Trailhead: A campaign blog.

Forcing Ignorance

For those who made the smart decision to skip tonight’s circus, you’ve missed one especially exciting bit of news. Clinton’s campaign is alleging that Obama supporters committed various illegal acts during the caucus proceedings that discriminated against Clinton supporters. They say they have proof of the discrimination, but it’s unclear what that proof is. Now that we’ve soaked in some perspective (at least a few hours’ worth) on Clinton’s EMERGENCY conference call announcing the allegations, we’re ready to declare it an ultrashrewd political move.

Clinton has effectively pinned Obama into a catch-22. Obama can’t say that his supporters didn’t do it, because he has no control over his supporters. If he goes out on a limb and erroneously trusts his supporters’ morals, he could look like a naive liar and a cheater—never a good option heading into a six-week marathon to Pennsylvania. If he takes the other route and says nothing (which is what his campaign has done thus far), then he looks like he’s admitting defeat and recognizes that he can’t control his own supporters. As Michelle Obama infamously said, “[I]f you can't run your own house, you certainly can't run the White House.” In reality, Obama’s supporters are the equivalent of his across-town neighbors, but voters may not see it that way. 

This catch-22 ploy isn’t new. Two weeks ago the Obama campaign trapped Clinton in a similar scheme by crying foul over a picture of Obama in native Somali garb—pictures that were reportedly leaked by Clinton staffers to make Obama appear to be a Muslim (which he is not). Obama demanded that the Clinton campaign take responsibility for the leak, but the Clintonites were silent during the first hours of the hubbub because they couldn’t verify that none of their 700 staffers released the picture. Eventually they said they knew nothing about it.

That’s the only way out of this catch-22, to claim ignorance and hope the scandal doesn’t trickle up. There are still too many details missing for us to know whether Obama will suffer because of his supporters’ alleged indiscretions. It’s hard for Obama to take umbrage at the allegations, especially because the claims are more serious and the potential fallout is steeper. It’s telling that we still haven’t heard Obama’s campaign directly respond to Clinton’s conference call. (Outside of an Obama lawyer’s heated exchange with a Clinton spokesman.) That doesn’t mean his supporters are guilty, it just means he has no way of knowing that they’re not.

Clinton's Game-Changer

The Clinton campaign needed a game-changer. It got a game-changer.

In an “EMERGENCY PRESS CALL” tonight, officials with the Clinton campaign complained of numerous “disturbing reports” from “all over the state” that Obama supporters were tampering with the Texas caucuses. (Transcript here.)

Among the accusations (or, as Clinton’s Texas director, Ace Smith, calls them, “documented instances”):

• Obama supporters closed the doors on Clinton supporters at some of the precinct conventions.

• Obama supporters monopolized the “packets” used to sign up caucus-goers. In some instances, they even “took them away from the premises” before the caucuses started, according to the Clinton campaign. Here’s why the packet matters, via the Dallas Morning News:

In most cases, the election judge [at a caucus] will have the packet with instructions, guidelines and other materials for the convention. If you gain possession of the packet, you can appoint yourself temporary chairman, get a friend to nominate you as permanent chairman and then quickly elect a secretary. If you do this, you control the flow and pace of the meeting. That could make a difference, especially if you're dealing with late arrivals and those not familiar with the process. There will be times when precincts will be merged under one election judge. That means the other packets will be up for grabs. Make sure you get one and don't allow a judge to stall you and then give the material to the rival camp.

• Some caucus results were being reported before the caucuses were even set to begin. A Clinton memo cites "numerous instances of Obama supporters filing [sic] out precinct convention sign-in sheets during the day and submitting them as completed vote totals at caucus." In other words, cheating.

The charges are fairly broad, but the campaign promised to provide specifics. (Some are already available here.)

Whatever the merits, the campaign’s decision to draw attention to the issue as it was happening was a bold move. (Communications director Howard Wolfson made sure to point out that they had never done this before.) It’s now guaranteed to overshadow the election results, no matter who wins. If Obama pulls through in Texas, naturally the issue calls his victory into question. If it’s Hillary, the added sense of injustice could propel her even further back into the race.

On the call, which was abruptly and entertainingly hijacked by Obama attorney Bob Bauer, Clinton’s lawyer couldn’t say whether the campaign was going to take this to court. It’s too early to say. But it doesn’t matter whether this lands in court. If the flap manages to overshadow the election results, whatever they may be, then mission accomplished. Obama’s normally lightning-quick campaign has been slow to respond, suggesting that 1) there’s merit to the charges, 2) the campaign doesn’t want to dignify them with a response, or 3) the campaign wants to be extremely careful (especially post-Goolsbee) about what it confirms and denies. In any case, the Clinton campaign has made one thing clear: If Obama thinks he can walk away with the nomination, he'll have to do it walking on glass.

Read the rest of Trailhead's coverage on the emergency call.