by publius
The Politico reported earlier today that the McCain campaign is essentially replacing Rick Davis, its current campaign manager, with Steve Schmidt. Not exactly where you want to be in early July.
This is big news for several reasons, but one particularly important reason is that it’s seemingly a repudiation of Rick Davis’s bold “decentralization” strategy – i.e., it vindicates John Weaver. In fact, it seems that the very problems that McCain is experiencing (lack of field operation, no message, etc.) are precisely the types of problems you might expect from a radically decentralized campaign.
You can get the full background on Davis’s grand plans in Jason Zengerle’s wonderful “McCain-land” piece. The nickel version is that McCain-land has had at least two major factions – one loyal to Rick Davis, and one loyal to fellow long-time McCain devotee John Weaver (who was campaign manager before the shakeup in 2007). One point of contention is that Davis wanted to institute a decentralized campaign composed of various regional chairs. (In other words, the polar opposite of Bush-Cheney’s highly-unsuccessful and amateur 2004 operation, which was rigidly top-down. Yes, that’s sarcastic.) Long story short – Davis got the nod last year after Weaver departed and then proceeded to implement his decentralization plans.
Today, though, the McCain campaign has lots of problems – no consistent message, uneven fundraising (to put it gently), and, in particular, a lack of a strong field operation. What’s interesting is that these problems seem to stem directly from the lack of a strong central command, Mehlman-style (which is how I order my In-N-Out burgers when in LA).
For one, it’s easy to see how message control and coordination could be a problem with 10 essentially independent regional campaigns. Even if the general day-to-day talking points are reliably coming from on high (and there’s not much sense that they are – thus the need for Schmidt), there are still a lot of coordination costs involved.
Second, this type of structure is bound to have a lot of agency costs – and many of McCain’s problems stem from relying too hard on excessively-removed agents. For instance, it’s not clear to me that reporting to an assistant to the regional manager creates the same urgency as reporting to national headquarters.
But the bigger agency problem in a decentralized campaign is that it’s harder to make sure everyone is doing their job. My understanding is that the regional managers all report to Davis. That, in turn, requires a lot of Davis. In addition to his regular strategy duties, he needs to be looking closely to see if these decentralized organizations are raising enough money, building enough organization, and so on. It’s pretty clear they’re not though.
At first glance, it’s easy to mistake the Obama and Bush 2004 operations for “decentralized” campaigns. They are grass-roots campaigns to be sure, but that’s different from being decentralized. For instance, think about Wikipedia. Its success depends on grass-roots volunteers, but it’s not necessarily decentralized. There’s a centralized code, creating a centralized website, that enables and empowers grass-roots volunteers. But there’s not 10 different Wikipedias – one for the Midwest, one for Florida, etc.
In short, Rick Davis’s grand idea just seems pretty crappy. And it’s better for McCain to get rid of it now.
I’ll close with John Weaver’s priceless quote, which pretty much says it all:
"At the end of the day, this is a required action," he said. "They couldn't continue to go on without a field organization and without the basic architecture of a traditional campaign. . . . There's a requirement for basic competence, and that's what this change says."
Ouch.
UPDATE: Ambinder (who seems to have good McCain sources) confirms:
Sources close to John McCain's campaign say that Steve Schmidt has been given the authority to "completely" overhaul the campaign's political department and is likely to abandon the regional campaign manager structure that Rick Davis set up.
Ouch.
i don't understand how McCain's military service didn't prepare him for this.
Posted by: cleek | July 02, 2008 at 04:17 PM
In regards to McSame's campaign - - I know I'm paranoid, but it seems exceedingly curious to me that McSame decides to take a trip to Colombia which has various political writers quizzically scratching there heads as to its purpose (See Dan Balz' article in The Washington Post today), and it just happens that there is a rescue of hostages by Colombian forces - - including three Americans - - from a terrorist group. Do you think it may turn out that the old guy will now just happen to appear on the network and cable news programs discussing the War on Terror, how America is winning, how we need the steady hand of a proven warrior to keep up progress, etc. in the context of stories on the rescue which would normally have very little connection, in the mind of Americans, to the presidential campaign? How very Rovian - - free air time, on the Republican terroism scare topic. It's a bloody miracle of fortuitous timing, ain't it?
Posted by: RoaringPurpleEagle | July 02, 2008 at 04:21 PM
it is odd timing, but i wanted to hold off before weighing in on that. the thing about that is it would backfire many times over if it could be shown to be coordinated. so, i'll hold off judgment on that for the time being.
Posted by: publius | July 02, 2008 at 04:24 PM
the thing about that is it would backfire many times over if it could be shown to be coordinated.
oh, i doubt that. the press would take it as a sure sign of his McManly TakeChargeitude (which he developed during those long nights in Vietnam).
Posted by: cleek | July 02, 2008 at 04:28 PM
It would also be likely to backfire because of this recent entry from the IOKIYAR file:
Posted by: hilzoy | July 02, 2008 at 04:32 PM
Mehlman-style (which is how I order my In-N-Out burgers when in LA)
Animal Style!!!!
Obi-Wan has taught you well...
Posted by: Eric Martin | July 02, 2008 at 04:39 PM
Ari Berman's http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080714/berman>excellent article in the current Nation tells a very interesting story about McCain's close an corrupt intermingling of a fake "Reform Institute", his re-election committee, and Davis's lobbying firm, all of which shared offices, personnel, and payrolls. See if you can guess which nonprofit "institute" got soaked to fatten Davis's wallet.
In a better world, Davis would be stepping down because the media were going to ask awkward questions about issues raised in Berman's article. Of course, we all know that's not true, and it must be about organizational issues, as Publius discusses.
Note also that while the Berman article covers some old ground, it asks questions I'm not even seeing in the leftwing blogs. We all think this stuff is old news and well known, but if we want even a slim chance of McCain's actual record getting some traction in the media, we're going to have to start beating the drums ourselves. Making fun of McCain's gaffes, like his "I never said I didn't know economics" statement today, is fun, but it has little power to change anyone's perception of the man.
Posted by: Warren Terra | July 02, 2008 at 04:59 PM
The really odd thing about the timing is that it puts him out of the country on the Fourth of July.
For a followup, his new campaign chief will direct the candidate to stop kissing babies.
Posted by: Model 62 | July 02, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Mehlman-style (which is how I order my In-N-Out burgers when in LA).
Do you get the santorum back, or on the side?
Posted by: Dr Paisley | July 03, 2008 at 12:05 AM
jeez - i just realized that the mehlman comment could be taken in an offensive way. i actually wasn't even remotely thinking along those lines. i typed the words mehlman-style, which reminded me of "animal style" burgers at In-N-Out, which I'll be getting soon in LA because I'm going there over the 4th.
it's hard to say how completely innocent that reference was intended to be ( i had actually forgotten all about the mehlman rumors). it was a strained attempt at humor.
but if people think it's offesnive, i'll delete.
Posted by: publius | July 03, 2008 at 12:13 AM
"but if people think it's offesnive, i'll delete."
Everyone, clap your hands, to save publius from deleting himself!
Posted by: Gary Hussein Farber | July 03, 2008 at 12:39 AM
Clap if you believe in publius! Clap harder!
Posted by: hilzoy | July 03, 2008 at 12:41 AM
ha - in a paranoid state, i asked a friend who reconfirmed i was quote "being crazy" for thinking of deleting.
by the way, animal style in-n-out burgers are my favorite fast food. i rarely eat fast food burgers anymore, but i always get one when on the west coast.
Posted by: publius | July 03, 2008 at 01:30 AM
For those of us who have never been to Californ-i-aaay, what is an animal style in-n-out burger?
Posted by: ThirdGorchBro | July 03, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Animal Style. A burger fried in mustard with extra pickles and extra sauce.
Animal Style fries = fries + cheese + burger sauce + grilled onions.
Posted by: Model 62 | July 03, 2008 at 10:31 AM
That looks pretty delicious. Too bad that chain isn't in Houston (not that we don't have plenty of good burger joints anyway).
Posted by: ThirdGorchBro | July 03, 2008 at 11:41 AM
dry creek baby - it's the best i've had in houston
Posted by: publius | July 03, 2008 at 11:45 AM