Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Plouffe on "Obama 2.0"

Even as Barack Obama completes his transition from candidate to president, the political machine he built in his successful 2008 campaign is also taking new form as an advocacy group for legislative agenda.

Bits and pieces of the structure of Obama's political organization have spilled out in recent days -- most notably the appointment of Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine as the chairman of the Democratic National Committee and Jen O'Malley Dillon as its executive director, a sign that the president-elect plans to keep control of his massive grassroots army in the hands of a small number of loyalists.

One of those loyalists who is certain to be involved in the re-imagining of Obama's political world -- "Obama 2.0" as its known to insiders -- is campaign manager David Plouffe who recently explained his thoughts on what the new organization might look like in an interview over the weekend with the Post's Lois Romano. Plouffe also spoke at length about the transition, and offered a ringing endorsement of Eric Holder, Obama's choice for attorney general, who will face tough grilling on the Hill later this week.

The goal of the new grass-roots operation, according to Plouffe, is to ensure buy-in from the millions of people who donated or volunteered during the course of the campaign. Plouffe added that the advisers tasked with the transformation of Obama's political operation have spent considerable time poring over the half-million (or so) surveys filled out by supporters online looking for guidance about the next iteration of the organization.

"We're going to help facilitate people having discussions back in their home town communities about that -- building support, talking to people about these issues," Plouffe told Romano.

The challenge, Plouffe acknowledged, is turning a group of people who came together in support of a candidate and a campaign into a grassroots group organized around legislation.

"It is much different than a political campaign," said Plouffe. "That's not what we are undertaking here, we want to just basically try and, for those people that want to get involved, on issues out there in their community, we want to try to figure out the best way to try and help facilitate that."

Look for Romano's complete interview with Plouffe on tomorrow morning. More details on the look of "Obama 2.0" as well as the players -- in addition to Plouffe -- that will be involved in the effort are expected in the next week or so. We'll have them all for you on the Fix.

By Chris Cillizza  |  January 12, 2009; 3:55 PM ET
Categories:  White House  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Voinovich Announces Retirement, GOP Problems Mount
Next: Senate GOP Faces Tough 2010


Boy George was at his petulant best today, fully full of himself and railing against any suggestion that he did anything wrong except the Mission Accomplished banner and some atmospherics regarding Katrina and privatizing social security.

It will be nice to have a non-delusional President again on Jan 20.

Posted by: DrainYou | January 13, 2009 2:11 AM | Report abuse

Electing Obama was simply the first step. If we really want to effect change, it's going to take citizens demanding change from a reluctant congress and entrenched government bureaucracy. Seemingly, Obama understands this. Naive? Maybe, but just ask Hillary if betting against BHO is a winning proposition.

Posted by: -pamela | January 12, 2009 10:11 PM | Report abuse

TO: NotBubba the smugga

Just answer this question:

Don't they usually keep the movements and timing of the President/VP secret?

On a train trip with a set, pre-announced itinerary -- a route that runs next to chemical plants, over narrow water bridges and in tunnels under highways -- can they do that?

Can they change directions, take evasive action, police the trackside crowds, secure the many buildings and open spaces alongside the tracks?

Your smug dismissal of the risks inherent in this needless excursion is as incredulous as the decision to sign off on an exercise in reckless political theatrics.

At the very least, it says to the public that anti-terrorism security measures are being selectively applied.

Is that really the impression authorities want to leave? What other reasons could there be for such obvious abandon of their own policies?

That is a rhetorical question I'd like all who read this to think about.

Please read this article and distribute widely:

p.s. -- If the link is dead, let it be stated for the record that the html code was properly applied on my end...

Posted by: scrivener50 | January 12, 2009 6:46 PM | Report abuse

all of Snobama's empty promises should be labeled with an expiration date.

now it seems hillary has done more than simply sip tea and duck sniper fire. now the need for change is no more.

the desire for ongoing hope is getting bigger and bigger though.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 12, 2009 5:39 PM | Report abuse

"Obama and bush are twins!

Posted by: newagent99 | January 12, 2009 5:07 PM |"
Note to newagent99: Before you get hysterical, let's see him in office for about a year first, then give us your evaluation.

Posted by: JRM2 | January 12, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Obama has just about completed turning into bush 3...
from Israel to the economy to letting the torturers off free.
Obama and bush are twins!

Posted by: newagent99 | January 12, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Scrivener50 whoa! They'll get the security they need. No amount of hysteria is going to change things. A plane is a risk as well albeit with less chance of involving others. If the Secret Service thinks there's a threat, they'll speak up. I'm afraid my faith in Homeland Security is nil.

Now o.t. If I get one more e-mail from the Obana campaign, inagural committee et al. for more funds, I'll seriously think about voting for the GOP in 2010. Knock it off!

Posted by: NotBubba | January 12, 2009 4:40 PM | Report abuse


• What happened to Homeland Security warnings of "heightened risk" during Presidential transition?

• How about the late November FBI warning about possible Northeast train station attacks?

• "Amtrak Joe" Biden's longstanding warnings about security flaws along the Amtrak Northeast corridor -- why isn't he waving this whistle stop tour to a halt?


OR (if link is DEACTIVATED or corrupted):

Posted by: scrivener50 | January 12, 2009 4:02 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company