Once the dust settles on the presidential campaign, some smart person will write an interesting article about Democratic voters who like Hillary Clinton a lot more than Hillary Clinton’s campaign strategy. More often than not, I tend to find myself in this category — I respect and trust her as a leader, but frequently find myself frustrated and annoyed with the moves made by her campaign.
It’s one reason I’ve been especially pleased by Mark Penn’s … well, whatever happened to Penn. By all accounts, he’s been responsible for most of the things that have bugged me the last few months. This is all the more encouraging given the approach preferred by Geoff Garin — Penn’s replacement as the campaign’s top strategist.
Mr. Garin, 54, joined the Clinton campaign several weeks ago to augment strategy. His elevation could herald a less negative tone as the candidate tries to catch Mr. Obama.
Inside the Clinton team, Mr. Penn advocated increasingly sharp attacks on Mr. Obama as Mrs. Clinton’s best option. Long before he joined the campaign, Mr. Garin argued that her route to success lay more in presenting her strengths than in assailing her opponent.
“The sweet spot a campaign needs to hit is the intersection between what makes the candidate special and what the voters feel they need,” he explained, praising Mrs. Clinton’s values, spunk and resilience.
Recalling a recent meeting with Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Garin said: “I had the same reaction so many people have: I wish everyone could see her this way. If we could help make that happen, that would be great.”
I suspect different players have different motivations, but my sense is that most of the high-profile Dems who’ve been urging Clinton to drop out are doing so, at least in part, because they fear months of relentlessly negative campaigning between Dems. Dems know Mark Penn, and they know his approach, so they could see where this race was poised to go.
And Garin doesn’t want to go there.
An ardent fan of the Washington Nationals, Mr. Garin cast his campaign role as that of “the seventh-inning guy, instead of the starter.” But his genial relationships throughout the party may offer some reassurance that the endgame of the nomination fight will not prove as damaging to Democratic hopes in the fall as some have feared.
“I don’t want there to be a thermonuclear climax,” he said. “Senator Clinton is committed to having a united Democratic Party at the end of this process. Senator Obama is committed to having a united Democratic Party at the end of this process. And we will have a united Democratic Party at the end of this process.”
That isn’t a quote we’d see from Mark Penn.
Josh Marshall noted this afternoon that there isn’t “much doubt that Clinton’s blunt force attacks have been counter-productive for her. I believe they soured many people who went into the voting phase of the contest open to supporting her.”
I think that’s right, and it’s bolstered by polling data that shows her with surprisingly high negatives, which have gotten worse, not better, as the Democratic race has gone on.
Now, realistically, we’re probably past the seventh inning of this game, and Clinton’s team is trailing by a margin that she probably won’t be able to overcome. New strategy or no, the numbers are stubborn.
But Garin’s intention to emphasize her strengths over Obama’s weaknesses is a win for everyone. It helps Clinton by improving her positives; it helps Obama who won’t have to defend himself and return fire; and it helps the party with less divisiveness.
It’s too soon to say, of course, but my guess is, when all is said and done, Clinton supporters will be left wondering what could have been if the campaign had pulled Penn for Garin after Iowa.