Contrary to the general media reliance on poll-driven stories at the expense of stories on the role of organization, the New York Times has three stories posted today on (or partially on) the ground games Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are rolling out in Texas and Ohio.
Randy Kennedy reports from Texarkana:
In dozens of interviews across Texas over the last two weeks with campaign workers, volunteers and voters, a similar picture has consistently emerged from place to place: a well-prepared Clinton campaign has relied on longtime friendships and deep connections to the state’s party operation here, especially in the highly organized, heavily Hispanic cities of South Texas. At the same time, the Obama campaign nearly always feels smaller  sometimes even makeshift, despite its considerable money advantage  but it also seems remarkably self-generating, drawing hundreds of the first-time campaign volunteers that have fueled his success elsewhere.
Mayhill Fowler paints a different picture at the Huffington Post:
The turnout numbers for the first three days of early voting here may have something to do with the difference between Obama and Hillary’s campaigns. In South Texas, which is almost 90% Hispanic, the turnout has been half again to twice as high as in 2004. In Dallas, Houston and Austin and their suburbs, however, Democratic primary turnout has been from 400 to 800 percent of 2004. These state senate districts are widely believed to be Barack Country.
Yet Fowler also grumbles about Hillary’s Hispanic firewall:
This was the day I was trying to get a sense on the ground of the Hispanic vote. Hillary events here can have the atmosphere of cult goddess rites, so it was bracing to speak with people like the UT residents who may vote for her but retain a measure of perspective.
Fowler claims that the Clinton ground game has been lacking generally, with some events poorly planned. Yet her most recent post suggests the campaign is taking a toll on both ground games:
The difference between the Clinton and Obama Texas ground games going into the Tuesday Two-Step is this: the Clinton field organizers don’t know what they’re doing; the Obama field organizers know but they’re too tired to do it.
***
 The Clinton Campaign is spread thin, short on surrogates, short of the numbers of trained and experienced volunteers and paid staff that “the opponent,” as both Clintons consistently call Obama, has been able to field. The Obama team leaders brought in from previous contests are exhausted. Many of these battle-seasoned and mostly young people now have the responsibility of fending off a Clinton insurgency at the March 4th caucuses. (Why this is a daunting task will be the subject of my Monday report.) If it weren’t for the infusion of new troops, primarily but not exclusively Tejanos for Clinton and African-Americans for Obama, the campaigns would more noticeably be faltering. But the ominous signs of burn-out are there.
The NYT report from Andrew Jacobs in Ohio, where Clinton is supposedly faring better in the polls, has a bleaker account of her ground game.  Clinton phone-bankers were getting frequent rejections, while Obama phone-bankers had the opposite problem — working “their way through a list of people who were eager to volunteer but had been waiting days for an assignment.” Nevertheless, Jacobs reports high enthusiasm levels are high in both camps.ÂÂ
Some of the patterns from past contests are emerging in Ohio as well. The Clinton camp is more accessible to the press, the Obama camp has succeeded in harnessing volunteers online before officially arriving in the state, and so on. And Obama is greatly outspending Clinton on advertising and GOTV efforts, as has increasingly been the case.
The Ohio race also pits Paul Tewes, who played a big role in Obama’s Iowa caucus campaign, against the unfortunately named Robby Mook, who led Hillary Clinton’s hard-fought popular vote win in Nevada. Beverly Davis, writing at the HuffPo, quotes an Obama operative as saying Ohio has their biggest ground game besides Texas. The Obama camp apparently planned to knock on a million doors this past weekend.
It is a useful reminder that while the post-Super Tuesday contests were so compressed that paid and free media exposure became increasingly important, the pause before Texas and Ohio has been anything but restful for the throngs of staffers and volunteers in these two cruicial contests.
Nice post, Karl. I’m glad you’ve spent the time going over the organizational aspcts of the campaigns.
Yeah, man. Good stuff.
Hillary is a cult-goddess? Oh. I see . . . it’s like Catholics to Hagee: Obama’s a true religion.
There’s always this thing where Hispanics love Hillary, but I don’t see how that makes any intuitive sense really. I think they really a lot don’t like Obama. Tejanos for Clinton and African-Americans for Obama. How do Tuesday’s exit polls not nail down the story that Hispanics are not in the cult pf the hopeychangey? I think that will be maybe the biggest import of what happens Tuesday. It’s a way bigger story than the Obama’s Jewish Problem story anyway, at least for the general.
Hillary events here can have the atmosphere of cult goddess rites…
Or maybe they prefer the Madonna to the Messiah? I wonder if I can rig a grilled cheese sandwich with Hillary’s face on it…
Anecdotal supplement: all the campaigns are urban and media phenomena. Out here in the hinterlands, the only visible campaigning other than for local issues is the still-enthusiastic geeks waving Ron Paul signs. I have received one (1) mail flyer, a very expensive slick from Hillary!, and one (1) phone call, from a robot so overstretched it was a full minute before the pitch for Obama came.
Regards,
Ric
I was checking the weather on one of the local channels this morning as I was getting dressed and a BO commercial came on. And he’s saying that he’s the only candidate in the race who voted not to go into Iraq in the first place and that this makes him the only one you can trust on national security. WTF Over? How does a pacifistic streak so broad that you are not in favor of using your military in order to deal with a rogue state and it’s crazy, unstable, dictator make you a trustworthy actor in the area of national security. But I’d imagine that the sheep are lapping it up. This campaign is damned near Orwellian.
ilajgsgsgsgsgsgsgagsgags;sldkkkkkkkkkkkkggggggggggasdfkjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjewlfarakkkkksaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaannnnnnnnllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Wha? Oh, sorry. You said the word “Obama.” I’m a big fan of his and I must have swooned. Happens to me a lot when anybody talks about Great Leader and his 5 Year Plan. Juche, out.
Sticky B: Not too mention the fact that Barry O wasn’t even in the Senate at the time. He operates with the same set of rules as my office condo: If you don’t vote, then it’s a no vote. Jest oh so slightly disengenuous.
I think in the all the blogosphere, you are the best reviewer, Karl.
Great job.
Don’t care, ain’t votin’ for either one of them monkeys.
Thanks, Al.
Clean-up on Aisle 7, please. We need some spaces in Al’s gurgle so other shoppers can get through.
Once again the stories contradict each other. Most likely due to the differing biases of the reporters and editors.
One thing I don’t get is the “knocking on doors” thing. I find that anyone from a campaign, a church group or salesmen knocking on my door to be extremely annoying. Even more than the telemarketers. This gets people to vote for someone? Must be just me.
No, it’s not just you, geoffb. I frankly don’t understand how people can be swayed at all by phone calls, commercials, signs, buttons, or bumpstickers.
It is frightning how damn little the average voter pays attention to a candidate’s record and governing philosophy.
Randy? That’s an adjective I never expected to see modifying the name “Kennedy.”
This campaign is mostly just about this campaign. Bored now. For real. So. Who’s Barack going to pick for his running mate?
To shore-up the weak demographics, Barry better pick someone with a name like Joe Six-pack O’Shaunesteinez.
For balance, I nominate Froront Hooscrazy Ebola.
I want to make sure the caucuses are set up fairly. In Washington State they were very unorganized with standing room only. Make sure that the Texas caucus is also set up to provide Seniors and physically challenged access. They are unable to stand in lines and wait. But have every right to attend a caucus.