Mark Penn, Clinton pollster, ignoramus, greedy hypocrite, union-breaker, and fat piece of lard, reportedly does not have the quality of "intelligence" to counterbalance these aforementioned traits, according to a report by Karen Tumulty. I was going on the assumption that he was just a greedy moron. I figured, this guy MUST be brilliant, he has awful people skills! But no. Apparently, not only did he drive Clinton's campaign into the ground, he did it with very little knowledge of the campaign: so little knowledge, in fact, that he THOUGHT DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES WERE WINNER TAKE ALL.
This revelation goes toward explaining why Clinton did so poorly and why she was caught in millions of dollars in debt, debt she's failed to pay off until today and according to George Snuffleufogas is even more than originally thought.
Ironically, much of that debt is owed to Penn's firm. Here's some of Karen's article, which can be foundhere
Clinton picked people for her team primarily for their loyalty to her, instead of their mastery of the game. That became abundantly clear in a strategy session last year, according to two people who were there. As aides looked over the campaign calendar, chief strategist Mark Penn confidently predicted that an early win in California would put her over the top because she would pick up all the state's 370 delegates. It sounded smart, but as every high school civics student now knows, Penn was wrong: Democrats, unlike the Republicans, apportion their delegates according to vote totals, rather than allowing any state to award them winner-take-all. Sitting nearby, veteran Democratic insider Harold M. Ickes, who had helped write those rules, was horrified — and let Penn know it. "How can it possibly be," Ickes asked, "that the much vaunted chief strategist doesn't understand proportional allocation?" And yet the strategy remained the same, with the campaign making its bet on big-state victories. Even now, it can seem as if they don't get it. Both Bill and Hillary have noted plaintively that if Democrats had the same winner-take-all rules as Republicans, she'd be the nominee.
Now, typically, if this race wasn't over, I'd say something like "Do you want this kind of gluttony and ineptitude being owed favors in the White House?" Luckily, this gluttony and ineptitude was so greivous, it cost her the campaign.
But it's okay. This baby is over. And we never have to see this anti-labor union, moronic, inept, and greedy face ever again.