Clinton Team Is Quick to Bat Down Rumors

WP: Clinton Team Is Quick to Bat Down Rumors
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, November 24, 2007; Page A06

....Bill Clinton honed the art of rapid response in his 1992 campaign, as memorialized in the movie "The War Room." President Bush's campaigns were known for even swifter reactions to criticism, as blast faxes gave way to BlackBerry messages and technology fostered a nonstop news cycle. As a former first lady who lived through numerous scandals in her husband's White House, Hillary Clinton seems determined to avoid the fate of Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), the 2004 Democratic nominee, who later admitted he was too slow to respond to attacks on his Vietnam War record by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

"One of the greatest strengths of the Clinton campaign is they've internalized and updated the lessons of 1992 for the new media era," said Dan Schnur, a Republican campaign veteran. "When it comes to rapid response, you can't be too fast, but you can certainly be too hysterical. It's important to get information into reporters' hands as quickly as possible, but you don't want to be the deputy press secretary who cried wolf. . . . You want to save Defcon 5 for when you really need it."...

***

"The first version of a story is incorrect, it gets pounced on, your opponents jump on it, and trying to get the toothpaste back in the tube is almost impossible," said Jay Carson, Clinton's traveling press secretary. "All of a sudden you have reputable news organizations chasing it." With the tip yarn, he said, "you're in the middle of a full-fledged controversy over something that didn't really happen."

The Clinton campaign isn't reticent about challenging news reports that turn on interpretation, either, and critics have likened its aggressive tactics to those of the Bush White House, which has had tense relations with the press corps. "Reporters who have covered the hyper-vigilant campaign say that no detail or editorial spin is too minor to draw a rebuke," the New Republic says.

Clinton aides know they run the risk of highlighting small items that might otherwise receive scant attention but have concluded that, most of the time, that is an acceptable risk. "Vigilance is very important," (Clinton communications chief Howard Wolfson)said. "I think Democratic voters expect a nominee's campaign to know how to correct the record."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/23/AR2007112301659.html?nav=hcmodule

Can't forget just how closely many of her tactics resemble the PR spin by the current president's team.

Hillary is using the Rovian playbook and turning the tables immediately against the perps. The lady can think on her feet.

She undoubtedly learned from the 'rip off of Air Force One' and the 'thefts from the White House' and the trashing the white house stories.

Hillary is appearing to be able to hold her own with any attack.

What rumors, exactly, has she spread?

others is hard to do.....

I believe they have this nature they like to employ. TALK LOUD AND SAY....NOTHING! (caps to express shouting)

Ben david

You have no facts to back up your original assertion.

I never thought Obama would stoop to working with Novak, but politics makes strange bed-fellows.

I was just watching his drivel on MSNBC to Tim Russert about different topics. This man is such a shill.

Including jumping on the small stuff. When it comes to bashing Dems, the press has gotten away with too many smears for too long.

I think the story from the awful debate a few weeks ago was made far worse when HRC's team first made it that they were attacking the only woman, then BC comes out speaking of swiftboating merging into the debate "attacks" on HRC not taking positions, which were followed up by McAuliffe and Clark.

They turned it into a story for over a week! (where in fact, they all had some nuance on the question of how to deal with illegal aliens.) Here was a case where being in attack mode hurt - it transformed the race into a race where she is ahead from one where she was prohibitedly ahead. (Not to mention BC mentioning that with swiftboating was pathetic and actually undercut the idea that HRC could fight back better - most people saw this as what the front runner gets, not the vile SBVT attacks.

Imagine if your kid came home from school with a paper that marked wrong 2 + 2 = 5 and had the audacity to complain that the teacher was to fast to mark it wrong. Why shold the press be different? The two concrete examples used were both apparently errors by the press.

There are unpleasant aspects to having to play the game this way, but that doesn't negate the danger of not mastering this strategy. It is one of the reasons why I think Hillary Clinton IS electable. Once the Presidential contest boils down to two major Party candidates, "popularity" takes on a very different nature. It boils down to which is thought will do a better job as President, and campaign skills like that discussed here are part of what makes one candidate emerge from that direct comparison seeming more solid and competent than the other.

When one of these two candidates most likely is our candidate next year, this is one area we won't have to worry about. Hillary has never hesitated to respond quickly, and Obama is proving that he isn't turning the other cheek either. We don't need a repeat of what happened in 2004, this is one area we won't lose any sleep over.