Even though it’s a week-old story, I feel I need to comment on the whole Clinton-Geffen-Obama dust up. This is news? Really? Petty sniping between fundraisers, candidates and their campaigns seems to be pretty routine.
What I am surprised about is the untempered venom with which Clinton’s campaign, specifically Howard Wolfson, the communications director, responded. We still have more than a year before the parties officially nominate their presidential candidates, and more than eighteen months until the 2008 general election. Viscious mudslinging so early in the cycle does not bode well for anyone. Plus, it has undermined the candidates’ promise to avoid name-calling and run positive campaigns, returning them to politics as usual.
According to the New York Times, Clinton’s campaigned responded so swiftly because they were worried about the effect of Geffen’s comments on average voters in Iowa and New Hampshire. Again, I am forced to ask, really? Does the average voter in the heartland really know who David Geffen is? Do they care what he thinks? Will it really affect their voting a year from now?
Since Clinton’s campaign pounced so aggressively, this probably became a bigger story than it would have been if they had let it slide. So now the campaign has just shot itself in the foot–those average voters they are so concerned about are being barraged by this story. The result? The campaign’s biggest fear–they will learn about Geffen and his history with the Democratic party.
Perhaps the wise move in this case would have been a little bit of patience to see where the story went, and maybe a more measured response. Granted, as a communications professional, you want to stay ahead of the story, but sometimes it’s better to wait.
