How Much Does Organization Matter In PA?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:54:07 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

By Big Tent Democrat

You always hear these stories about "organization." I am always skeptical about the claims of how much organization matters in actual election states, as opposed to caucus states. But today E.J. Dionne said:

I want to go back to this polling business in Pennsylvania. You know, it seems to me, when you look at these numbers right now, the most likely outcome is that she’s got a five point lead, he probably picks up three or four points, maybe two or three points on organization. This is from a very smart Democrat I talked to yesterday when I was up there. But she—those undecideds look an awful like her people, and they seem if you push them that they’re going to go to her. So if you sort of just do it on the numbers, she probably should win a healthy victory. . . . [S]he ought to win that by a pretty decent margin.

I actually do not follow Dionne's math there - if Obama picks up 3 points on organization and Clinton is leading by 5 then even if she wins undecideds by 6-3, she only wins by 5. But I am always skeptical of these claims of organizational advantages, particularly where Clinton has the Governor of PA and the Mayor of Philly working hard for her. But if Dionne is right, then it seems to me he should be expecting a close race in PA. I must say I do not follow Dionne's logic there.

< Clinton Winning Big Among Bowlers In PA | McCain Criticizes Obama on Economy and Ayers >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

How Much Does Organization Matter In PA? | 51 comments (51 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I think part of it comes down to street money (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:03:12 PM EST

which both candidates have refused to fund. The guy with zillions of dollars and a commercial on TV every six seconds is making his organizers pay for bumper stickers and yard signs while the woman who is, according to press reports, struggling to raise funds, is giving this stuff away.

It's hard to energize an organization when they're feeling resentful.

I think numbers don't really matter right now. We're all just making wild a*s guesses here, so I'll add my own: Clinton by sixteen.

Both candidates? (none / 0) (#20)
by Iphie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:38:22 PM EST

Was there a statement from the Clinton campaign about this? I thought that it was only Obama who had declared that he wouldn't pay street money, and that he'd been criticized, especially locally, because of it.


They will both pay street money (none / 0) (#21)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:39:59 PM EST

That's what I thought. (none / 0) (#23)
by Iphie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:43:05 PM EST

can you find a link for this? (none / 0) (#30)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:00:35 PM EST

All I got was Obama saying he wasn't paying street money and Clinton not being pinned down on the subject. Articles about it are all over the place.


: There is no link, but it's clear (none / 0) (#32)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:04:36 PM EST

that they will.
Don't believe what you read about it.

: La times (none / 0) (#50)
by CHDmom on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:25:14 PM EST

http://tinyurl.com/6xbho6 has a story about it today, here is a part of it
So when Sawyer walked into an Obama campaign office and asked for a yard sign, the response took him aback. They said they didn't have any.
"Then I tried to play the 'I'm a Democratic committeeman' card and 'I need materials for my voters and stuff for election day.' And their response was nothing, zero. 'You're a what?' "
The mutual puzzlement underscores the culture clash within the coalition working to elect Obama here. In the run-up to the Pennsylvania primary Tuesday, there is a deep divide over the best tactics to use in this city's quirky political culture.

My one friend in Florida (none / 0) (#31)
by BarnBabe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:00:43 PM EST

Pointed this out in our latest conversation. Led with it anyway. I explained it was the local Democratic party in Philly that has done that for years. Maybe I am wrong. But I did not want her thinking that Hillary was out there trying to buy votes in Penna with passing out money. Maybe you could explain if Obama changed his mind. Would help me out in my weekly phone conversations and for when Hillary wins and she tried to point to this money as one of the reasons.Thanks.


It's just how it works in Philly (none / 0) (#33)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:05:25 PM EST

there's frankly nothing to explain.


Well, you are in PA (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:08:10 PM EST

and I am not, so I defer to your experience on the ground. The stance of both campaigns, however, is that they are not paying street money. Now, they are politicians and all politicians lie, but that is their public stance.

Actually, I hope Clinton is doing it. If that's how the elections are won, then the donation my cat sent yesterday should be liberally spread!


: It's not buying votes, it's tips to (5.00 / 1) (#41)
by FlaDemFem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:37:36 PM EST

the volunteers who have worked their butts off and spent their own money. That's all it is, a few bucks gas money to offset the expense of volunteering. It doesn't surprise me that Obama didn't want to do it, he is very cheap when it comes to anything but stuff for himself, like ads and things. I think it's terrible of him to charge people for supporting him. And does anyone know if those sales are counted as donations by small donors? Wouldn't surprise me if they were. New style politics, my Aunt Fanny!!!

: heh (none / 0) (#36)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:13:50 PM EST

: Cats are ... (none / 0) (#37)
by Robot Porter on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:21:35 PM EST

such clever animals.
:)

: she is (none / 0) (#51)
by CHDmom on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:29:36 PM EST

Hillary isn't givng much, but some, the money is to reemburse people for their gas coffee ect (I lived in Philly 15 year)Some of it doesn't get spread but for the most part it is because people take off work to help and don't really have extra money of their own to help with

All successful campaigns (none / 0) (#38)
by oldpro on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:24:33 PM EST

everywhere pay to GOTV...one way or another. Street money is only one way you pay people to get voters to the polls...

Sounds ugly. It's not.


Good question (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:05:17 PM EST

To answer, I would point to the Philadelphia Mayoral primary that took place almost a year ago. The results reflected the polling, and nor organization. The two most "organized" (Machine) candidates, Brady and Nutter came in third and fourth.

Tom Knox had the electricians union and Johnny Doc behind him, but he mostly relied on an obscene amount of self-funded media. He came in second.

Scroll down for the results here SUSA's poll track was here.

andgarden, what time do the polls close in PA? (none / 0) (#18)
by Teresa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:25:40 PM EST

I've looked everywhere and can't find it. I'm trying to plan my pre-Tuesday night sleeping. :)


Polls close at 8PM ET. (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:34:10 PM EST

Most of the results should be tabulated by 11PM, but you should know that Philly always comes in first. . .


: Yeah, us small town people. Ha. (none / 0) (#25)
by BarnBabe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:47:58 PM EST

Remember, I am only 30 mins from all the box stores but when you live in a town of a few thousand and no stop lights, you are small town small minded. Ha. Anyway, we vote at a local community hall and you have to run a gauntlet to get inside. Campaigns bombard you with stuff as you walk in. I did enjoy the hammer emery boards from the judge himself. I kid but it is so annoying as if you would change your vote in the 1 minute walk. I thought there were laws but they are not enforced. Then the votes are taken to the county seat and thus they are later in the reporting than urban Penna.

Nutter won (none / 0) (#52)
by CHDmom on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:33:45 PM EST

and he is doing a great job for Hillary.
The other party backed candidate with Brady was Fattah


this is what passes for analysis? (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by Kensdad on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:15:22 PM EST

i was watching MTP as dionne made that statement. it is a perfect example of how these "analysts" and "experts" just pull stuff out of their asses on the fly. one thing that i learned over the last three weekends going door-to-door in PA is that people don't listen to these guys. it's only the hard core political junkies who care what they say. whatever the outcome of PA and the democratic primary season, i'd say that it will either be different from what these guys are telling us, or if it's not, then it will be a pure coincidence. if economics is the "dismal science," then politics is not science at all and the only thing that is dismal about it is the predictions of these so-called analysts and experts!

Hillary will win by 10+ (none / 0) (#3)
by myiq2xu on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:06:46 PM EST

SUSA says so, and they are the gold standard.

kos thinks so too, that's why the OFB are claiming she has to win by 20 or it's a loss.

I think what Dionne's saying is (none / 0) (#4)
by scribe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:09:18 PM EST

Clinton is leading by about 8
Obama cuts that lead by about 3, as a result of his "organization"
yielding a net Clinton lead of about 5.

If you push the undecideds, they break relatively strongly for HRC, yielding a net win for HRC by somewhere about 8.

More or less.

A lot will have to do with weather, GOTV, and so on. And, until the stars go cold, election junkies can wank with the cross-tabs and reconfiguations almost as much as do the guys with the software that they use to re-draw Congressional districts.

Really. I said it a couple weeks ago - this is all about both sides appealing to the same set (fixed at the end of March, b/c of PA's voter registration rules) of voters and beating the crap out of each other while doing so.

Boring.

His math does not add up (none / 0) (#5)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:12:45 PM EST

If he accepts as he states the poll finding of Clinton +5, then subtract 3 for organization then add a 6-3 split among the undecideds, then you get back to 5.

Dionne's statement makes no sense.

Let me also add thast this is the first time I have heard anyone say Obama has a better organization in PA. I think he MIGHT have misspoke and meant Clinton gains 3 from organization, which, given the support of the GOV and Mayor, makes more sense.

that leads to a "healthy victory."


Obama's organization (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:16:00 PM EST

is Chaka Fattah's.


And Bob Casey's (none / 0) (#8)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:17:50 PM EST

In other words, just Chaka (5.00 / 2) (#9)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:19:00 PM EST

In 2006, Ed Rendell paid for and ran the entire statewide GOTV Dem operation. Casey spent his money on TV.


Ah (none / 0) (#14)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:21:06 PM EST

Yup. A case study... (none / 0) (#39)
by oldpro on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:32:01 PM EST

ID your voters...get 'em to the polls.

TV alone wasn't enough. Casey lost.


Huh? (5.00 / 1) (#40)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:33:19 PM EST

In 2006, Casey won.

Of course, in 2002, he lost to Rendell.


Reading comprehension plus (none / 0) (#43)
by oldpro on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:46:00 PM EST

more coffee...sigh...

Of course you are right...or he wouldn't be a Senator, would he?!? I wasn't registering '06...I was thinking '02. Oh, well.

BTW...is Casey always sloe-eyed and sleepy looking/sounding as he was on TV today? Hard to watch and listen to him compared to Rendell.


: I didn't see him today (5.00 / 1) (#44)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:48:56 PM EST

but he does tend toward the soporific. He was a good antidote to the firecracker Santorum.

and Chaka's only answer this morning was... (none / 0) (#12)
by white n az on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:20:42 PM EST

Obama was against the AUMF

He is a very very weak advocate for Obama.


: Chaka is a weak advocate for Chaka (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:21:50 PM EST

Fattah on CNN (none / 0) (#16)
by Kensdad on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:21:16 PM EST

i saw Fattah go head-to-head with Nutter on CNN earlier. it's no wonder that Nutter beat him in the mayoral election. Nutter has depth and perspective.

Seems fitting that one is supporting Hillary and the other Obama...


The only math he cares about adding up (none / 0) (#11)
by scribe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:20:18 PM EST

is the answer to "does my checkbook balance".

Seriously, one wants to be a pundit precisely to avoid math, or to be able to make it up as one goes along.

That, or he's the kind of wanker who makes me spend a Sunday writing a brief responding to a Daubert motion in which the movant wants to have addition, subtraction, multiplication and division (of undisputed numbers on a financial statement) declared insufficient to get past the gatekeeper.

Until the votes are cast and counted, all this is just plain building cloud-castles.


: Heh (none / 0) (#13)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:20:50 PM EST

The only way to read his statment (none / 0) (#26)
by Faust on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:48:05 PM EST

and have it make sense it to have virtually all the undecideds break for clinton. You read it as a 2-1 split. But for what he's saying to make sense you have to assume that she gets all of them because otherwise we def don't conclude with a "healthy margin" for Clinton.

So I guess that still doesn't "make sense" because such a massive break of undecideds is highly speculative but that's how I read the statment. I think he's talking a 3-1 break or higher.


political pundits don't stand up to scrutiny... (none / 0) (#10)
by white n az on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:19:29 PM EST

who knew?

I don't want to trash EJ Dionne since he's been one of the more objective 'pundits' but the problem is often the questions that they are asked expects that they pull answers out of their a** and expect accuracy. If they answered with a truthful, I don't really know, they lose stature.

Organization aka voter intimidation (none / 0) (#15)
by TalkRight on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:21:09 PM EST

those undecideds look an awful like her people,

And what Dionne want is to give all those 9 undecided to Hillary making up for the healthy margin victory. Dionne just doesn't know if that makes sense.. Dionne is trying to raise expectations for Hillary, at the same time wants to give credit to Obama for "Organization aka voter intimidation, suppression"

And the mayor of Pittsburgh. (none / 0) (#24)
by Iphie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:45:58 PM EST

But I am always skeptical of these claims of organizational advantages, particularly where Clinton has the Governor of PA and the Mayor of Philly working hard for her.

How's Ravenstahl's organization?

: Ravenstahl is good with flyers and stuff (none / 0) (#29)
by smott on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:58:56 PM EST

But as a politician he's completely out of his depth. Just a youngtser and he's learnign but he has made a bunch of stupid mistakes so far.
Looks like Doogie Howser too which is kinda funny.
Here in Pittsburgh Hillary and the Big Dawg will be downtown tomorrow in Market Square. WOndering if I can sneak away from work long enough to go!

Why are we doing it? (none / 0) (#27)
by koshembos on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:50:48 PM EST

Time and again we hear about polls, organization, supporters and time and again, the initial trends tend to win. Polls are mostly wrong. Obama had a very strong union organization support in Nevada and lost. Basically, unless we will have more serious polling (not likely) and better research into organization, we are trying to catch mosquitoes with butterfly net.

Years of calling (none / 0) (#28)
by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:58:02 PM EST

I have done Get the vote out calling for years. Most people by then are so sick of all the calls that they lie to whoever calls. From doing the calling it does not seem to do anything, people are always peeved by the calls. But I guess it works cause everyone keeps doing it.

E. J. Dionne clearly failed ... (none / 0) (#35)
by Robot Porter on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:12:26 PM EST

third grade math.

Organization on the Ground (none / 0) (#42)
by 1jane on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:38:57 PM EST

Obama people have been on the ground for one solid year in my part of the state I live in,not PA, with over 200 local volunteers. The Clinton folks set up an office a week and a half ago. The Clinton office has one field rep from Rhode Island and the Obama supporters have 3 reps. One of them is a local guy who worked for Obama in a couple of other states.

Both campaigns are working very hard. Obama supporters greatly out number Clinton supporters and are a cross section of ages. Mostly white women in the 65 plus age group are supporting Clinton.

The campaign spending the most money is easily Clinton's. The Obama people are working on a shoe string budget to have $$$$ for TV ads and to prepare for the GE if they win.

The difference in the organization is striking. Obama's folks are in the groove and the Clinton folks are still in a set-up mode of operation.

Couple of things (5.00 / 1) (#45)
by Marvin42 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:50:42 PM EST

Sorry maybe I am dense, I was curious, which state?
Saving money for the GE? Have you SEEN the obscene amount of money he is spending in PA? I don't think he is saving money for next week! :)

One year solid on the ground? (none / 0) (#46)
by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 02:01:15 PM EST

that counters the notion that people just getting to know him. One year on the ground, obscene amounts spent on tv, and in the polling he is still behind in a primary. Wow...should this be moved to the electability thread?


What are you referring to (none / 0) (#47)
by waldenpond on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 02:02:33 PM EST

??????? Just where do you get your info? Obama is outspending Clinton 4-1 by some media reports 5-1 in some areas. Yeah we are aware he isn't paying people much and spending it on advertising. We are also aware he is busing people in from out of state and paid them $50 a pop to go to his rally.


does anyone know about the so called (none / 0) (#48)
by thereyougo on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 02:12:54 PM EST

"Internals"? I'm not sure what that is...

"Thoughtful" Wing? (none / 0) (#49)
by herb the verb on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 02:18:38 PM EST

That's the part of the OFB I thought Dionne was a part of. Maybe he's just part of the "Hopeful" wing. I don't mind the realistic wing in slightest. The CDS and the "we know what's best for you low information voters" wings are the ones that bother me.