Report: Obama Campaign Manager Disdained Mark Halperin, Politico
The Huffington Post got an advance look at the forthcoming New York Times magazine profile of Robert Gibbs, the campaign spokesperson who will be White House press secretary.
Check out the disdain that Obama campaign manager David Plouffe seemed to harbor for The Page's Mark Halperin and Politico:
The article, written by Mark Leibovich, recounts various elements of Gibb's communications strategy during the campaign that seem to defy common perceptions. For example, the Obama team, with all its tech savvy, new media skills, generally shunned political websites that dictated election coverage."Staff members were encouraged to ignore new Web sites like The Page, written by Time's Mark Halperin, and Politico," writes Leibovich. "'If Politico and Halperin say we're winning, we're losing,' Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, would repeat mantra-like around headquarters."
As amusing as that will be to you all, my personal experience of the Obama campaign is a bit at odds with this. Politico was treated like royalty by the Obama camp, which lavished a steady stream of leaks on the upstart website. Politico got more love from the Obama camp than the liberal blogs did, for instance -- even though the liberal blogs were going after John McCain way more aggressively than Politico was.
And I remember Obama staffers getting pretty worked up about what did and didn't appear on The Page.
I've checked in with Halperin and Politico to see if they want to say anything. Incidentally, the whole piece is now up online.
Late Update: A Time spokesperson emails that the mag will have no comment.
Late Late Update: Politico editor John Harris emails over this response:
I'm outraged on The Page's behalf.
I think what Plouffe is saying here is that the campaign should ignore them as sources of information, rather than shunned. They wanted the information spigot directed one way only. This is probably because Halperin and Politico were more obsessed with the small minutiae statistical noise of the campaign rather than the overall trend. It's all about being able to retain the big picture.
December 17, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the way I read it. Especially in the context of what we've heard about certain other campaigns being obsessed with Drudge and such, shunning them as sources of incoming information and being friendly with them as channels for outgoing information both seem like extremely sensible strategic decisions.
December 17, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correct. Plouffe shunned the websites as sources of information because they were full of crap. But given that Halperin and Politico were going to spew crap anyway, there was no harm in feeding them some inside information in hopes that they wouldn't completely crapify it.
Moreover, just because Plouffe directed his staffers to ignore the websites doesn't mean they actually did so. These are political operatives, after all, to whom political websites are pretty much like crack cocaine.
December 17, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, regardless of how staffers acted, Plouffe (who was a target of many armchair strategist Obama supporters for his "shut up and let us do our thing" demeanor) was right. The torrent of "Bradley Effect" articles published by Politico turned out to be nothing more than B.S., and Halperin, of course, infamously declared McCain "the winner of the week" immediately after the Lehman Bros. collapse.
December 17, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Well, regardless of how staffers acted, Plouffe (who was a target of many armchair strategist Obama supporters for his "shut up and let us do our thing" demeanor) was right."
I could of sworn that was Steve Hildenbrand that said that. But regardless of who said it they were right. Politico is nothing more then a right wing shill site and nothing more. There constant nit picking and concern trolling regarding Obama drove me from going to that site.
Some of their concern trolling included writing articles of how Obama's pillar stage at the last day of the convention has worried Democrats about them losing the race, their obsession about the "Bradley Effect" and they would have their stat man David Paul Kuhn (who is an author on the book how the Democrats lost the South) would go out and do one poll from a certain demographics (like women or church goers) and even if Obama did even slightly bad in the poll they would say that he losing that specific group.
They made a huge deal on Obama keeping the WH political office when no other news source or liberal blog even bothered to report and the creme of the crop is when Obama when on MTP and they wrote a article on 10 questions Tom Brokaw should ask Obama. Three of the questions were good regarding Iraq, Energy and his tax plan but the other were shill questions like about his supposed trip to Indonesia, him using his middle name when he's sworn in and his views of George Ryan when the average american couldn't give a fuck about George Ryan. Not to mention they wrote a bad article on how it was Democrats in MN who were tampering with the votes to give Al Franken more votes
Basically there a site that writes about fluff using just one source for their atricles mixed in with their own opinions, not good journalism if you ask me. I do not blame the Obama campaign for saying this about the site, their not their friends but a site that will do literally anything to make Obama and the Democrats took bad.
December 17, 2008 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hah!
They may have been concerned about what was appearing on the Page while simultaneously recognizing that the Page and Politico publish some of the worst political reporting and commentary. Reporting and commentary that gets attention.
I find this amusing.
But Halperin will probably twist this around and claim that it's evidence of the media's "disgusting" favoritism towards Obama. Or something.
December 17, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
their concern led them to lavish an awful lot of love on Politico that they weren't willing to give their allies in the liberal blogosphere...
December 17, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think there were that many Obama allies on the Liberal blogs during the campaign. Yes you have TPM and Daily Kos but that's pretty much it. I mean MYDD was pro-Hillary during the primary and were still lukewarm towards Obama even after he got the nomination and Open Left would nit pick about every position Obama takes.
December 17, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
you're right, but I'm really talking about during the general election, when the liberal blogs were going after mccain very aggressively and hitting the msm hard when it hopped the tire swing. didn't stop the obama camp from giving way more love to "nonpartisan" sites like the Politico than the lib blogs got.
December 17, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see it as strategy, but you seem to suggest that it might be bias?
December 17, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
No offense, but why would they bother? I'm sure they liked the liberal blogsphere well enough, but why try to court people who are already on your side?
December 17, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your comment appears to assume that the support of liberal bloggers actually had some practical value for Obama--an assumption I'm not sure is warrented. Really, now: what did we achieve that the Obama campaign wasn't already achieving through its own efforts on its own terms? Why would they have needed us?
To put it bluntly: the liberal blogosphere could have disappeared at the beginning of 2008 and the outcome wouldn't have been any different.
December 17, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
They didn't need to lavish love on y'all. Because they knew you were allies.
Besides, you're not the inside-the-Beltway crew that Halperin and the folks at Politico are. Halperin is a staple on the Sunday talking head festivities, and Harris and Vandenhei (sp?)? More insiders. Be nice to those who shape (wrong though it is) the news.
However, if the Obama campaign can really recognize quality, and reward it, it should have you people here at TPM on speed dial.
December 17, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, cry me a river, Sargent. This is just an incredibly whiny post. "The Obama campaign was mean to lefty bloggers! Wah!" Forgive me if I am unsympathetic.
December 17, 2008 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
You must have been reading a different Politico than the one the rest of us were reading. You know, the one that printed Sid Blumenthal's daily talking points verbatim; the one printed the Clinton camp's talking points and promoted the idea that "she can still win!" at every turn; or the one that flogged the hell out of Bill Ayers and Rev Wright (yeah, I'm talking about you, Ben Smith!) to no end.
I didn't see any "love" from the Obama campaign going Politico's way, because Politico went out of their way to champion every other candidate. And they -- Politico and Halperin -- managed to fool the rest of the media into repeating their lame-a$$ reporting, turning what should have been thoughtful, fact-based reporting into a circle-jerk of "Ben Smith said that Mark Halperin said that Greg Sargent said the Ben Smith said the Josh Marshall said that Sid Blumenthal said that Phil Singer said that Howard Kurtz said Ben Smith said that unnamed sources in the Clinton campaign said that Mark Penn said the Ben Smith said Howard Wolfson said that Mark Halperin said Ben Smith said absolutely effing nothing."
December 18, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I take Plouffe's comments simply as a motivational tool to tell his staff not to believe the hype that "we're winning" whether the print media said it or the interwebs.
December 17, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I agree with Greg that this doesn't pass the smell test. While it would be nice to think that the campaign took it to Politico and Time, they couldn't; both are conventional wisdom shapers. With that said, it doesn't diminish the fact that Halperin is Bill O'Reilly minus the yelling.
http://pufferfish.typepad.com/
December 17, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
For a number of reasons, it's sound advice to ignore Mark Halperin and Politico. In a historic presidential campaign lasting two years, I can't recall one story or bit of information from Halperin or Politico that provided greater understanding or insight into the campaign. Compare that to the wealth of information and perspective provided at TPM. Or the insight into the down-ballot races at Daily Kos. Or the fantastic number crunching at FiveThirtyEight.
On more than one occassion throughout the campaign I recall Frank Rich linking to something insightful that he found here at TPM. Compare that to when he made mention of Halperin and the tone deaf media.
December 17, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
i totally agree with you. The Page and Politico are consistently wrong. i dont even visit those sites anymore because they never offer anything new. Politico just tries fabricate shock headlines and Halprin has never had an original thought or broke a story.
BO's campaign used them to suit their purposes thats all. the thing is the way Greg wrote this post will end up going straight to Halprin's already big head.
December 17, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remember that one week in September when McSame said the "fundamentals of the economy were strong" and then "suspended" his campaign, and Halperin actually awarded the week to McSame.
Of course that was the last week McSame "won," according to "The Page."
So even an idiot like Halperin can sense the tide...once it's already washed over him.
December 17, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the 'love' they showed was strategic. The Politico and Time guys are shapers of beltway CW. They are the ones that will be quoted and interviewed on all the talk shows. The liberal blogs, not so much. It's that 'preaching to the choir' thing.
It's reasurring to know that while they stroked these folks, they knew they were full of s**t!!
December 17, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo. I think what we're seeing here is Plouffe and the Obama campaign viewing Halperin and Politico as useful idiots. Ignoring what they say and feeding them information is not necessarily contradictory.
December 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agree with these guys, Greg. What you're interpreting as "showering love," I would tend to interpret as "coldly and callously using like Elliot Spitzer used high-end hookers."
If I wanted to inject something directly into the consciousness of the small-minded nitwits who are the Village press corp, Politico would be my hypodermic of choice. On the other hand, if I wanted to disseminate a meme to the people with brains I'd definitely leak to TPM.
Okay, I'm lying on that last part. If I was Team Obama during the campaign and I wanted to get something into the heads of the people with brains, I'd just fire off an email, because damn near all of them would be on my awe-inspiring email list. So, yeah, you guys did kind of get shafted.
December 17, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
It’s all too easy to imagine how this past election would have unfolded if it were not for the tireless liberal bloggers, energetic YouTubers, and the small handful of clear-minded journalists who reported the day to day events rather than getting lost in media narrative provided by the likes of Halperin and Politico. Surely the Obama team understands this.
December 17, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
another reason for me to love david plouffe; i'm glad that he thinks these folks are as full of crap as i do. as for the debate about not "shunning" these outlets, i don't think they shunned any outlet really during the campaign, no matter how absurd; i mean they talked to fox & that's as absurd as they come; but i don't doubt that he thought they were idiotic and not worth reading on a regular basis. anyway i love david plouffe, he just seems like such a no nonsense, says things even if they aren't necessarily tactful kind of guy; he's the only person i've heard call straightforward bullshit on the fundraising meme & say it nice and plain that the mccain camp was "hardly destitute" & certainly not limited to the $84 million like the CW would like to pretend.
December 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think David's message was that the campaign should not get complacent, not that the campaign was shunning Politico.
December 17, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Halperin is a two faced jerk. In the morning you might see him on one news show raving about the Obama campaign & how it was run, then next morning he is calling him a pampered pet of the media. He did this consistently. After awhile, hopefully many, simply tuned him out.
December 17, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
His nominations suggest that Obama will not be the Great Liberal Hope that some of us expected. If he gave scoops to center-right blogs like Politico, I am not surprised. He's still so much better than the current trash, and however he wants to play the game, I am happy to watch.
December 17, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really like Salon. And TPM, of course.
December 17, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
For what its worth; I don't like Politico OR Halperin.
Oh, by the way, Mike Allen is a Rove lover. He showed me that when I talked to him while he was a guest on C-SPAN during the Katrina tragedy.
December 17, 2008 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you read that ugly blog rumor about Politico planting spies in many of the campaign staffs starting back in 2004, and again in 2006 band 2008?
Apparently, according to the rumor mongers, the Kerry campaign caught one of them back in 2004 when Kerry told different people different VP choices, hoping to weed out whoever was passing inside info along to Politico. Then when Politico claimed it was Gephardt, the campaign knew who their mole was, because Gephart never was in consideration.
And, according to these rumors, the Edwards campaign caught one of them too, with similar tactics. Give a different insider story to different camapign staffers and see which of those stories ended up in Politico.
Does anyone know of any former campaign staffers who now work for Politico? If these ugly blog rumors are correct, they may have been working for Politico all along.
December 18, 2008 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Having now read the article, all I can say is that's quite an odd detail to have chosen from all that was written. A great piece by Mark Leibovich and--seriously--who gives a shit about Halperin or Politico?
December 18, 2008 5:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think this is really about who Obama people "like," or taking lefty blogs for granted. Remember when seats were getting tight, and Fox got squeezed off the plane?
Point is: why grant them any access you don't have to? These are guys who spent the first chapter of their book talking about haircuts & Drudge... to say nothing of their day-to-day campaign stuff. Esp. when they're nascent websites -- why encourage their growth?
December 18, 2008 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink