Now, Barack Obama camp puts out strategy discussion video
David Plouffe is no household name, which is fine with him.
He is, in fact, Barack Obama's campaign manager. You won't see him on the news talk shows. He is, by his own design, a back-room manager.
But with a new e-mailed video for supporters of the Democratic presidential candidate -- and, of course, that always comes with a fundraising appeal -- Plouffe is walking people through th
e outlines of an Electoral College strategy for an Obama victory in November.
A couple of weeks ago we pointed out the 15-minute PowerPoint demonstration of Rick Davis, John McCain's campaign manager, on their website. Now, Obama's crowd has its own version and you can compare the two.
Neither contains trade secrets. Obama's starts with the states which Sen. John Kerry claimed in 2004, and it adds some -- including some unlikely candidates such as Montana and Alaska. And it looks with some confidence toward Iowa, which gave Obama his launch in the Democratic primaries so long ago last winter. And even Georgia.
The McCain video is slick with moving screens. Obama's video is filmed without lights or staging at the Chicago desk of the campaign manager to give it that, you know, laptop look.
It also has some Perot-like charts, maps of the perceived path to victory. It's worth a watch -- you know McCain's campaign is -- and a listen. It's viewable at the campaign website.
You can read the whole story on the Obama tape by our colleague Mark Silva over at the Swamp with a link to the website video. There's a link to the McCain video here.
--Andrew Malcolm
Photo credit: BarackObama.com
Andrew Malcolm's immigrant parents repeatedly stressed the importance of active participation in a democracy. Early lessons included learning the alphabetical list of states by watching televised roll calls of national political conventions. That childhood exposure led to a lifelong fascination with politics, including 40-plus years of covering them and a brief stint practicing them as press secretary to Laura Bush in 1999-2000. A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Malcolm served on the Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four.
Johanna Neuman is a veteran Washington correspondent for both The Los Angeles Times and USA Today, having covered presidents and politics as far back as Ronald Reagan. A former president of the White House Correspondents Assn., she authored a book on media and foreign policy, “Lights, Camera, Wars.” Most recently she was co-author of the 
Subscribe to this Blog
Is anyone else weary of political campaigns being run like marketing strategies, ( especially by the candiate who is for change ; proving beyond any doubt that the more he says change the more things remain the same ) while no real help whatsoever is held out for the american people . THE MORE OBAMA CHANGES the MORE he remains the SAME AS MCAIN without the trust that people have in John .
As much as he would like peiople to believe he is different , the more he more of the same . I prefer someone i can trust and that is John Mcain .
Posted by: Swannie | June 28, 2008 at 09:01 PM
We Democrats are in it to win it, and we will not be taken our eyes off the prize.
The principle is simple; win the White House and then make changes.
Until we win, we can't do very much.
When one is fighting both against the Republican party and the Corporate media
(who like their corporate tax cuts and relaxed FCC regulations against conglamoration),
one has to do what one has to do.
GoBama!
Posted by: C.M. | June 28, 2008 at 09:25 PM
Pfft McCain has flipped more than any Senator in history. And if you think that campaigns shouldn't be run like a marketing campaign then you are a fool. They are marketing their message to the American people. Don't feel threatened just because Obama has a smarter marketing team.
Posted by: CBC5G | June 28, 2008 at 09:34 PM
Pfft McCain has flipped more than any Senator in history. And if you think that campaigns shouldn't be run like a marketing campaign then you are a fool. They are marketing their message to the American people. Don't feel threatened just because Obama has a smarter marketing team.
Posted by: CBC5G | June 28, 2008 at 09:36 PM
Its already obvious that Obama is an emtpy shell. He is a Poster...a campaign button, a beautiful present with a nice bow--but there is nothing inside.
Some people are so stupid--all you have to do is print up a card that says "CHANGE" on it and they turn into drones.
McCains resume reads like one of the founding Fathers but people dont listen to the masters of music..they listen to Pop..they listen to Britney Spears. Look how that turned out.
People dont want Wisdom..they want glitter. With their big screen TV's and their SUV's..they cant stomach people who would sacrifice for them. In our current culture--WWII would have been won by the Nazi's because we would have told the president he was a murder when the first 4000 fell.
500,000 died for america and the people didnt waver because they were just like the men fighting. Today, us gluttons cant accept that such men still exist. Even now, when more people die from getting struck by lightening than US troops in Iraq--the gluttons still say PULL OUT..let the Iraqis get slaughtered, let all the progress be damned, because I cant bare the guilt any longer.
Folks..more people die from bad beef and cosmetic surgery than US troops in Iraq. 85 million people die every year. How many die for something? WE know for sure that at least 4000 did. If we listened to the Democrats--who said "Immediate withdrawal ..The War is Lost" a year ago...those 4000 would have joined the others.
We stopped a man that not only attacked every one of his surrounding nations but who was responsible for over a million deaths--a MILLION. So put down you starbucks coffee and stop calling Good evil and the evil just misunderstood. The world is a bit more complicated. Their are still men that have Honor..even if you dont have any.
Posted by: Jim Nasium | June 28, 2008 at 11:29 PM
What is at stake here is the future of the United States to be a leader in the free world -- no, the entire world.
And we did not become a leader because of our military might being priority number one. No, it was our economic might that set us on the path toward being a nation offering the greatest prosperity for ALL it's people, not just the wealthy and well-connected.
David Plouffe, Davide Axelrod, and the Obama for America marketing machine have a job to do -- to get Barack Obama elected President, and to do it in a manner in keeping with the candidate's high regard for ethical primcipals in governing, and campaigning.
The call to never voters and first time voters is loud and strong. We will win this election because we will engage the highest number of people ever to get involved for the very first time, to realize that Washington cannot change without the support and direction from the bottom up.
McSame will not bring change. Only Barack Obama will do that. If you value this country, and your own future, you will vote, and you will vote for Barack Obama. Any other course is sheer madness.
Posted by: Obiwan1250 | June 29, 2008 at 06:42 AM
Jim Nasium writes -- "Their are still men that have Honor".
Yes, and that is the number one reason to vote for Barack Obama!
McSame supports a regime that has treated the constitution as though it were an impediment to be avoided, pushed aside, even ignored -- to the victor the spoils and you're either with us or you're against us. Mindless drivel from men of small minds.
Anyone can go to war. Children in their sandboxes do so all the time. It takes a real leader to find the commonalitites that will prevent war and futher peace.
Why is it, Jim Nasium, that you only count the US troops who have been killed? Have you no heart for the 100's of thousands of innocents who have been slaughtered by indescriminate bombs? They kill the guilty and the innocent.
This 9/11 tragedy should have been a police action. Were the President not engaged for 6 minutes too long in reading "My Pet Goat" to second graders, perhaps he could have discovered a strategy that would have actually captured the perpetrator, Osama bin Laden, rather than grandstanding "Mission Accomplished" when the battles had only begun.
As Barack Obama has stated, he doesn't want to just stop the Iraq war, he wants to change the mindset that got us into this senseless war.
David Plouffe and David Axelrod will lead Barack Obama to victory because his time is now, his cause is just, and his love of country trumps John McSame's love of war.
Posted by: Obiwan1250 | June 29, 2008 at 06:53 AM
Underestimate Plouffe and his team at your own peril. You need only ask the Clinton folks how sharp these people that Barack Obama put on his team and they will tell you Gillette could learn from them. One of the greatest harbingers of how good an executive will be is to see who he surrounds himself with and I look at this as one more great reason to vote for OBAMA.
Barack and Roll in 2008!
YES WE CAN SI SE PUEDE.
Posted by: RAUL PEDRAZA | June 29, 2008 at 08:24 AM
Federal prosecutors planning their case against Illinois political fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko intended to invoke the name of his onetime associate, Sen. Barack Obama, often during the recently concluded two-month prosecution in Chicago.
Now, is the type of guy you want running the country? He would probably select Mr. Hoffa has Secretary of the Interior.
Alydar
Posted by: alydar | June 29, 2008 at 08:33 AM
Raoul Pedraza !
Are you kidding ? The guy has consistently surrounded
himself with undesirables and nut-cases.Explain how
he could live with a J. Wright for 20 years as his pastor
and mentor. What about Ayers and convicted felon Rezko ? Ir por lana y volver trasquilado....that's what
awaits you and the rest of the gullible and credulous,
wich are abundant this season.
Posted by: Lord Philpot | June 29, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Somewhere down the road we need to start looking at issues.
I could never vote for McCain:
* my vote would be a death sentence for more of our military personnel dying in Iraq in a war that should have never been started. The US was never attacked by Iraq and and our safety was never at stake.
* the economy would continue to languish as McCain has already stated he really doesn't understand it.
* it has been an objective of the Religious Right to control federal judicial appointments, another Republican president might alter the court so drastically that the very definition of freedom would change (it might disappear -- not the definition, but the concept)
* he is a maverick, true it is a rather ambiguous term that the press has coined to avoid telling the truth about someone who has them bamboozled but I have been reading up on some of the hot tempered stunts he has pulled from cursing out Senators on the floor of the Senate to reportedly calling his wife a a vile and abusive name -- ladies do you really want to vote for a man who has so little respect for his own wife that he would humiliate her in public?
I think I can now begin to define maverick as someone who can't be trusted by his colleages or his spouse not to lose his temper and in a fury commit some unretractable action . . . scale little Johnnys trends toward destructive fury to the launch of nuclear weapons.
*It is time for our free press to take off the gloves and take an objective look at John McCain, flush the uncertain tag of maverick from all refererences to him and tell the US what kind of man McCain really is.
Posted by: Chris | June 29, 2008 at 01:56 PM
Citizens, have you forgotten the Keating Five scandal when McSame was found gulity of money cronyism and corruption? Have you forgotten Mcsame's maverick position against tax breaks for the super-rich, his pro-immigration stance, his anti-drilling decision? NOW he is for more PERMANENT tax breaks for the very rich, against immigrants, and wants the US to drill, drill, drill and bomb, bomb, bomb Iran and everywhere else. McSame will flip-flop BEFORE day one, he will lead us as McBush in Bush's third term. If the planet is safer for your children and you are better off with McBush, then vote for McSame. Otherwise, be a patriot and turn the page.
Posted by: shirlin | June 30, 2008 at 06:33 AM
The real issue is not how well Obama or McCain might do in the closely divided battleground states, but that we shouldn't have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral vote -- that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
Because of state-by-state enacted rules for winner-take-all awarding of their electoral votes, recent candidates with limited funds have concentrated their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. Two-thirds of the visits and money were focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money went to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people have been merely spectators to the presidential election.
Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.
The National Popular Vote bill has been approved by 19 legislative chambers (one house in Colorado, Arkansas, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and two houses in Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring this legislation into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
Posted by: susan | June 30, 2008 at 04:10 PM