Before the February 19th Wisconsin primary, Barack Obama had made 17 campaign appearances in the state, while Hillary Clinton had only made 7. Since that time, however, the Clintons have held twice as many campaign events in primary states as the Obamas. According to the Washington Post’s Campaign Tracker (click here for Clinton and here for Obama), the differences are stark:
Candidate Events In March 4 through May 6 primary states
- Ohio: Clinton 46-29 Obama
- Rhode Island: Clinton 2-2 Obama
- Texas: Clinton 60-37 Obama
- Vermont: None
- Wyoming: Obama 7-5 Clinton
- Mississippi: Clinton 11-3 Obama
- Pennsylvania: Clinton 77-38 Obama
- Indiana: Clinton 56-23 Obama
- North Carolina: Clinton 48-19 Obama
While Obama is heavily outspending Clinton on paid media, the Clinton campaign is holding far more events on the ground. The differences in Pennsylvania, Indiana and North Carolina are particularly stark, with Clinton holding 181 campaign events in those three states, compared to 80 events for Obama. And the gap appears to keep getting larger. This is important for several reasons:
- It helps Clinton’s image as the candidate for “working people.”
- It reinforces the notion that campaigning on the ground still matters, and it isn’t all about television ads. C
- Smaller might be better. While Obama’s large rallies are impressive, almost all campaign events draw significant local media coverage. There is a point where the size of the crowd does not matter quite as much in terms of news coverage, especially if the candidate with smaller crowds is hlding [sic] so many more campaign events.
- Clearly, Bill Clinton is much more of an asset to the Clinton campaign than he is given credit for, since more than half of this advantage comes entirely from his non-stop campaigning.
- It makes a mockery of the notion that Clinton should drop out, and also hurts Obama’s perception as the presumptive nominee. If he is the presumptive nominee, then why do the Clintons seemingly have so much more energy?
Stats like these make me wonder if Obama’s massive activist corps seems to be working harder than Obama. As an Obama supporter, I have to say that I am not in the least bit happy with these numbers. If he wants to put Clinton away, the campaign needs to start holding a lot more events in upcoming primary states…
Inserted from <Open Left>
In my experience, few things energize people more to support a candidate than face-to-face contact, the smaller the venue the better. While, unlike the author, I am uncommitted, I have to agree that this strategy is counterproductive for Obama.