Matthew Dowd

Matthew Dowd has been a campaign strategist in races throughout the country. In 30 years, Dowd has worked for Democrats and Republicans, most recently serving as chief strategist for President George W. Bush in 2004.

January 2009
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

« Previous | Main | Next »

What Campaigns Must Do Now

January 04, 2008 9:56 AM

It has begun.

A very interesting night in Iowa, and now on to New Hampshire, but first let’s review some lessons we might have just learned and what that tells us going forward.

The candidates perceived as running the most positive campaigns won -- Huckabee and Obama; the candidates perceived as running the most negative lost --  Romney and Clinton.   The youngest candidates in each party also won, which shows to a large degree where the voters of this country want to go and how important change is in this election.

Money didn’t seem to matter all that much. Message and ability of candidate to connect with voters were most important.  Huckabee was way outspent and won.  And Clinton had so much more establishment resources and lost.   In fact, the candidates widely viewed as having establishment backing and being the most political and least authentic (Romney and Clinton) lost.

So, what happens next?

The candidates who won are going to be looking for any opportunity to build on the momentum, and the candidates who lost are going to be looking for any way to stop the bleeding and slow the momentum of the winners. 

And the best opportunity for both those things is the ABC debate on Saturday night – just three days before the New Hampshire primary.  It is the only real place to alter the story line if you lost or build on it if you won. 

Huckabee is going to need to prove fairly quickly that he can win votes outside of evangelical voters and that is going to be tough in New Hampshire.  He needs to prove his support isn’t limited to one group.  He needs to convey a sense of seriousness that is beyond the jovial attitude. 

Romney has to win New Hampshire.  He outspent everyone in Iowa and finished second.  And has outspent everyone in New Hampshire.  His campaign cannot survive two consecutive losses, since their original strategy was premised on winning both!  Romney also needs to figure out a way to undermine Huckabee’s authenticity, which is going to be hard coming from a candidate viewed by many as a flip-flopper.

McCain has to win New Hampshire.  He won it by 18 points eight years ago, and has no base to recover from if he loses it.  Much of his success will be contingent on the number of independents who participate in the Republican primary, and that is questionable since many independents may opt to vote in the Democratic primary now that Obama won.   He needs to continue rebuilding his independent credentials -- a good way is to point out differences with President Bush on spending.

Clinton: My expectation is that the Clinton campaign will throw the kitchen sink at Obama to try and slow him down.  Clinton made a huge mistake running a campaign premised on experience in an election all about change.  I would think they will try and undermine Obama on his change credentials.

Obama made history in Iowa and will likely have a ton of momentum.  For at least the short term, he will be the sentimental favorite, and like the Chicago Cubs, once he starts winning, voters are going to want him to win.  His goal is going to not be dragged into a mud fight with Clinton and to stay on his message of hope and healing.

Edwards has to hope that Obama and Clinton go at it toe to toe, and he can stay positive and pick up alienated votes.  He needs a second place finish to keep his campaign going. 

Exciting times. And good news for the country as voters are getting to decide the direction of the political winds. And even better news for all of us observers can sit back and watch this historic election. 

January 4, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (37)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/24792696

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What Campaigns Must Do Now :

User Comments

The evengelicals who support Huckabee would definately approve of a Taliban type nation. First thing everyone becomes "born again". Born agains are the most hateful,ignorant,rapture loving,warmongering,narrow minded people in America. It's my way or the highway with these screwed up people. Jesus would disavow the born agains if he came back. Another religiuos nut job in the White House would be more disaster for America.

Posted by: AJ | Jan 4, 2008 10:50:50 AM

Unfortunately, I have to agree with AJ's jist. As a born again Evangelical I have been embarrassed and angry for 10 or 20 years over the prostitution of Scripture and the screwed up view of Jesus that the politically active 'Evangelicals' portray...but equally dismayed over how the more progressive open minded Christians have let them claim the 'moral values' label with little challenge to their tainted view. It's great to have 3 Democratic candidates with some semblence of values (though imperfectly so) beyond their own self-agrandisement.

Posted by: Al | Jan 4, 2008 11:29:38 AM

Unfortunately, I have to agree with AJ's jist. As a born again Evangelical I have been embarrassed and angry for 10 or 20 years over the prostitution of Scripture and the screwed up view of Jesus that the politically active 'Evangelicals' portray...but equally dismayed over how the more progressive open minded Christians have let them claim the 'moral values' label with little challenge to their tainted view. It's great to have 3 Democratic candidates with some semblence of values (though imperfectly so) beyond their own self-agrandisement.

Posted by: Al | Jan 4, 2008 11:29:44 AM

What good news for the people if OBSERVERS like this guy who lost all credibility in backing Bush can really sit back and watch this election. We certainly do not need your drool and spittle show again, do we????

Posted by: daddyblue | Jan 4, 2008 12:02:47 PM

I, too, am rooting more for the democratic party in this election. As a registered Republican as well as a "born again" Christian, I am ashamed of what extreme fundamentalists have done to tarnish what the original message is. I can't say I fully support any candidate, but we need to move in a different direction... and I don't believe Huckabee, Mitt, or McCain are going to take us there.

Posted by: Brittany | Jan 4, 2008 12:10:03 PM

I'm not a Republican nor an evangelical but from what I've seen of Huckabee (on Meet The Press amongst other shows), he has impressed me with his intelligence and take on political issues. I don't agree with him on some of the social issues but he has honestly stood out to me as the most viable Republican candidate, no matter his religious affiliation. As for the Democrats, I think the Clinton campaign strategy has been the best they could do, given the candidate herself. I'm all for women being in office but I don't think she's the right person. And while I am a Bill Clinton supporter, I don't like that his presence with her now is meant to sway voters vs. her having the goods on her own. Obama indeed made history showing predominantly white Iowans dug his vision. And his speech last night was stirring. We sure have an interesting race here, folks.

Posted by: tamarino | Jan 4, 2008 12:29:03 PM

I find it curious that non-evangelicals treat evangelicals with so much hate and vitrol. They claim Christians are hateful--but aren't they doing exactly the same thing? Sure, some Christians are bigoted. But have you talked to non-Christians. Don't a lot of them share the same bigoted views? Of course they do. I apologize for angry Christians. I wish they weren't so narrow. And I would hope that the "other" side would be a bit more charitable as well. Let's not charactarize the "other" side with such inaccurate generalities.

Posted by: Jim | Jan 4, 2008 12:30:50 PM

Excuse my ignorance AJ, but are you going for irony there? I hear hate-filled comments like yours everyday, not from Christians, but about them. I'm guessing you love and support everyone, except for those you don't.

Posted by: cam | Jan 4, 2008 12:33:56 PM

As a follower of Jesus, I am dismayed that we are often in the hip pocket of the right wing of the Republican Party! However, to those who want to characterize all of us into the same narrow pigion hole...it is the Evangelical community that has led the way for most of the social change during much of this nation's history. From public education, hospitals for the working class, emmancipation of slaves, food and shelter for those on the streets,right up to the people actually helping rebuild lives and homes on the Gulf Coast. I am politically independent and while my Faith impacts my personal views on public policy I have no interest in pushing my personal beliefs on the public. I am as much concerned for the welfare of living children as those who are unborn, and from day #1 felt Iraq was a stupid, tragic mistake. So my friends, lets work together to make this country better, and stop making general assumptions about each other that are false and simply part of the disasterous polarization of this country. God Bless!

Posted by: Len | Jan 4, 2008 1:02:46 PM

My daughter and I met Obama at a rally here in Manchester NH in August, shook his hand, and spoke to him briefly before the speech.
What impressed me most was that his tone, demeanor and words were to the effect that 'It's not me, it's us'. In addition to him representing a change, I think he expects us to become involved again. From the other candidates I hear "this is what I am going to do", from him I hear "this is what we can do".
I'm a registered independent, and am sick of both parties, the partisanship, and the way that both parties say they believe in America, when they really only believe in their third of the Americans that can get them elected.
Obama, and for that matter McCain seem to be the best alternatives to the tiresome bullying fascist hacks that have hijacked our political and religious dialog and daily discourse and presented a thoroughly screwed up version of the values that this country was created for and still really stands for.
Maybe, finally, it's us 'moderates' time to stand up and be counted.

Posted by: Steve | Jan 4, 2008 1:05:31 PM

i really hope the nation wakes up and sees that Edwards is the true agent of change. certainly Hillary is not, and although i like Obama for some of his message (and certainly he is an engaging speaker), i wonder about his experience and some of his ill-informed comments of recent past. it is telling that both Clinton and Obama have made points of late regarding their fundraising prowess as if that is a true indication of one's value and message "to the people." in their case, i suspect "the people" are monied special interests that don't speak for me, don't live in my neighborhoods, don't worry about bills like i do, wonder about my childrens' future in America, etc.

Posted by: alan | Jan 4, 2008 1:08:12 PM

O0000---BAM- MA ---- O00000 -----BAM------MA
O-B-A M-A
OOOOOO--- BAM -- MA ----- OOOOOO---BAM----MA
ALL THE WAY!!!

Posted by: Paulet | Jan 4, 2008 1:10:08 PM

I'm an agnostic, but I have to agree with tamarino; I was impressed with Mike Huckabee on both "Meet the Press" and "This Week". He came across as the most genuine of all the candidates running. His take on his religious faith reminds me very much of Jimmy Carter, which I can live with.

Moreover, every time Tim Russert attempted one of his gotcha questions, Huckabee said "If that's what I said (years ago), then of course I stand by my earlier statement." He made no effort whatsoever to spin his comments to appear more politically correct. In fact, not only did he defend his previous statements, but when his statements were put into perspective, they were totally logical.

I also love his most recent statement - that unlike some other candidates he's not a "Wholly Owned Subsidiary of the Investment Banks." He's also not a favorite of the Neo-Cons and their powerful lobbies. McCain has that war mongering group rapped up - as demonstrated by the support favorite son Joseph Lieberman.

Posted by: TJ | Jan 4, 2008 1:17:41 PM

Jesus would not support hate,bigotry,warmongering,greed,etc. Many evengelicals share this type of thinking. Pick and choosing certain passages from the Bible is what these people do. Have you stoned the adulterous down the road lately? Why not? The Bible says so! Maybe we could have a national "Jesus Camp",if someone like Huckabee gets elected President. That Jesus Camp was a brainwashing,form of child abuse! Shades of what the Nazis did. The Taliban does the same things to their children too.Huckabee is a snakeoil preacher type who has a hidden agenda no doubt. America needs to keep religion out of politics. No Taliban society in America ever!

Posted by: AJ | Jan 4, 2008 1:27:56 PM

I would be very interested in your perspective on/analysis of how the collective voice of the Iowa electorate might resonate in response to current policy (both national and international).

How much of the Iowa "statement" do you believe to be in reaction to the current status quo/administration (as noted by Moran, Gibson, Stephanopoulous on last evening's Nightline)?

Is Iowa representative in your view?

Do you believe Iowa's (and then New Hampshire's) electorate might ultimately affect current policy from a strategic angle? At least be taken into consideration?

Appreciate your blog and all the perspectives that you bring as you were once insider looking out/now outsider looking in.

Posted by: jim bruno | Jan 4, 2008 1:28:35 PM

Hey TJ...did you see Ron Paul on Meet The Press? I'm honestly not sure how anyone could support him if they saw that. He said "I don't know" to several key questions on the policies he was espousing and he felt a little "blowhard" like Ross Perot used to come across to me.

And I agree with Alan that Edwards is a stronger candidate that Clinton and that I could see voting for either Obama or Edwards with confidence.

And I echo Jim that I'd be curious to know from expert pollster Dowd, how he would extrapolate the Iowa and soon to be NH perspectives onto the pulse of the nation.

Posted by: tamarino | Jan 4, 2008 1:38:35 PM

Hey TJ...did you see Ron Paul on Meet The Press? I'm honestly not sure how anyone could support him if they saw that. He said "I don't know" to several key questions on the details of the policies he was espousing and he felt a little "blowhard" like Ross Perot used to come across to me.

And I agree with Alan that Edwards is a stronger candidate than Clinton and that I could see voting for either Obama or Edwards with confidence.

And I echo Jim that I'd be curious to know from expert pollster Dowd, how he would extrapolate the Iowa and soon to be NH perspectives onto the pulse of the nation.

Posted by: tamarino | Jan 4, 2008 1:39:35 PM

I think there are two factors in the Iowa caucuses that bode poorly for Clinton that haven't got too much coverage so far. One is the small amount of redistributed botes she got. As the also ran candidates fall by the wayside, the national polls between Clinton and Obama are going to narrow, and may well even move Obama's direction. The other factor is that in the end people are not warming personally to Hillary. The factors she won over Obama in exit polls are all fairly 'cold' factors, experience and the such like. Obama is a more inspiring figure it seems.

Posted by: saintlymark | Jan 4, 2008 1:56:32 PM

Personally, I'm sick of hearing about Obama and Clinton and Romney and Paul and Huckabee and Edwards.... list goes on. I enjoy politics, I do - but I enjoy it more when I feel as if politics serves the country well... and that hasn't happened in awhile.
But this year, we - as an informed and able minded populous - have the opportunity to put someone of outstanding character and achievement, someone who has thought out plans rather than simply saying what it takes to get into office, someone who wants strength through peace - not peace through strength........
It's time to stop paying attention to the 'big wigs' in politics simply because their campaign is paid for by corporate America. It's time to realize that if we truly want change, we have to first change our outlook. Don't give in to stereotypical 'electability' - Dennis Kucinich may not look super suave or be the youngest in the race or have the public's sympathy but he's a damn good candidate with solid morals, solid plans, and a solid campaign.
He's underrated - and I'm all for the underdog.

Posted by: Ashley | Jan 4, 2008 2:06:37 PM

A Thomas Jefferson quote comes to mind: "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them"

Posted by: Patti | Jan 4, 2008 2:58:17 PM

Being a Christian and after reading some of these comments made about Christians, seems to me that some of these Liberals are acting like hypocrites. You say that we are narrow minded, but yet making comments you made about Huckabee you are being narrow minded. Give him a chance. We have a Constitution. The United States has Freedom OF Religion not Freedom FROM Religion. Futhermore, if you all aren't Christians, then why didn't you all go to work on Christmas? The Christians that condemn people to hell are not acting the way Jesus told us to act. We should act loving toward everyone. WE are all sinners, no one should condemn anyone to anything.
Back to the election, Romney being a Mormon has nothing to do with me supporting him. I don't live in Iowa by the way. I think the reason why he lost was because his campaign was too negative. I also support John McCain and have great respect for him. It will be interesting to see what happens in NH.

Posted by: Al | Jan 4, 2008 3:22:47 PM

Not only do most of you have a 2nd grade level understanding of politics, but you know absolutely nothing about Yeshua... ignorants like most of you are the very reason our country is such a morally deficient, Nazi controlled, greedy nation.

Posted by: Truth Hurts..Doesn't It | Jan 4, 2008 4:47:40 PM

Let's call everyone that doesn't agree with us ignorants. In this day and age, everyone thinks they know everything. They think of themselves first. They don't think about other people. They're own their own little world. Its all about them. Its always to hear a story on the news or know someone who tries to help other people.

Posted by: Al | Jan 4, 2008 4:57:03 PM

born againers are the most hateful narrowminded people AJ? Judging from your post, id say agnostic/atheistic people rank pretty high in those catagories too.

Posted by: Larry | Jan 4, 2008 5:51:58 PM

But agnostic/atheistic people aren't claiming to be all about love are they?
However, that is beside the point... the person who mentioned Dennis Kucinich or however you spell it... you include Ron Paul in that list like he is one of the mainstream candidates... he's not... he's got SOME attention because people are catching on to his message, but really he gets little coverage on his actual stances on the issues... I know a lot of people just see Ron Paul as the radical guy that all the younger kids are going for, but you all should really go see for yourselves what he has to say: ronpaul2008.com
You will be so greatly surprised... his ideas click with that part of us that is so proud to be an American.

Posted by: Danielle | Jan 4, 2008 6:29:12 PM

Fact is Edwards came in second among the Dems in IOWA. and Ron Paul beat Romney. Plus there was a record turnout. But, ABC News didn't see it fit to even mention their names. So fair and balanced! So accurate. So very informative. Here's the scoop. The populists won big despite your spin machine, ABC. And they will continue to do so. You see we the people run this country, not your corporate chiefs.

Posted by: Karl KOFOED | Jan 4, 2008 10:08:15 PM

Yo Yo!
Happy smiling face American!
This election is Guitaman Huckabee Romney VS. Rockwoman Hillary Obama.
(scenario)
KKK White Power for Hilary.
Harlem Black Power for Obama.
And Little cokc Yellow Power for President Hillary, Vice President Obama.

Posted by: yungh | Jan 4, 2008 10:19:28 PM

Bush is a monumental embarassment.

Obama and Cubs should not be int he same sentence.

Clinton will beat Huck or McCain like an old rug.

Posted by: lamont | Jan 5, 2008 6:24:48 AM

I hope our party, the Republicans, wake up before it is to late. The only candadate capable of winning in November is Mitt Romney. McCain will not carry the conservative base in our party. He has chosen to separate himself from this base so often that he cannot be trusted. Huckabee is an accident waiting to happen. Rudy and Fred draw no new comers and are not capable of drawing in new voters. They are just more of the same ole same ole. Wake up. Don't buy into the Democrates attempt to pick our candadate. Romney is the last guy they want to run against. They get it...I hope soon we will.

Posted by: Wayne | Jan 5, 2008 11:39:25 AM

Great reference to the Chicago Cubs !!!

Posted by: Kelly | Jan 5, 2008 2:15:01 PM

Huckabee, smeared both Obama and Romney. It was Huckabee who was televised saying that Obama was an Islamic terrorist, which is a lie. OBAMA IS A CHRISTIAN! It was Huckabee who said negative things about Romneys' religion, Mormon faith. Huckabee forced Romney to go before the cameras and defend his right to run for the Republican nomination as a Mormon. Huckabee also crossed the picket line of the strikers when he appeared on the Jay Leno show. If he was as caring of the working middle class as he says he is, then Huckabee would have gone on the Letterman show instead. At least David Letterman cares for his writing staff.
Then we have Thompson, a good actor, but rude in his comments of the working middle class. How can we expect Thompson to care about the working class since his views of the working class is so negative to begin with. Then we have Hillary. She has been rude in her remarks and answers a few times. She has behaved at times as if she were the Queen or an empress. That does not make her look strong, but mean. She is connected to the old way of doing things. Then we have Romney who has been classified a flip flopper and spending a lot of money to get what he wants. Then we have McCain, yes he is also considered the old way of doing things. And times he does look tired. But at least McCain knows how to be a good communicator, negotiator, and has been able to bring Republicans and Democrats together in the past. Then we have OBAMA. A gentleman, polite, and articulate. He has been called a great communicator, also a good negotiator and has also brought Republicans and Democrats together on issues. Obama has also kept his cool when he is under attack by slander. Obama is about Change. Then we have Edwards, who is also polite, and a gentleman. He too comes across as a good communicator and negotiator. He too is about change.
As long as wolf in sheeps' clothing Huckabee, or the rude crude queen of sheba Hillary, then our choices are not too bad. I wish those who left after the primaries, should have tried to hang in a little longer. I really wanted to hear them.

Posted by: angelheart80153 | Jan 5, 2008 6:02:40 PM

I meant: As long as wolf in sheeps' clothing Huckabee, or the rude crude queen of sheba Hillary, are not elected for their parties nomination, then our choices are not too bad.

Posted by: angelheart80153 | Jan 5, 2008 6:08:21 PM

If you believe in GOD and understand the word you should not expect our government to judge - that it GOD's role. Our govenment should provide leadership.
Healthcare is in crises - why is there a different cost to test? why should I have to shop around to get test done. What happen to the middle class, who is working have insurance and may have to be out of work for 6-weeks due to illness. No income, the insurance is paid and you are dropped. Let's talk about healthcare. One episode can cause the middle class to loose the home. How do you plan on resloving this. Yes - sometimes one have to work pay check to pay check...how you save for the future?
That is fluff...

Posted by: gg | Jan 5, 2008 8:26:11 PM

Evangelicals expect the government to force religion on the people. Evangelicals, please read the bible. God gave us free will. We have a choice, and our government should not get involved. We will be judged one day…I am very spiritual but not religious. I believe in GOD and no one can push their beliefs on me.

Our government should provide leadership on the important issues: Example
1. Healthcare: it is in crises. How do you plan to ensure everyone will get health care? Disease prevention should be a priority.
2. The war – please it time to end it.
3. Jobs: efforts to decrease unemployment
4. People are loosing their homes – that is a problem, how can they pay for health insurance. How do you pay for gas and pay for insurance?
5. How do you buy food and pay for healthcare insurance? Let’s talk.

OBAMA – how do you expect to bring about the change? What change? Change is good and we want a change – but how do you plan on implementing the change.

Hillary, you sound sincere. Keep talking I am listening?

I am a republican – and I am extremely disappointed. You are a bunch of folks that are fighting. Former Governor of NY only talks about 911 and the Former President. He blames President Clinton for the Army – he has been gone for 8-years. Please get a new line.

I am listenting....

Posted by: REM | Jan 5, 2008 8:47:30 PM

I am not sure Edwards needs a 2nd place finish, he just needs to do well and show his campaign hasn't stalled, do well in Nevada and (Michigan! Florida!) and South Carolina. And he might have momentum into super Tuesday. If neither Clinton or Obama have sowed it up by then, then Edwards has a good chance. Reporters and pundents are always so quick to be the first to say, That is the end of this or this guys Campaign.

Posted by: nobledonkey | Jan 6, 2008 6:07:00 PM

there's only one 'race' and that's the 'human race' that has to make all these major decisions! why did we get involved anyway? better yet, why did they?

Posted by: gwenn | Jan 10, 2008 1:55:56 AM

there's only one 'race' and that's the 'human race' that has to make all these major decisions! why did we get involved anyway? better yet, why did they?

Posted by: gwenn | Jan 10, 2008 1:56:02 AM

Post a comment