Organizing Matters: The Lesson from Hillary's NV Win
Before the mainstream media descended on Nevada, I spent several days with the Clinton campaign there in early December. The field campaign, led by State Director Robby Mook and field director Marlon Marshall turned out to be an incredible example of passionate, yet cool-headed management and results-focused organizing.
Every single night, for almost one year up until today, in the modest Las Vegas offices of the Clinton campaign, young, exhausted organizers have reliably reported the results of their hard days' work to a regional field director in incredible detail. Every night, without fail.
For the mainstream news media, a few seconds of "tears" or a last minute robo call will always trump the story of a year of meticulous organizing by disciplined armies of young campaign staff and volunteers. Though it's difficult to report comprehensively on scattered and closed-mouthed presidential field operations, there are reasons to believe that high-quality field organizing has been decisive in the first contests of 2008. This week in Nevada, Obama had a surge in the polls and an endorsement from the powerful Culinary Workers union on his side. Meticulous organizing and good management by the local Clinton Nevada staff have made the difference.
But the big field story of 2008 is not about the horse race. In the 2008 and 2004 presidential primary cycles, the early states of Iowa and New Hampshire -- joined by Nevada and South Carolina this year -- have functioned as training grounds for a new generation of field organizers and incubators of new field techniques and technologies. The dramatic surge in early resources available to campaigns has put large staffs on the ground up to one year before voting day. These organizing hothouses -- especially on the Democratic side -- are producing a new generation of activists who are as disciplined and skilled as they are passionate.
It remains to be seen, however if this new generation of talented and battle-tested organizers and field leaders will be given the reigns during the general election.
A little after 9:00 PM, in one nightly reporting meeting I witnessed, regional field director Ryan Donohue started with three questions for all his organizers: "Did you have a Caucus 101 meeting today?" "How many people were you expecting to show up?" "How many people did you actually have?" In the case of a discrepancy, organizers were asked to explain what happened. There was the feeling that it was better to have a small number of volunteers and to have predicted turn out correctly, than to have a big unexpected turnout. In other words, as an organizer, this campaign expected you to be in control.
The walls of Donahue's team office were covered with overlapping charts and lists of staff, their precinct captains, and other measures of their progress. But no numbers were put on the wall without a discussion of how they were achieved -- and the lessons to be learned from the experience. In these nightly reporting sessions, regional directors went beyond mere numbers to debrief every conversation the organizers held that day with potential campaign workers as well as detailed plans for future recruitment, voter ID, persuasion and organization building. Each reporting session included good-natured self-critique and group-critique of team members' day-to-day efforts, both successful and unsuccessful. All meetings closed with a "role play" in which one organizer was called upon to lead a mock volunteer house meeting (the mainstay organizing tool of the campaign). The role plays too were followed by self- and group-critique.
After organizers had given their reports, they went to work inputing data from the day's work into "The Donkey," a new online volunteer management system. Regional directors then gathered in another room to report their teams' results to the statewide field director, Marlon Marshall, followed by the same process of self- and group-critique and evaluation.
In one of these upper-level meetings I visited, word was handed down by Marshall of new internal polls showing Obama surging in Nevada. And rumor had it that all bets were off, even in Iowa. No more inevitability. And intelligence about the Obama campaign pointed to massive turnout on their part.
Marshall explained to his bleary-eyed regional directors that the vote goals for all precincts therefore had to be revised. In other words, the goal post for all organizers had suddenly moved much father away. The regional field directors looked to be in various states of anxiety. But there was no sense of depression or despair. They were part of a well functioning organization. They knew the next step. They knew exactly what they had to do the next day, because they had just detailed their plan to their field director in the meeting.
Finally, getting close to 11:00 PM, Marshall would then report the progress of the past 24 hours in detail to state director Mook.
Through that repetition of work, accountability, reflection and change, an organization was being built to accomplish a goal: victory in the Nevada Caucus on January 19. That repetition was taking place within a grand strategy that, though changing along with the conditions of the race, was understood by all staff and even all volunteers.
Mook sees that kind of big-picture strategic understanding as essential for everyone from regional field organizers down to precinct captains: "If I train someone, and hold them accountable for delivering overall goals in a precinct, they're going to work a lot harder than if I just say, 'Go find 3 supporters and then come back to me.' If I say, 'You're accountable for winning," then they're going to do whatever it takes. And also, as the definition of what it's going to take to win changes over the course of the campaign, they're going to be able to adapt to that."
Even as the clock struck midnight, staff were still buzzing around the office in a mixture of calm efficiency and adrenalin rush as the news of the new tough reality spread among the staff.
Mook and Marshall are naturally good managers. And they work at being good managers. They see it as a major ingredient to winning--something that makes campaigns work.
"I've worked for Robby before and he sets a tone of being accountable--not just in terms of numbers, but also your work ethic and how your treat people, and how you run an organization. It comes out of asking a lot of people, but respecting people too," caucus director Mara Lee told me.
"Here, people are asked to do what they can do, and a little bit more. The nice thing is that organizers know they can go to their regionals. Regionals know they can go to Robby, or myself or Marlon. So it's not just a matter of reporting up--there's actually a two way conversation. Sure, it's hierarchical because it's an organization. But everyone is helping each other to succeed."
I asked Ryan Donohue if the level of detail expected in daily reporting seemed excessive. "At first yes," he said. "But now I realize it might actually be a little under."
That echoed what Mook told me about his method of breaking organizers in to this insane level of regimentation:
"It's never hard to get people to work hard on this kind of campaign. If someone came all the way out here to Nevada just work for Senator Clinton, they're already ready to do what ever it takes. And they really want to win. But the discipline piece is the hard part. And a lot of times, that means giving them time to prove to themselves that things need to be done a certain way. We'll say, 'Here's the way to have a successful house meeting -- if you do this you will have done everything you can to have been successful.' Things like: sit down with the host and get them to give you 50 names to invite. Little disciplined steps like that. A new organizer will say that's overkill. But then their first meeting will not be successful and so then they get it."
My first organizing job after college, with a union, demanded a similar level of daily accountability as on Mook's campaign. But my mentor's primary means of enforcing it was the traditional Old Left staple: terror. He'd often yell at us or viscerally insult us when we failed to carry out our tasks exactly as ordered. Actually, it worked quite well for me. But this new generation of left leaders favors trust and respect.
Lee, the caucus director, told me that respect was part of the DNA of the organization Robby built in Nevada: "We respect our leaders -- and so yelling just wouldn't be tolerated. What we're doing here is different from so many other organizations because we really are investing in our staff and in precinct captains. We're building permanent organizers and a permanent organization."
For Democrats in 2004, all these ingredients were lacking in most places during the general election: repetition of disciplined work, sound strategy, respect for precinct volunteers and staff organizers, and the most basic elements of decent management. Most of that was missing in Iowa for front runner Howard Dean too, where meticulous and consistent organizers working for John Kerry and John Edwards pulled victories out of Joe Trippi's "perfect storm" of passionate, numerous and unorganized, volunteers.
Dean's long-haul New Hampshire campaign was another story, however. Robby Mook developed as an organizer there through it's house-by-house, meeting-by-meeting process of organization building. Dean's fiercely independent New Hampshire operation produced a roster of young organizers who are now playing key roles in 2008 campaigns. Jeremy Bird, who is good friends with Mook, is in charge of organizing in South Carolina for Barack Obama. Karen Hicks has been a senior field advisor to Hillary Clinton's operation. And Harvard Professor Marshall Ganz, a veteran of the Farm Workers Union who helped shape and inspire Dean's New Hampshire strategy, is an advisor and trainer for the Obama campaign. Many others have been trained since 2004 by organizers from the New Hampshire Dean operation--for example, Buffy Wicks, who directs Obama's innovative California field operations.
"The NH experience was kind of a 'crucible' in which some talented young organizers had to work their way through some big challenges, taking an approach to electoral organizing that had been marginalized for years. So it wasn't neat, it wasn't smooth, and, at times, it wasn't professional," says Ganz.
"The US presidential selection system uniquely combines cosmic significance with utter contingency in a way that is truly remarkable. It takes a strong heart, a clear head, and skillful hands to provide the leadership to make it work. Jeremy and Robby came from very different places, but both showed their strength of heart, kept their heads clear--most of the time--and grew skills with their hands to make a difference in the world. That's what they're doing."
All the discipline and repetition of Mook's Nevada organization wouldn't have meant anything if it didn't satisfy that "utter contingency." The purpose of the organization Mook was building was to accomplish a very specific string of results: (1) Recruit a competent and dedicated leader for every precinct; (2) Test those leaders to make sure they are capable of recruiting and leading other caucus goers; (3) ID and turn out as many Clinton supporters to caucus as possible; and (4) Train precinct leaders to make sure they know how to lead their caucus attendees on the big day.
Precinct leaders were recruited and tested though the mechanism of the house meeting. These house meetings are not to be confused with the "self-organized" house parties popular with the national Dean campaign in 2003-2004. These house meetings were imported to the insular Dean New Hampshire operation across the decades from Caesar Chavez's Farm Worker movement, Saul Alinsky's neighborhood organizing and older movements by Marshal Ganz and other veteran Farm Worker organizers who visited New Hampshire in 2003.
Unlike most of the Internet-organized house parties of the national Dean campaign, the house meetings of Dean New Hampshire 2003-2004 and Clinton Nevada 2007-2008 had definite goals that would be tracked and reported immediately after the gatherings. In the case of the house meetings I visited in Nevada, the goal was commitment cards--promises to caucus for Clinton. Organizers also had to report how many new potential leaders had offered to hold their own house meetings.
Hundreds upon hundreds of house meetings over many months slowly built out Clinton's organization in Nevada. And then, as December finally arrived, it was time to bring leaders together to a series of training events to give the organization concrete knowledge and skills about caucusing as well as a sense of collective identity and excitement.
On Saturday, December 15, I attended one of these mass trainings at the William Orr Elementary School just outside of downtown Las Vegas. An incredible number of volunteer precinct captains showed up for this all-day commitment. Of course, showing up was a test in itself. Precinct captains who committed and didn't show up would be replaced.
Introductory speakers included Rory Reid and Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. And then caucus director Mara Lee and Robby Mook got to work preparing precinct captains with the detailed knowledge they would need to have to compete in the caucuses successfully. Following that, the mass broke up into smaller groups according to the staff organizers who were in charge of their precincts. I sat in a meeting run by a young organizer named Megan Rodman who repeated the same set of instructions over and over until her group of precinct captains could produce no more questions.
At the very end of the training day, a gaggle of reporters and television cameras showed up for a pre-planned photo op of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa going "canvassing." With at least five people from his staff and another five from the Clinton campaign following behind, he walked down the street from the Elementary School and began knocking on the doors of unsuspecting Latino voters who were shocked and confused to find themselves talking to someone who said he was the Mayor of Los Angeles and had the TV cameras to prove it.
That was the scene that made the evening news that day, not the meticulous organizing that had gone into the event.
The Nevada Clinton campaign is not the only well-run campaign among the early-state primary operations. There are at least 12 such operations on the Democratic side: four (the number of early states) times three (the number of major candidates running robust operations in all four states). There are several more on the Republican side this cycle. In each of these pressure cookers, a new generation of organizers is maturing.
Through this process, circumstance may be handing Democrats a long-term advantage in field organizing over Republicans. In 2007-2008, Democrats have far more organizer incubators than the GOP, and theirs are far better funded too. The overall amount of money raised by Republicans is far less than that raised by Democrats. And on the Republican side only Romney has had anything close to a robust field operation in all four early states. Furthermore, the 2003-2004 cycle also had a number of such incubators in the primaries for Democrats. That cycle, the GOP had no primary.
In other words, Democrats have enjoyed bumper crops of field organizers for two presidential cycles. The next big question is this: Will the nominee succeed in harvesting these crops and making the very best use of these organizers. Or will she or he put blockages and bureaucracy in the way of these young organizers, as happened in the 2004 General Election?
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
She's a goner.....
I was an assistant ambassador for Hillary Clinton in the Nevada caucuses. (Volunteered by my sister, the real ambassador for my precinct.) The article is quite right about organization. This kind of organizing is going to benefit whoever the Democratic nominee is in the fall. I saw many younsters with parents and grandparents registering to vote for the first time. I saw people, including myself, who were switching from a non-partisan status to joing the Dempcratic Party because we have people to vote FOR instead of wanting to vote AGAINST a person. I met long time Democratic party faithful. I met Culinary Worker Union members dismayed at their boss' decision to push their endorsement down their throats.
It was the kind of experience that lets you see where improvement is needed and where healing will begin when the party unites behind a candidate.
It was a good thing to participate in, and I sure have high hopes for the future. I might have had only one vote Saturday, but it felt wonderful being part of the process that will end with the Republicans being swept from office.
As a realist, I just don't think this type of orgainization will make much difference in the general election. Kerry had all the money needed for ground organization in all the states needed for winning the electoral vote. It didn't happen because media coverage will trump this stuff every time. The sad thing is we have just about narrowed our choices to our two most vulnerable candidates- perhaps the media had something to do with it, hummmph.
A case could be made that Clinton gave us 8 years of Bush because of his antics. His presidency had so much potential, but it rapidly petered away. Instead, we got media consolidation with the Telecommunications Bill, we got legislation for corporate accounting where stock options were like off the books- which has helped to create the financing scandals of the last few years, we got an unfair NAFTA agreement, and on and on. Once Hilary gets the nomination, the campaign will center on the issue of whether she will be able to keep the frank and beans in the cupboard or not for the next 4 years. Good grief. Should Obama win the nomination, well the republicans will just take a page out of the Clinton/ Nevada campaign strategy- with the phone messages. Oh wait, they created that page a long time ago, it has most likely been revised and sharpened by now. And what about his experience?
I give up, we've already been railroaded. Doh, lost another one to big-monied interests!
President Clinton and President Carter are the only 2 presidents that have ever left office and instead of sitting on their back sides traveled around their world. They have helped people in need. They have also built up Americas reputation around the world. It took President Clinton to go to President Bush I and ask him to join him and raise money for disasters in America (Kathrina) and around the world like tsunami relief.
Go give our DEMS presidents credit. Why are people so ready to bring down good people who have helped so many people in their time of need?
The union who backed Obama told their members no matter who you want to vote for, you must vote for Obama or stay home. Does that sound like Obama wanted every vote counted? There are several cases out there of people saying they are going to file voter intimation complaints against their union.
And even with the unfair advantage Obama had with the sites on the strips, the Clinton's still won 5 out of the 7 places on the strip.
5 out of 7 that is impressive. Did you see how excited both sides of voters in the casinos got on CNN yesterday?
Why can't people give the Clinton's credit?
They did it by working their tails off. They went to the casinos and met with the kitchen staff, house keepers, bell hops, loading dock workers etc.......
Give the voters creidt for casting their votes the way they wanted. Every American has that right.
And the casinos are the one that didn't want to give their workers time off to go vote in their neighbor's. So they allowed this unfair advantage for only certain people. I know I'd love to be able to vote where I work. Give me a break.
Actually, there is a groundswell in support for Hillary that cannot be discounted. All this ganging up on her is having the opposite effect and giving her an added boost from women voters who are a majority in Democratic primaries.
This is actually very sad because Hillary's positions are very corporatist and her foreign policy will be disastrously hawkish. Expect Jeb Bush in 2012, that is if America survives until then.
1/20/08
9:52pm
Alexandria, VA
So, what happened to the recount that was going to happen in New Hampshire? Any word on that yet?
Great piece..I met you at the Obama roundtable at the library here in Vegas..
Hope to have you on my radio show to talk about your piece and more..
WOW! Obama has really lost it. He can't wait even a day after his second lost to lie about President Clinton.
Most of the posters are entirely missing the point of this article. In fact, it seems that no matter what an article is actually about lately, the comments posted simply continue the war of words between Obama and Clinton supporters, and fail to respond to or respect the actual topic. Which was, by the way, ORGANIZATION.
The kind of operation Mr. Exley outlined is key. The more the relationship between field staff, regionals, and the highest levels of a campaign can be give-and-take, the more successful the campaign will be. It is especially important that feedback from field organizers be considered and appreciated; they are the ones on the ground in these communities, and they know what's working, and what isn't.
Whoever ends up as the nominee, they will be wise to continue their campaign in the vein of cooperation and accountability.
No Republican has ever beaten Hillary Clinton. Never. No smart woman at any walk of life, lets a man stop her. Any man. We fight for what we believe in. Think about how many things women have had to fight for their entire lives. And to have an experienced woman in the white house, regardless of your color, doesn't that make you proud.
The doors Hillary will open up for woman in America and around the world. The most powerful nation in the world, that every nation looks toward, will have a woman president. Never in our country's great history has there been a woman president. I am smiling already.
And the look on the Republican faces would be priceless. Even more priceless, the look on Bin Ladens face when he hears a woman is in the most powerful position on earth. Now that,is priceless.
any worker that votes for hillary must not be watching the economy...
Hang tough progressiv
we can pretty much guess the poor will get the crumbs from H., so we might just as well let the chips fall where they may.and return in 4 years to point some fingers--something our tame genteel version of politics is just too unseemly for the front runners.
I personally think 'corporate bag lady' would make for good a soundbite that wold run forever.
Maybe, EAT THE RICH.....E
Edwards-08
She BARELY won! She was ahead 20 points or more last month! HA! She only eeked out a measly 5% point lead. She didn't even win most of the caucus sites! HA! She would lose Nevada big time in the General Election!!!! She can't shake Obama! She BARELY beat him in NH. She barely beat him in Nevada. He will WHIP her in South Carolina..
I have no respect for the Clintons or for their continued infection of democratic processes.
Bill Clinton goes around to all the multinational corporations gathering millions of dollars for himself personally and for his trojan horse effort to re-take control of the country. With the hundreds of millions of dollars, we assume these corporations are assured that Hillary Clinton will take care of their interests. Just like Bill did.
Then they take their hundreds of millions of dollars and launch a two-year pr campaign to convince the country that Hillary should be president.
I'm not impressed. It's like watching any of those TV shows showing the same people who invented subprimes and made millions in the process holding 5 million birthday parties. It's obscene. The Clintons should ashamed of that money which represents nothing but corruption and graft.
We need serious campaign finance reform. No one should be able to afford to run two-year campaigns. Next they'll be 4-years. No one in D.C. will ever do anything except go around soliciting more bribes. Which is pretty much the way it is already.
This is not a good thing. The rich, the corrupt, the insiders benefit and the rest of us lose. The Democratic party once again will choose the person who collects the most corporate bribes, the biggest insider, then tell us that working people should cheer the selection. Not me.
The way Hillary Clinton campaign is organize is something every volunteer and supporters can be proud of. Whenever a group of volunteers visits a home of a registered voter, regardless if they support republican or other democratic candidates, they explain and answer every question a person(s) ask about platform of Hillary. A lot of registered republicans will be crossing party line to vote for a democratic candidate in general election.
I wish Obama stayed awhile and thanked his volunteers and supporters. What he had done wasn't nice at all. The only consolation supporters and volunteers get is a simple thank you, SHOW SOME RESPECT for their effort.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
