How did he do it?

[RunInRed 16,492]

Regardless of what you think of him, this truly is a remarkable story...

How did he do it? How did Obama become the first Democratic insurgent in a generation or more to knock off the party's Establishment front runner? Facing an operation as formidable as Clinton's, Obama says in an interview, "was liberating ... What I'd felt was that we could try some things in a different way and build an organization that reflected my personality and what I thought the country was looking for. We didn't have to unlearn a bunch of bad habits."

When Betsy Myers first met with Obama in his Senate office on Jan. 3, 2007, about two weeks before he announced he was forming an exploratory committee to run for President, Obama laid down three ruling principles for his future chief operating officer: Run the campaign with respect; build it from the bottom up; and finally, no drama.

... Obama's Chicago headquarters made technology its running mate from the start. That wasn't just for fund-raising: in state after state, the campaign turned over its voter lists — normally a closely guarded crown jewel — to volunteers, who used their own laptops and the unlimited night and weekend minutes of their cell-phone plans to contact every name and populate a political organization from the ground up.

... "What I didn't anticipate was how effectively we could use the Internet to harness that grass-roots base, both on the financial side and the organizing side," Obama says. "That, I think, was probably one of the biggest surprises of the campaign, just how powerfully our message merged with the social networking and the power of the Internet."

... "As somebody who had been a community organizer," Obama recalls, "I was convinced that if you invited people to get engaged, if you weren't trying to campaign like you were selling soap but instead said, 'This is your campaign, you own it, and you can run with it,' that people would respond and we could build a new electoral map."

... the way Obama organizations sprang up organically in almost every congressional district in the country meant that by the time Obama's field organizers arrived in a state, all they had to do was fire up an engine that had already been designed and built locally. "We had to rely on the grass roots, and we had clarity on that from the beginning," says Plouffe.

... Obama has already changed the way politics is practiced in America — and he is poised to keep doing so. After delivering his dramatic victory speech in St. Paul, Minn., Obama walked offstage and spent the next 45 minutes signing dozens and dozens of his books that had been brought to the Xcel Center by admirers. When he finished, he happened to see fund raiser Dornbush and told him, "Enjoy the celebration tonight." Then Obama took a few steps, turned around and added, "But it's right back to work tomorrow."

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/...1811857,00.html

[bigsixfive 328]

How he did it (previously):

- He won his state senate seat in an uncontested election.

- He won his national senate seat because his favored opponent got caught in a scandal a few months before the election.

[Justin5 20]

How he did it (previously):

- He won his state senate seat in an uncontested election.

- He won his national senate seat because his favored opponent got caught in a scandal a few months before the election.

While not perfect, that is better than about 3/4 of the people in office.

Also, you can argue that the less competitive an election is, the less likely the canidate will be to accept donations from questionable donors.

[autigeremt 6,717]

Neither Obama NOR McCain can claim that! Actually, Obama is less likely to do so. If George Sorros is hanging around, then you can bet there needs to be a question or two. Same can be said about a few of McCains supporters.

Middle ground, now! Middle ground.

[autigeremt 6,717]

Hold on, Justin. Neither Obama NOR McCain can claim that! Actually, Obama is less likely to do so. If George Sorros is hanging around, then you can bet there needs to be a question or two. Same can be said about a few of McCains supporters.

Middle ground, now! Middle ground.

[otterinbham 0]

How he did it (previously):

- He won his state senate seat in an uncontested election.

- He won his national senate seat because his favored opponent got caught in a scandal a few months before the election.

Actually, he arm-twisted the judge into opening up the sealed divorce records of his opponent and giving them to the Chicago Trib. Not exactly honorable behavior if you ask me.

[autigeremt 6,717]

How he did it (previously):

- He won his state senate seat in an uncontested election.

- He won his national senate seat because his favored opponent got caught in a scandal a few months before the election.

Actually, he arm-twisted the judge into opening up the sealed divorce records of his opponent and giving them to the Chicago Trib. Not exactly honorable behavior if you ask me.

Interesting information. Not that it matters all that much now, but here's what Wik. says about it. Not sure how much is for sure, but for those who may not know anything about it.

Link

2004 U.S. Senate race

See also: Illinois United States Senate election, 2004

Ryan hoped to succeed retiring Republican Peter Fitzgerald in the United States Senate. On March 16, 2004, he won the Republican primary, thus pairing him against Democrat Barack Obama. However, after allegations from his ex-wife, he withdrew his candidacy on June 25, 2004, and officially filed the documentation to withdraw on July 29, 2004.

Controversially, in 2004, Ryan had Justin Warfel (a campaign worker) follow his opponent, Barack Obama, throughout the day and record everything he did in public on videotape.[4] The tactic backfired when many people, including Ryan's supporters, criticized this activity. Ryan's spokesman apologized, and promised that Warfel would give Obama more space. Obama acknowledged that it is standard practice to film an opponent in public, and Obama said he was satisfied with Ryan's decision to have Warfel back off.

Campaign demise

Ryan married actress Jeri Ryan in 1991; together they have a son, Alex Ryan. They divorced in 1999 in California, and the records of the divorce were sealed at their mutual request. Five years later, when Ryan's Senate campaign began, the Chicago Tribune newspaper and WLS-TV, the local ABC affiliate, sought to have the records released. On March 3, 2004, several of Ryan's GOP primary opponents urged release of the records.[5] Both Ryan and his wife agreed to make their divorce records public, but not make the custody records public, claiming that the custody records could be harmful to their son if released. On March 16, 2004, Ryan won the GOP primary with 36 percent to 23 percent against Jim Oberweis who came in second.[6] Obama won the Democratic primary, with 53 percent to 23 percent against Dan Hynes, who came in second.

Barack Obama's backers emailed reporters about the divorce controversy, but refrained from on-the-record commentary about the divorce files.[7] On March 29, 2004, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Schnider ruled that several of the Ryans' divorce records should be opened to the public, and ruled that a court-appointed referee would later decide which custody files should remain sealed to protect the interests of Ryan's young child.[8] The following week, on April 2, 2004, Barack Obama changed his position about the Ryans' soon-to-be-released divorce records, and called on Democrats to not inject them into the campaign.[7] The Ryan campaign characterized Obama's shift as hypocritical, because Obama's backers had been emailing reports about the divorce records prior to Judge Schnider's decision.[7]

On June 22, 2004, after receiving the report from the court-appointed referee, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Schnider released the files that were deemed consistent with the interests of Ryan's young child. In those files, Jeri Ryan alleged that Jack Ryan had taken her to sex clubs in several cities, intending for them to have sex in public.[1] The decision to release these files generated much controversy because it went against both parents' direct request, and because it reversed the earlier decision to seal the papers in the best interest of the child. Jim Oberweis, Ryan's defeated GOP opponent, commented that "these are allegations made in a divorce hearing, and we all know people tend to say things that aren't necessarily true in divorce proceedings when there is money involved and custody of children involved."[1]

Prior to release of the documents, Ryan had told leading Republicans that five percent of the divorce file could cause problems for his campaign.[9] But after the documents were released, GOP officials including state GOP Chair Judy Baar Topinka said they felt Ryan had misleadingly indicated the divorce records would not be embarrassing.[10] That charge of dishonesty led to intensifying calls for Ryan's withdrawal, though Topinka said after the June 25 withdrawal that Ryan's "decision was a personal one" and that the state GOP had not pressured Ryan to drop out.[11] Ryan's campaign ended less than a week after the custody records were opened, and Ryan officially filed the documentation to withdraw on July 29, 2004. The same party leaders who called for Ryan's resignation controversially chose Alan Keyes as Ryan's replacement in the race; Keyes lost to Obama, 27% to 70%.

2004 Senate campaign in retrospect

Subsequent to his withdrawal from the U.S. Senate race in Illinois, Jack Ryan has characterized what happened to him as a "new low for politics in America".[12] According to Ryan, it was unprecedented in American politics for a newspaper to sue for access to sealed custody documents. Ryan opposed unsealing the divorce records of Senator John Kerry during Kerry's race against George W. Bush in 2004, and Kerry's divorce records remained sealed. Ryan has made this request: "let me be the only person this has happened to. Don’t ask for Ted Kennedy’s. Don’t ask for John McCain’s. Don’t ask for Joe Lieberman’s. Just stop. This is not a good precedent for American society if you really want the best and brightest to run."[12]

Now I have one question.......where's the privacy here when it comes to divorce issues? I mean, I don't get the public nature of something that should be a private matter.....

Any lawyers in here. I'm just asking the question. Is is because marriage is a public "trust", so to speak?

[Justin5 20]

Hold on, Justin. Neither Obama NOR McCain can claim that! Actually, Obama is less likely to do so. If George Sorros is hanging around, then you can bet there needs to be a question or two. Same can be said about a few of McCains supporters.

Middle ground, now! Middle ground.

What did I claim? I just said it was possible.

[autigeremt 6,717]

You are right. I over shot the runway on that one. Let me correct it.

[Tigermike 3,055]

Actually here is another look at "How did he do it?"

Obama used party rules to foil Clinton

May 30 10:48 AM US/Eastern

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Unlike Hillary Rodham Clinton, rival Barack Obama planned for the long haul.

Clinton hinged her whole campaign on an early knockout blow on Super Tuesday, while Obama's staff researched congressional districts in states with primaries that were months away. What they found were opportunities to win delegates, even in states they would eventually lose.

Obama's campaign mastered some of the most arcane rules in politics, and then used them to foil a front-runner who seemed to have every advantage—money, fame and a husband who had essentially run the Democratic Party for eight years as president.

"Without a doubt, their understanding of the nominating process was one of the keys to their success," said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist not aligned with either candidate. "They understood the nuances of it and approached it at a strategic level that the Clinton campaign did not."

Careful planning is one reason why Obama is emerging as the nominee as the Democratic Party prepares for its final three primaries, Puerto Rico on Sunday and Montana and South Dakota on Tuesday. Attributing his success only to soaring speeches and prodigious fundraising ignores a critical part of contest.

Obama used the Democrats' system of awarding delegates to limit his losses in states won by Clinton while maximizing gains in states he carried. Clinton, meanwhile, conserved her resources by essentially conceding states that favored Obama, including many states that held caucuses instead of primaries.

In a stark example, Obama's victory in Kansas wiped out the gains made by Clinton for winning New Jersey, even though New Jersey had three times as many delegates at stake. Obama did it by winning big in Kansas while keeping the vote relatively close in New Jersey.

The research effort was headed by Jeffrey Berman, Obama's press-shy national director of delegate operations. Berman, who also tracked delegates in former Rep. Dick Gephardt's presidential bids, spent the better part of 2007 analyzing delegate opportunities for Obama.

Obama won a majority of the 23 Super Tuesday contests on Feb. 5 and then spent the following two weeks racking up 11 straight victories, building an insurmountable lead among delegates won in primaries and caucuses.

What made it especially hard for Clinton to catch up was that Obama understood and took advantage of a nominating system that emerged from the 1970s and '80s, when the party struggled to find a balance between party insiders and its rank-and-file voters.

Until the 1970s, the nominating process was controlled by party leaders, with ordinary citizens having little say. There were primaries and caucuses, but the delegates were often chosen behind closed doors, sometimes a full year before the national convention. That culminated in a 1968 national convention that didn't reflect the diversity of the party—racially or ideologically.

The fiasco of the 1968 convention in Chicago, where police battled anti-war protesters in the streets, led to calls for a more inclusive process.

One big change was awarding delegates proportionally, meaning you can finish second or third in a primary and still win delegates to the party's national convention. As long candidates get at least 15 percent of the vote, they are eligible for delegates.

The system enables strong second-place candidates to stay competitive and extend the race—as long as they don't run out of campaign money.

"For people who want a campaign to end quickly, proportional allocation is a bad system," Devine said. "For people who want a system that is fair and reflective of the voters, it's a much better system."

Another big change was the introduction of superdelegates, the party and elected officials who automatically attend the convention and can vote for whomever they choose regardless of what happens in the primaries and caucuses.

Superdelegates were first seated at the 1984 convention. Much has been made of them this year because neither Obama nor Clinton can reach the number of delegates needed to secure the nomination without their support.

A more subtle change was the distribution of delegates within each state. As part of the proportional system, Democrats award delegates based on statewide vote totals as well as results in individual congressional districts. The delegates, however, are not distributed evenly within a state, like they are in the Republican system.

Under Democratic rules, congressional districts with a history of strong support for Democratic candidates are rewarded with more delegates than districts that are more Republican. Some districts packed with Democratic voters can have as many as eight or nine delegates up for grabs, while more Republican districts in the same state have three or four.

The system is designed to benefit candidates who do well among loyal Democratic constituencies, and none is more loyal than black voters. Obama, who would be the first black candidate nominated by a major political party, has been winning 80 percent to 90 percent of the black vote in most primaries, according to exit polls.

"Black districts always have a large number of delegates because they are the highest performers for the Democratic Party," said Elaine Kamarck, a Harvard University professor who is writing a book about the Democratic nominating process.

"Once you had a black candidate you knew that he would be winning large numbers of delegates because of this phenomenon," said Kamarck, who is also a superdelegate supporting Clinton.

In states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, Clinton won the statewide vote but Obama won enough delegates to limit her gains. In states Obama carried, like Georgia and Virginia, he maximized the number of delegates he won.

"The Obama campaign was very good at targeting districts in areas where they could do well," said former DNC Chairman Don Fowler, a Clinton superdelegate from South Carolina. "They were very conscious and aware of these nuances." (There is a word the dims love.)

But, Fowler noted, the best strategy in the world would have been useless without the right candidate.

"If that same strategy and that same effort had been used with a different candidate, a less charismatic candidate, a less attractive candidate, it wouldn't have worked," Fowler said. "The reason they look so good is because Obama was so good."

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9...;show_article=1

[AURaptor 1,126]

He " did it" by getting mixed up w/ the unscrupulous Chicago crime, err... political machine, that's how. Tony Rezko, Rev Wright, folks of like mind, what ever it took to garner the support of the 'insiders' of big time movers and shakers.