Ladies and gentlemen, the Joe Biden Test:
"My dad used to say, don’t tell me what you value, show me your budget. I will tell you what you value,’’ Biden said.
Applying this test to Hillary Clinton's campaign reveals that her winning the nomination would be the death of the 50-state strategy.
Let's look at Hillary Clinton's budget and where she spent her money as opposed to Barack Obama (note--they had roughly the same amount of primary funds available and roughly similar media buys).
Specifically, let's talk state offices.
Field offices per February 5 state:
Alabama: Obama at least 5, Clinton 2.
North Dakota: Obama 4, Clinton 0.
Idaho: Obama 5, Clinton 0.
Colorado: Obama 12, Clinton 1.
Minnesota: Obama 7, Clinton 1.
Alaska: Obama 1, Clinton 0.
Kansas: Obama 20 staffers, Clinton 3 staffers. (same link).
February 9-10:
Louisiana: Obama campaign had "really been working the state harder [than Clinton]."
Washington state: Obama 3, Clinton 0.
Nebraska: Obama 1, Clinton 0.
Maine: Obama 1, Clinton 0.
February 12 states:
Maryland: Obama 9, Clinton 0.
Virginia: Obama 9, Clinton maybe 1.
Whew. Of course, Clinton will claim that this is just a matter of Obama having more money than her. Indeed, that was the excuse Clinton trotted out on Saturday:
Tonight there are contests in three states that the Obama campaign has long predicted they would win by large margins. According to a spreadsheet that was obtained by Bloomberg News, the Obama campaign predicted big victories in Washington State, Nebraska and Louisiana.
The Obama campaign has dramatically outspent our campaign in these three states, saturating the airwaves with 30 and 60 second ads. The Obama campaign has spent $300,000 more in Louisiana on television ads, $190,000 more in Nebraska and $175,000 more in Washington. [More...]
Well, the truth is that Clinton had raised just as much money as Obama. She just spent it in different places.
Let's look at Clinton's budget to see where her values lie.
During Clinton's 2006 Senate race, several high-ranking aides voiced concerns about loose financial controls over such things as office supplies and advertising. The current campaign appears to be run more frugally, with headquarters in Virginia rather than on K Street. But the campaign's latest reports still show unusual expenditures, such as nearly $500,000 last year for parking costs.
A review of both campaigns' financial filings show they aggressively spent money last year. Both spent more than $80 million before heading into the January primary season, including similar amounts on travel and events. Obama spent more on television advertising and field staff. Clinton spent nearly $4 million on political and media consultants; Obama spent about $1.4 million.
Five hundred-thousand dollars on parking costs? Are you kidding me? How is that even possible? If we assume the campaign has 500 staffers, that's about a thousand dollars per staffer just in parking costs.
And this is a candidate who touts her cred on fiscal discipline? Wasteful spending is not a Democratic value.
And, Clinton spent almost three times as much--to the tune of an extra $2.6 Million dollars, for the services of media consultants such as Mark Penn and Mandy Grunwald.
So, Senator Clinton, don't tell us about how much you value the 50-state strategy. We've seen your budget, and your budget indicates that you value DC-insiders, media consultants, and extravagant perks moreso than in contesting elections in places like Colorado, Idaho, and other states that aren't as glamourous as New York or California.
The next installment of this analysis will deal with Senator Clinton's judgment in not having a post-February 5 plan, and how this failure of judgment resembles another that occurred this decade.
Footnote, let me congratulate Eddie in ME, who was completely right and schooled me on the Maine caucuses. Either I underestimated Obama's field organization and the enthusiasm of his supporters, or I overestimated the strength of Clinton's support and the value of the local political machine. The fact that Clinton did not have her own organization working here is directly tied to the theme of this piece.