Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If you ran the Clinton campaign, how would you have handled the photo issue?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:43 PM
Original message
If you ran the Clinton campaign, how would you have handled the photo issue?
Here's the hypothetical.

You wake up on Monday morning to hear that the Drudge Report is claiming that someone in your campaign has provided them with the “Dressed” photo. What do you tell the press?

There are a couple of factors that should be taken into account. It’s possible that Drudge has made this entire thing up. Also, it’s possible that someone in your campaign did send this out with or without your knowledge.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Disavow it, condemn it, and announce a review of the campaign email server.
Sure, sometimes a loose cannon fires off a shot that makes the whole campaign look bad - just as a loose cannon at a company might post some scurrilous gossip about a competitior. In cases like that, you publicly wash you hands of it, and investigate if it occurred, and fire the person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent-Voter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #1
20. What she said. Totally disown it, not that bullshit "Why would he be embarrassed" act
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeraldSquare212 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. You first say, "As far as we know it didn't come from our campaign..."
which they still haven't said (unless you think Wolfson's comments are saying that, which I don't). Then you say, "We deplore these kind of tactics and if anyone in our campaign is found to have been involved, they will be fired."

There. Situation over. Press moves on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerDittoHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #2
23. Exactly. It's what they DON'T say that's important, and they DIDN'T say THAT...
...and to ME, what politicians DON'T say speaks volumes.

I'm sorry, but Hillary's husband taught us to pay very close attention to how they "parse" their words...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrreowwr_kittty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'd say that no one in my campaign was authorized to do such a thing
And anyone who had would be fired. It allows for the possibility that someone on your campaign may have done it while giving you the moral high ground for stating your intolerance of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. Assuming she didn't approve this herself...
Come out quickly and condemn anyone who engages in this kind of race-baiting and state categorically that anyone on her campaign who does this will be quickly and publicly fired.

Then promise that, no matter what happens, she will work to heal any racial divisions caused by the campaign.

Of course, that would require her to take the high-road, which she's proven to be incapable of.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #4
22. Nice-----but you ASSume Drudge was correct. Obama believed him also. He is the
one doing the divisive campaigning
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Windy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. They can't outright deny it or condemn it as there is obviously info that they are behind it.
They know that the minute they deny it, the entire story will come out. There can be no other reason for their lack of a denial, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. Disavow at every opportunity, very loudly, explaining in great detail
exactly how muslim Obama looked. Give the campaign worker a raise. If not asked, volunteer how despicable a smear it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ExtraGriz Donating Member (405 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. i would point them to this website
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
8. I would ignore it and if anyone asked I would say
"We don't comment on things printed by Matt Drudge."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. IF your hypothetical was true
I'd have excoriated whomever did it, and denounce the picture altogether. absolutely stated she had nothing to do with it.

instead, she initially gave a nondenial-denial.

nowhere to go from there.

also, I'm not convinced she had nothing to do with it, myself.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Every answer I got to my OP
was better than what Clinton's campaign tried to do. IMO, her response was the worst of all worlds. She went negative on Obama when she could have used that opportunity to bash the RW conspiracy. She could have come out looking better, but instead sounded even worse than she did when the story first broke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. agreed. what they did only convinced people she was directly responsible.
and in fact, she may have been.

when someone attacks your opponent, and blames you, you don't sort of deny it but attack your opponent, which only confirms that you would attack your opponent. This is kinda like what we used to call "cheater's proof" when I was a kid.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Campaign managers should scour DU
and hire us. I swear that SOME of us would do a helluvalot better job than some of the jokers that are running the show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. its common sense, I swear, consultants do not have any
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheDonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. Find the person, fire them, condemn those sort of tactics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoadRage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #10
17. The problem is she already did that with the emails a couple of months ago..
after a few times, it sort of starts to ring hollow. Not as hollow as say, not doing anything and then slamming the other candidate like she did - so I guess it's sort of a moot point. :eyes:

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. Why did Obama believe a RW website? and Drudge no less!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baconfoot Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
11. Have someone contact Drudge pretending to be from the Obama campaign and leak a Hillary story. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
12. Always...
...Always IGNORE DRUDGE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sir Jeffrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
18. First..
I would have issued an immediate denial of any official involvement. I would have decried this sort of political gamesmanship. Then I would have announced that anyone in the campaign that is found to be involved would be immediately fired.

Then I would have issued a second press statement later in the day to inform the media that we had evidence that Mark Penn ordered the leaking of the photo to Drudge, and therefore he had been fired from the campaign.

And then cheers of joy would have flooded the land.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
19. I would ask Obama why he believed a RW website and then used the infor
mation to diss Hillary with this so called evidence of an email that Drudge will not show to anyone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. so your proof that it was not used against Obama is to further attack Obama?
LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC