This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

The Politico has a great piece up about a 50-year old lawyer named Jeffrey Berman who is Senator Obama's Director of Delegate Selection.  Most of you already know the story--the Obama team has performed brilliantly during this campaign making the much vaunted Clinton campaign look like amateurs. But this is another confirmation in detail about the meticulous preparation that was made for this campaign.


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

Berman and his friend David Plouffe (Campaign Manager) both come from work on Gephardt's campaigns of '88 and '04 but it seems as if Berman first became known to the press in Nevada when he announced to the world that Obama had actually won Nevada:


Despite Clinton’s popular vote victory in Nevada and an authoritative Associated Press count giving Clinton the edge in the Nevada delegate count, Obama had actually won the state by the only measure that mattered. Obama had a majority in the district that had an odd number of delegates, so he won an extra seat,” Berman told the puzzled press; the Associated Press delegate expert, on the call, promised to revise his count.
Obama’s Nevada delegate victory was widely viewed at the time as a curiosity, an asterisk to Clinton’s win. But in February, as Obama amassed delegates despite losing big states, the shape of the race became clear: The name of the game was delegates.
While Harold Ickes was busy getting articles published about himself,  trashing Obama and trying to figure out the Texas Prima-Caucus a few weeks before the actual contest, Berman was working on Texas and its intricate nature  a year before the contest.

Berman and his friend David Plouffe (Campaign Manager) both come from work on Gephardt's campaigns of '88 and '04.  The article makes an interesting assertion about why Obama has won:

Now, analysts trying to explain Obama’s rise and Clinton’s fall tend to point to the big picture: Obama’s inspirational message, the drag of the Iraq war, the past and the future. But the heart of Obama’s victory has been technical and tactical — to the frustration and disbelief of Clinton’s inner circle.
“In the end, her campaign appears relentlessly driven by an inherent belief that their entire mathematical disadvantage is based exclusively on a technical mishap, a fluke, a strategic miscalculation — namely, not competing in February in those smaller states like Kansas and Idaho where an unchallenged Obama was able to ring up huge delegate margins,” Jason Kinney, an official of the pro-Clinton American Leadership Project, wrote on his blog last week.
That's where people get it twisted though; it wasn't just the incompetence of the Clinton team to compete
in  those OTHER February 5 states, but rather that the flawed candidacy and candidate went hand in hand with flawed strategy.   If she had competed in Idaho, how much of  a difference would it have made and how closer would California have been?  To try to just say that the campaign team was better slights Obama himself.
This was HIS campaign versus her campaign and by every metric he was better in every way.

Fittingly, Jeffrey Berman did not comment on the article (except to double check facts).  Obama's team always plays it low-key.  

Extended (Optional)

Originally posted to maxnyc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:53 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.