorts of damaging information.  And it'll focus the MSM on the campaign shakeup instead of the comeback story.

March 5, 2008 11:14 AM

eugenewisdom said:

In defense of Mark Penn, had he not positioned Hillary as the inevitable nominee, would she still be in this race?

Hillary is still alive because it was beat into everyone’s head early that she was going to be the nominee: she will win, get used to it. People still perceive her this way. No one turns off Rocky III after Rocky get destroyed by Mr. T. There is no “that’s it: Clubber Lane wins.” Everyone knows Rocky’s going to win: it’s a Rocky movie. So they keep watching to see how Rocky pulls it out. (Spoiler: Apollo races him on the beach and he becomes Muhammad Ali.)

This sense of inevitability has kept Hillary alive. She can say:

“Forget Iowa, I have a New Hampshire firewall. It doesn’t matter New Hampshire was close, I’ll win big in Nevada. So what if Obama got more delegates, black people love Bill in South Carolina. South Carolina doesn’t matter because they’re all black; it’ll be over after Super Tuesday. February is irrelevant, we are going to catch Obama in delegates on March 4. Delegates don’t matter, on to Pennsylvania.”

She keeps making new arguments for why she should continue. And it works, because enough people believe she is going to win in the end. She is given a benefit-of-the-doubt no other candidate would get. Just ask Mike Huckabee.

And this is all due to Mark Penn’s early strategy.

Of course, perceptions are not always reality. Hillary is actually Darth Vader. And last night she put Han Solo in carbonite. But that’s another story.

March 5, 2008 11:20 AM

tembrach said:

eugenewisdom . you are spot on. The brilliant strategy of  Penn to sell HRC as the "inevitable" candidate has paid off.

Despite her setbacks, she is still bedeviling Barack. And yes, she will win, courtesy of Penn

Thank God Hillary has Penn. Cause the rest of her campaign staff are next to useless. It is getting a bit absurd how Penn has to keep rescuing the rest of the campaign from their own mistakes.

March 5, 2008 11:47 AM

thesimulacra said:

"Hillary Clinton is now the presumptive nominee for the Dems (IMHO)."

That is one humble opinion, tembrach.  You do realize that in order to become the presumptive nominee you have to do things like win the majority of the vote, the majority of the delegates, and it might not hurt to win the majority of states too.  Do you have any idea how difficult, nigh impossible that is at this point for her?

"When Hillary was being written off as dead, he creates the 3 o'clock am commercial, which revives her flagging fortunes."

So she's not dead?  I can just see her at the next debate: "I'm not dead!  It's merely a flesh wound!"

March 5, 2008 11:48 AM

tembrach said:

thesimulacra

HRC will to be the nominee. Soon as Howard Dean comes to his senses, and decides that Mich & Florida should count, the calculus will favor HRC

Barack only wins small, insignificant "boutique" states. Large states like Ohio,  Texas, California, New York all go for Hillary. And Pennsylvania will be the  next state that Hillary will win.

If I were a Barack supporter, I would be perfectly happy with Barack as VP. That way, he could gain more experience, and learn the art of politics under the tutelage of the more experienced Clintons.

Obama is not yet ready for prime time

March 5, 2008 12:08 PM

EricWitte said:

Tembrach writes: "HRC will to be the nominee. Soon as Howard Dean comes to his senses, and decides that Mich & Florida should count, the calculus will favor HRC."

Please explain why these Soviet-style elections should count?  

March 5, 2008 2:52 PM

tembrach said:

Soviety style is a rather biasted way to descrbie them

They reflect the position of the those two states. Neither HRC nor Barack campaigned. Put the absence of campaigning is not a reason to disqualify their votes. That is kooky

March 5, 2008 6:19 PM

tembrach said:

Let me rephrase

Soviet style is an  Orwellian description

The vote counts in FLA and MICH  reflect the popular opinion  in these two states. Now, some folks  say we should disqualify both states , as neither HRC nor Barack campaigned. HOWEVER! The absence of campaigning in a particular state is  not a reason to disqualify their votes. That is absurd!!

Penn is arguing against this, and per usual, he is spot on

March 5, 2008 7:02 PM