Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton's Triple Threat

Clinton, with the AFSCME in the ring with her. (Getty).

To get a sense of the sophistication and sheer muscle of the machinery lined up behind Hillary Clinton's presidential bid in Iowa consider this: three of the largest players in national politics have all launched efforts on her behalf enlisting the services of a single media firm, and each will be tackling a different critical task.

The American Federation Of Teachers AFL-CIO Committee On Political Education reported today it has spent $281,114 on radio ads promoting Clinton in Iowa. Yesterday, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees unveiled a flight of television ads it began airing in Iowa promoting Clinton, the leading edge of what it said would be a seven-figure expenditure. And earlier this week, the national political group Emily's List unveiled a massive get-out-the-vote effort that involved surveys and a new web site aimed at drawing likely Clinton supporters to participate in the Iowa caucus.

For these efforts all three groups have enlisted the services of a boutique media consultant that specializes in political message development, Chicago-based Adelstein/Liston."Our intent is to deliver a very strong message for a very strong candidate," said Ann Liston, a principal in the firm.

The three mammoth political action committees did not all just stumble into each other. "We talked it all through," said Richard Feller, who is handling the Iowa effort for AFSCME. "I think it went in pieces. Emily's List designed their program. I spoke with them about what they were doing and then tailored my program to assist their program." The AFT effort followed after that.

None of the groups is legally permitted to coordinate with the Clinton campaign to design this effort, and each said they had not. "We have not and would not take any direction from them at all," said Eric Smith, of AFT. But coordinating with each other is a different matter.

The FEC has typically allowed separate independent groups to coordinate their activities, said Scott Thomas, a former FEC chairman.

The groups made an interesting choice of media firm to design the message. Eric Adelstein had history working for Bill Clinton in 1992. Liston worked previously for Emily's List. Together, they worked on the 2000 congressional campaign of Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.). That was the year he defeated Barack Obama.

--Matthew Mosk

By Washington Post editors  |  December 6, 2007; 7:39 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Giuliani's Network Support
Next: For Some, Negative Turn is a Turn-Off


Just read an article where BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA'S Minister was interviewed and he disclosed that in 1984, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA took a trip with the NATIONAL ISLAM leader LOUIS FARRAKHAN to meet with LIBYAN MOAMMAR GADHAFI.

If this is a true statement, how come the NATIONAL NEWS MEDIA hasn't picked it up and run with it ?? Why hasnt soneone asked BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA if this is true and if it is true, what was the content/purpose of the meeting??

Posted by: burlupus2000 | December 8, 2007 12:22 PM | Report abuse

ANYBODY But Obama!

His cultists on these blogs are just the mirror image of the bushies from few years ago!

If you think blog comments dont effect people - well wrong! Im for Bidn cause - Im from DE and always will be for joe - but when it comes time for me to vote in the primary - i will vote for WHOEVER looks best poised to keep Obama and his crazy and mean personality cult supporters away from 1600 PA Ave.


Posted by: holdencaulfield | December 7, 2007 6:12 PM | Report abuse

(Obama supporter)

I hate to disagree with the teachers..... but neither Gov. Huckabee nor the Clintons deserves particularly impressive marks on improving the quality of the public schools in Arkansas. While the Clintons took some positive steps to advance the state's schools, their efforts were matched and greatly exceeded by other states in the same period (Georgia and North Carolina, for example). Arkansas has made progress, but it still lingers in the lowest tier on most measures of school performance (including the measures taken before No Child Left Behind). Obviously, there are a lot of reasons for this result that were beyond the power of the Clintons or Huckabee to change, but it seems fair to conclude that they did less than they could have when they had the opportunity.

Posted by: wesfromGA | December 7, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Why OBAMA can not be trusted?

--Muslim blood. His father was a Muslim. Muslim's sons are Muslims for life.
--tried to change his identity. If you were born as a Muslim, you will always be a Muslim. No matter what you say or do.
--refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance. He did not want to offend ISLAM so he refused
--claims he's running on his record
-- had 17 years' old unpaid parking tickets
--made personal "questionable" investments
--insisted that his health care provides care to everyone, does he know what universal means?
--a fabulous orator, but we need more than words....
--he says one thing and does another
--claimed that as a young boy who lived in overseas for 10 years made him an expert of foreign affairs.
--will meet with enemies without preconditions
--recruited out of state non-Iowan residents to vote for him on Jan 3.
--he said that he was not taking money from the Lobbyists. Yeah right?
--playing old politics as usual, after he promised hope and change....
--AWOL for an IRAN vote in the Senate, then criticized his opponent.
--inexperience with little accomplishments, we need a doer not a talker

Pls don't be fooled by this PHONY ROOKIE. If he is the nominee, the Republican will eat him alive. The Democrat will lose again...

Posted by: graysce101 | December 7, 2007 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Regardless of Hillary's marvelous "do over" -- she is now shaving, both washing & styling her hair, and is never without heavy make up -- she looks great, no doubt, and her transformation into meshing her brains with a decent delivery and noticeable, but nothing below skin deep has fundamentally changed in Hillary. All the war room style charactor flaws are still there, the utter divisiveness, the chronic blame for others, along with that killer ambition for power at literally any cost, to anyone's distruction, leaks out all over and democrat women who are educated, who earned their own way, and are street smart to nuances and to "users", are seeing all this in Hillary, and looking elsewhere. She hitched her wagon to a star -- a man -- and that alone paved her easy access to status, where otherwise she would be a county chairman somewhere, instead of tramping her opinions out on a campaign trail, lording it over all with know-it-all condescension and expecting you useful idiots to coronate her. Believe it.

Posted by: Rita2 | December 7, 2007 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Sure, Hillary has a big attack machine. All paid for by big corporations. Lobbyists know they hve to side with Hillary to get their way in Washington. Hillary has turned this election into a sleeze war. How is she different from the Hugo Chavez of Venezuela? Both of them hate Bush Both of like socialism. Chavez tried to change the constition to make him de facto leader for life. Hillary is running essentially to get Bill back into the White House.

No more Clinton's in the White House. Even though Hillary is from Chicago & Arkansas, she abandoned her home state and went to New York for the sole purpose of getting a seat in the senate. The Clinton's have no moral values. Fugitives, and law breakers fill her campaign coffin with illegal donations.

Say No to Hillary.

Posted by: janetwombat | December 7, 2007 1:46 PM | Report abuse

This country will do well with Hillary because Hilary will do well for this country.
I cannot believe the people who get their marching orders from "HATE" TV and "HATE" radio, it seems that most of them have loss the ability to think for themselves, as you can see from some of the comments which mirror the comments on hate TV and hate radio - check the newspaper comment sections. If they were really concern about where Hillary would take this country they would really be expressing their utter discuss about where the Bush administration has already taken it - which is down - way way down ! surplus long gone, thousands of lives loss for a completely unnecessary war, 1 trillion and counting taken from our national treasury - funds that our children and their children will need to pay for, 50 billion paid to insurgents to stop attacking our troops - al least for now or until we stop paying them again, 12 billion in 100 dollar bills they claim is just missing - the list of unbelievable stuff just goes on and on and with no lessons learned from the past ; the times when we gave weapons and billions to the Taliban who were fighting the Russians at that time as well as the northern alliance ( now the current leadership of Afghanistan ) not to mention all the weapons and billions more dollars we gave Sodom Hussein during the Iraq - Iran wars - this all after the horrific gassing this administration likes to point out and those plane load of weapons Ollie gave to the Iranians during the U.S. led embargo ? - Why and what for? Were any of those weapons sent to the insurgents in this Iraq war ?. Now days our economy is in shambles, we are on the verge of a recession, this administration has been wrong about so many things that our credibility and respect around the world has been badly soiled, as Scott McCulin said he lad to lend the bush administration some credibility, Tony Snow was kind with his "somewhat of an embarrassment" remark - so Do your homework folks - then decide - because one more Bush like neo-con like administration could well do us in! Our founding fathers prevail over the most powerful military on earth because bullets will never be a substitute for the will of the people - a well informed people ! Neo-cons should return to the toy soldiers of the youth and leave the real soldiers to leaders like Hillary who will make decisions as their commander and chief worthy of the service and their sacrifices !

Posted by: TYSPOCK | December 7, 2007 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Mr Mosk, I find it interesting a search for the term "Clinton machine" on the WaPo web site yield 14 results, while similar searches for ALL of the other candidates yield none. Do you think this is significant? Does some editorial policy inform your choice of the term "machinery" in this piece, or did it just "feel right"?

Posted by: zukermand | December 7, 2007 12:40 PM | Report abuse

I foresaw the 9-11 disaster, Bush trying to invade Iran, and I foresee Mrs. Clinton becoming President, possibly with Mr. Obama by her side. Eight more years of Clinton stability and open-mindedness and compassion sound very good to my ears. After that, we would be ready for eight years of Obama, who would have had the experience of being Vice-President

Karan Henley Haugh, Ph. D.

Posted by: krh2004 | December 7, 2007 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Heil Hillary!

The polarization which is evident above, foretells the future. We need 4 more years of this like we need another war.

Posted by: andygarcia42 | December 7, 2007 10:56 AM | Report abuse


Kindergarden Cop HRC has no line of attack against fellow dems! Her experience is mostly shooting back at Republicans with harsh rhetoric that her base supports - they like her chances of fighting off Swift Boat attacks.

Regardless of whether dems think she is most capable of winning - will they really stand by and watch her launch the politics of personal destruction against the dems brightest and most promising candidate of the future.

She is struggling to find a line of attack which does not reinforce her shrillness, dishonesty, and politics of the past.

Good luck - to her and all of the professional politicians, special interests, journalists etc. who have bet it all on a candidate who used NEPOTISM (read Maureen Dowd) to achieve her limited non executive experience.

As a pro abortion, anti gun, who cares about gays INDEPENDENT - not only would I not ever vote for HRC - I would volunteer and knock on doors to defeat her. WHY?

1. She engaged in insider trading as Arkansas first lady - investing $1,000 and getting a $100,000 return in commodities.
2. The teachers union has a stranglehold on HRC and the prospect for fixing the education mess is impossible with this candidate.
3. She lacks executive experience - has never managed anything bigger than a Senate office.
4. She is devisive - it is time for a CHANGE
5. She is disengenuous - no triangulater in chief.

My preference in this cycle - Romney or McCain first - then Obama or Biden/Dodd then Richardson in that order.

PS - HRC supporters - you are going to get CRUSHED in SC and the South. Currently HRC is polling 50% of the black vote - She can write all the 200K consulting checks to influetial black preachers she wants - she is going to get less than 10% of this vote on primary day. Does anyone know a black american who would not vote for Obama if he was considered viable?? WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFEE -

Posted by: weinbob | December 7, 2007 10:14 AM | Report abuse

All the Clinton haters come out to play when the Fix does a sensible bit of analysis on Clinton's organizational strength. All the old talking points mostly invented by the Republican noise machine are trotted out. She's going to get the nomination. Get used to it. And contrary to popular wisdom she's going to win IA.

Posted by: johnbsmrk | December 7, 2007 10:12 AM | Report abuse

"the machinery lined up behind Hillary Clinton's presidential bid"

Machinery? Could the clowning of the Post's political "reporters" be any more transparent or condescending? Why do you people hate us? What did we do to deserve "journalism" like this?

Posted by: zukermand | December 7, 2007 10:00 AM | Report abuse

When are you people going to get a clue? 50% of the country HATES Hillary. She will energize the Republican base more than any other candidate. If the Democrats are going to win in '08, we need to nominate someone...anyone besides Clinton.

As for you who are voting for Hillary just because she's a woman...are you really that simple-minded?? Our sons and daughters are fighting a war right now and we need the best qualified person to lead or woman. We all know that without Bill, Hillary would not be here. She's never governed in any capacity and she couldn't even manage her own household.

Pull your heads out Democrats! Let's nominate the best qualified PERSON and the most electable. It is NOT Hillary!

Posted by: stephen.rangel | December 7, 2007 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Bears Empty Pot For Americans
December 6, 2007
Carl Fiser

(Smithtown, N.Y.) Many contend that Ron Paul, although an honest, plain-talking man, comes to the 2008 presidential campaign podium without a lot of achievement. While in office, he hasn't steer-headed proposed legislation into law, or galvanized broad-based support for this national agenda or that, or even been on board with most post-911 bills and actions. For almost twenty years, he's been a dedicated representative for his Texas District and has not a potpourri of achievements about which to boast on the presidential campaign trail. Is this exactly true? How could someone serve for so long, and have so little to show for it?

At this time, I should share a story I heard from two entertainers at my son's grade school. The entertainers were turning books from different parts of the world into short, little plays, in order to spark the children's interest in reading. The following story took place centuries ago in the Far East.

The wise, old emperor was keenly aware that he was getting along in years, and he worried about finding a suitable replacement to lead the people. One day, he solicited the young people of his kingdom to gather, and he shocked them by telling them that he would be stepping down and that he would choose one of them to be his successor. "I am going to give each one of you a seed today, a very special seed. I want you to plant the seed, water it and come back here one year from today with what you have grown from the seed. I will then judge the plants that you bring, and the one I choose will be the next emperor!"

One young man named Ling, a son of a farmer, was there that day, and he was certain that he could cultivate that seed better than anyone else. He got a pot, filled it with rich soil and watered it carefully. Day after day, he checked the pot. Weeks passed by, then months, and still nothing had grown. Other youths from the kingdom began to talk about their plants and flowers and trees, but Ling said nothing. He was sure that he somehow had killed the seed.

After a year had passed, all the youths of the kingdom brought their plants to the emperor for inspection. Ling's first inclination was not to attend, but he showed up that day, sick to his stomach. He was amazed at the plants that the others had brought. They were of all different varieties and all so beautiful. Some of the others made fun of Ling's empty pot and others felt pity for him. Ling stood toward the back of the crowd.

The emperor looked over the vast array and seemed pleased. Then, he spotted Ling standing at the back of the room with his empty pot, and he ordered his guards to bring the young man to the front. Ling was led grudgingly, fearful that he may be punished for his utter failure. The emperor asked his name. "My name is Ling," he replied. Now, all the youths were laughing and making fun. The emperor then announced to the crowd, "Behold your new emperor! His name is Ling!"
The emperor continued,

One year ago today, I gave everyone here a seed. I told you to take the seed, plant it, water it and bring it back to me today. But I gave you all boiled seeds which would not grow. The rest of you substituted your own seeds for the one I gave you, but Ling was the only one with the courage and honesty to bring me a pot with my seed in it. Therefore, he is the one who will be your new emperor!

Ron Paul, like Ling, is a great truth-teller. His voting record is one of the most consistent
this writer has ever seen. No flip-flops are to be found. As well, he is a courageous and wise man, and a heck of an economist. Just ask the Wall Streeters. However, he bears to his fellow countrymen (and countrywomen), an empty pot. He can't claim to have brought you wars or higher taxes, which we now have. He never brought you an unbalanced budget, which is a perennial joke. He never voted himself a wage increase and, to this day, gives back part of his salary every year. He has always voted to preserve the Constitution, cut government spending, lower healthcare costs, end the war on drugs, secure our borders with immigration reform and protect our civil liberties. Sorrowfully, he was outvoted or shot down on all measures. The Constitution has been chiseled down, government spending is through the roof, healthcare costs are out of control, the war on drugs keeps getting less effective, immigration issues remain unresolved and our civil liberties have been crimped for our own safety. I'll just throw in that Ron Paul opposes regulation of the internet, which has been a revolution in the exchange of ideas, this article being a case in point.

The eye-popping reality of the situation is this. No longer can it be said that Ron Paul is running for President. Amazingly enough, his candidacy has been hijacked, and it appears now that the people are running for President. . . through Ron Paul! That's the true revolution about which your neighbors are speaking.

So, do you want the plants and flowers that your other government representatives have cultivated for you year after year, or do you want an open and honest effort at change, not for the powerful interests, but for you and for members of your family yet to arrive. If you want to see an unprecedented effort at change - starting with the only man on the campaign trail who is not afraid to tell you the truth - your action must start now. Get informed. Get angry. Get talking to your neighbors. Then, get to the voting booths!

Join us for our Tea Party this Sunday...

Posted by: US-Citizen | December 7, 2007 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Interesting and important support for Hillary. But the reality is that I believe people will vote for Hillary because when it comes down to it- she is the best candidate to lead our nation and the best bet to beat the Republicans.

Especially if you look at the Obama campaign which is trying to become a movement. We don't need a movement we need a President with experience and global perspective. Oprah will try to sell Obama like she does a book. The most serious question will arise when like a recent book she sold-she found the author not quite what she thought- That will be the case with Obama but it's not like Oprah will then be able to have him come on her show and apologize for duping her and others. By that time he will be the candidate and we will be in trouble.

Obama has already made enough gaffs to give Republican candidates every commercial they need. Then include things like Chris Rock speaking on his behalf and saying to an African American audience-"Won't you feel stupid if Obama wins and you voted for that White Lady". Not the type of rhetoric that will go down well with voters in any state that the Democrats need to win.

I would like to see a commercial that just lays out a graph of what Hillary did every year since she got out of law school and compare it to what Obama did. Then put their Senate records back to back- It will be very clear who is ready to be the President.

I think that people will end up focusing on the fact that we are in too perilous a time to go with a untested candidate no matter how charismatic he is. He is not what we need now. Hillary is and the fact that she comes with Bill Clinton rather than Michelle Obama,(who recently told African Americans to "Wake Up" as if Congressman John Lewis, Mayor Ron Dellums and a host of other leaders from across the nation have been sleeping because they haven't been taken in by the very meager resume of her husband.

It will be a close caucus vote but I think that in the end the people of Iowa will do the right thing and vote for experience and get real change at the same time.

Posted by: peterdc | December 7, 2007 9:12 AM | Report abuse

But, they are no match for Oprah.

Posted by: vwcat | December 7, 2007 9:06 AM | Report abuse

It's funny that 80% of the posts above me are trolls; are they trying to convince each other? Hillary won't win because she IS Bush, and the Dems know it. That's why the GOP supports her so much. They can take her down easy.

Malia2: I only hope you're right that the ABC's (Anyone But Clinton) will unite.

Posted by: schencks84 | December 7, 2007 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Hillary has a massive support machine. If she wins Iowa she will come across as that candidate who leaves nothing to chance and is ready to be president. If she fails however then it will reinforce the current doubts about her that she is fundamentally and inherently flowed as a candidate. Not even such a machinery can make a difference. So this cuts both ways ""

Posted by: ajakachira | December 7, 2007 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Madame President of the United's an extraordinary thought. We truly are in a momentous time, where a woman's potential has no limitations," "Hillary Clinton has already proven to a generation of women that there are no limits for success. She is driven by her passion for public service and her belief in the enormous potential of our country. Smart, capable and strong in her convictions, Hillary has transcended the dictates of what is thought to be possible for our time.
"Hillary is a powerful voice for change as we find our country at an important crossroads. Under her leadership, our country will regain its respect within the global community. She will prioritize issues of global climate change, universal healthcare and rebuilding a strong economy. After 8 long years, the public will once again have faith in their government.
"Another former first lady, Eleanor Roosevelt once wrote, 'In government, in business, and in the professions there may be a day when women will be looked upon as persons. We are, however, far from that day as yet.' More than 50 years later 'that day' is now upon us...and Hillary Clinton is ready to shatter through that glass ceiling for all women."

Posted by: dyck21005 | December 7, 2007 7:00 AM | Report abuse

What I've been wondering about Iowa is whether Obama won't get a lot of the Edwards supporters in the end because if Obama doesn't win, the state is going to look like David Duke Country. Since the caucuses are not a secret ballot, people cannot secretly vote for the white guy as happens so often in elecions. Obama and Edwards are splitting the antiClinton vote and in the end, there will be an impulse to join forces at the caucuses. Who is the likely victor? Edwards supporters aren't going to argue that only a white person can win; thats a lousy argument to make out loud.

Posted by: Malia2 | December 6, 2007 11:55 PM | Report abuse

Emily's List is a discriminatory group--it practices and promotes misandry,--that hopefully will go down with Clinton.

Posted by: merganser | December 6, 2007 11:04 PM | Report abuse

This should help a little in Iowa, and Hillary needs all the help she can get to win in this caucus state. I have been watching the polls there from back in the summer, and this past month or so have shown the lead changing about a dozen times, and now with a couple polls coming out about every day, I think we are going to see many more changes right up to day of the caucus. Hopefully the folks there will see she has a much better chance of winning the General in 08 and act accordingly.

Posted by: lylepink | December 6, 2007 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Hillary has an amazing organization; one that nobody will be able to match, democrat or republican. This is great, the woman is smart, caring, good looking, and headed to the white house! YAY! (Now, if only she pics Evan Bayh to be her running mate)
Go Hill !

Posted by: aboyzboi | December 6, 2007 9:36 PM | Report abuse

This is great news. Hillary is clearly the strongest candidate for President and I am glad to read about this team effort on her behalf in Iowa, and I am sure in other states as well.

Posted by: audart | December 6, 2007 9:05 PM | Report abuse

It is possible that Senator Clinton is the best candidate. However, even though many may like the policies that Senator Clinton proposes, they should also consider her record, just as Senator Clinton insists.
The last Clinton Administration, when faced with the fact that protection rackets where assaulting, torturing and murdering people with poison and radiation, chose to avoid its responsibilities to incarcerate the criminals and to protect the citizenry.
Instead, they made a deal with the criminal gang stalker protection rackets to leave them alone and to consequently abandon the citizenry.
Do we want a President who sells out the citizenry for votes?
Do we want a President who sends a "crime does pay" message to society?
Would you vote for a President who signed nonaggression deals with the KKKlan or the Nazi party? Gangs that torture with poison and radiation are much like the KKKlan and Nazi Party.
We do not need a sellout President. We need a principled leader President.
If you are one of the few who do not know what the above refers to, do a web search for "gang stalking" to see the tip of the dirtberg. Please do it before you decide to reply to my post. Here let me make it easy for you:

Posted by: avraamjack | December 6, 2007 8:48 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company