Image 01 Image 03

Staffing Changes Won’t Fix Hillary’s Biggest Campaign Problem

Staffing Changes Won’t Fix Hillary’s Biggest Campaign Problem

No one wants what the Clinton’s are selling

No one is happy. Not Bill. Not Hillary. Not the Democrats. No one. Apparently.

This afternoon Politico that the Clinton campaign is considering a substantial staffing shakeup following what looks to be a loss in tomorrow’s New Hampshire’s primary.

Hillary and Bill Clinton are so dissatisfied with their campaign’s messaging and digital operations they are considering staffing and strategy changes after what’s expected to be a loss in Tuesday’s primary here, according to a half-dozen people with direct knowledge of the situation.

The Clintons — stung by her narrow victory in Iowa — had been planning to reassess staffing at the campaign’s Brooklyn headquarters after the first four primaries, but the Clintons have become increasingly caustic in their criticism of aides and demanded the reassessment sooner, a source told POLITICO.

The talk of shake-up echoes what happened in 2008 – when Clinton was on the verge of sacking her campaign manager and several top communications officials – before her surprise win here bailed out her beleaguered staff. Over time, however she slowly layered over top officials, essentially hiring old hands – like Hillaryland stalwart Maggie Williams and pollster Geoff Garin – to run the campaign while the previous staff were quietly relegated to subsidiary positions.
It’s not clear if that will happen again, but several people close to the situation said Clinton would be loathe to fire anyone outright and more inclined to add new staff.

“The Clintons are not happy, and have been letting all of us know that,” said one Democratic official who speaks regularly to both. “The idea is that we need a more forward-looking message, for the primary – but also for the general election too… There’s no sense of panic, but there is an urgency to fix these problems right now.”

Ultimately, the disorganization is the candidate’s own decision-making, which lurches from hands-off delegation in times of success to hands-around-the-throat micromanagement when things go south.

At the heart of problem this time, staffers, donors and Clinton-allied operatives say, was the Clinton’s decision not to appoint a single empowered chief strategist – a role the forceful but controversial Mark Penn played in 2008 – and disperse decision-making responsibility to a sprawling team with fuzzy lines of authority.

The announcement is not entirely shocking. Various reports of donor dissatisfaction with Hillary’s inability to gain traction have been bouncing around for months. Then of course, there was this handy chart published by the WaPo last month:


These campaign ills are all too familiar.

2008 called, they want their campaign problems back.

And you know what they say about those who refuse to understand history…

That one’s going to leave a mark:

Maybe the problem isn’t with how they’re marketing the product but with the product itself.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


If I were a Democrat, I would be depressed about my choices.

Of course, as a Republican, I am depressed about my choices.

legacyrepublican | February 8, 2016 at 4:47 pm

Apparently Hillary thinks staff is to blame for her problems connecting. That is what happens when you use a mirror without the light on.

Well, I think the staff must actually be doing a fantastic job, if you consider that selling Hitlary Clinton is Mission Impossible.

GeorgeCrosley | February 8, 2016 at 5:39 pm

What’s the apostrophe for in “the Clinton’s”?

Hillary’s biggest problem in her campaign is that it is Hillary that is running, period.

Her problem is that she believes she is every bit of Bill’s equal and while she may be in many ways, in the area’s of charisma, ability to connect with people, and just general likeability she is sorely lacking.

She has never been likable, I have met both Bill and Hillary Clinton multiple times both together and apart, you generally automatically like Bill. Hillary you naturally want to avoid. She has never been likable, even when she was First Lady of Arkansas and she has never tried to be likable.

buckeyeminuteman | February 8, 2016 at 6:21 pm

Bill didn’t trust Hillary’s mouth and neither should you.

Maybe the problem isn’t with how they’re marketing the product but with the product itself.

It’d be easier to market a bag of cow dung as a beauty product.

ugottabekiddinme | February 8, 2016 at 7:19 pm

Tyrants (and would-be tyrants) always tend to blame the little people for their own failings.

“We’re going to need a bigger tube of lipstick”

American Human | February 8, 2016 at 9:40 pm

Can one imagine the colossal ignorance of someone such as Chris Cillizza “wondering” if the problem is Hillary?
A sad sad state of affairs is that there are millions of voters still enamored of her. Pardon my expression but I refer to them as “Vagina Voters!” just voting for her because she is a woman.

Old marketing axiom:

Nothing kills a bad product faster than good advertising.

With a record like Hillary, she should be in hiding rather than running for any office. Actually, She & Bill stole furniture & other things from the White House. That makes them ineligible to run for any Federal Election. We all realize, that the current pres. only obeys the Laws that he wants to obey. Maybe, she feels the same. She should be running from the ” DOJ.”