Black Box Report

With solid support in the Hispanic community, Texas is one of Hillary Clinton's "firewall" states, a contest she expected to help close the delegate gap with Barack Obama. But her campaign has just recently "disovered" a "new obstacle," some convoluted rules about how Texas districts apportion their delegates that could water down her support. But this really shouldn't have come as a surprise:

When I read this, I dissolved in giggles after the first sentence. It was that part about the Texas delegate selection rules "creating a new obstacle for her" that got me. In what sense are the Texas rules a "new obstacle?" Were they only recently passed? Not as far as I can tell -- here, for instance, is a pdf about them from August 2007, which should have given the Clinton campaign ample time to get up to speed. While I was having fun thinking of possible analogies -- would I describe the existence of the Pacific Ocean as "creating a new obstacle" for my plan to walk from Baltimore to Beijing?...

Note to self: If I ever run for office and base my campaign on the idea that I am ready to lead from day one, I must remember to actually run an effective campaign.

And the highly-touted Clinton Machine is having trouble not only in Texas, but in Pennsylvania as well:

HRC was unable to put together a full slate of delegates for the Pennsylvania primary. In practice this doesn't matter (they'll be assigned later if necessary), but it demonstrates once again just how unprepared the Clinton team was for a campaign that extended beyond Super Tuesday.

On top of all that, the Politico reported a high-ranking Clinton camapign official said they intended to go after not only the Superdelegates, but Obama's pledged delegates from the primaries he's won as well. Clinton already caught heat for the idea of letting elite Superdelegates snatch the nomination for her, even if that goes contrary to the popular vote and pledged delegate counts, but this seems positively suicidal (not to mention reinforcing the perception that the Clintons will do anything to win, no matter how sleazy or undemocratic). Not to mention that, practically speaking, it's a really bad idea:

Yes, it's true that a delegate who arrives as a pledged delegate for Obama is not bound by the rules to actually vote for Obama…Delegates can do whatever they want, but before they are chosen as delegates, the campaigns get to sign off on who will represent them as delegates at the convention…The people who end up as pledged delegates for Obama will be among his most rabid and trusted supporters…among the least likely people in America to switch their allegiance…Why would the Clinton campaign even float out the idea…? God only knows. You'd think they might have some work to do trying to actually earn pledged delegates.

Both candidates have since vowed not to poach each others' pledged delegates, but it was still a mouthful of stupid for that "unnamed Clinton official." Team Clinton, renowned for its political savvy and discipline, stepped in it up to their collective hips. And it's hardly the first time they've done so. And in the end, that could be Hillary's biggest problem:

My biggest problem with Clinton isn't Clinton - I like her! - it's some of the people she surrounds herself with. Aren't they supposed to be the ones who know what they're doing?

Ignoring polls that don't show you data you like; insulting voters in "insignificant states"; failing to do the most basic due dilligance on and preparation for primary contests beyond Super Tuesday...For a fraction of what she's paying Penn, Ickes, Wolfson, et al, I could've not done all those things for the Clinton campaign, and she surely wouldn't be any worse off than she is now, with several million dollars left in her pocket to boot.