Clinton's Women

Former LG candidate Andy McGuire is on board with Hillary Clinton.  So is somehow-related former state chair and Congressional candidate Sheila Riggs.  Obviously Bonnie Campbell is on board.  Also involved is Kim Pieper, the campaign manager for Selden Spencer and former finance director for Mike Blouin’s gubernatorial campaign.

While it jumps out at me that Clinton seems to be running a Y chromosome-free campaign here, after some consideration (on a blog?  wtf?) it is most likely a combination of self-selection and me being a man.  Vilsack’s high-level staff, for example, is really dude-heavy – TPM lists one female and eleven males.  That’s pretty typical – Edwards has three females and thirteen males, and Obama has six and fifteen.  Hillary is actually the most gender-balanced nationally, with somewhere between eleven and thirteen females out of twenty-three total.  These lists aren’t comprehensive or 100% accurate, but they do give a broad view on things.  I imagine that Hillary will end up having a pretty well-balanced staff in Iowa too once she starts staffing up for real.

And what is up with all these other guys?  Can’t find any chicks to hire for senior staff?

About the Author(s)

Drew Miller

  • McGuire went with Clinton

    Hmm..after hosting Elizabeth Edwards last July. 

    She also liked Bayh.  I wonder how many Bayh supporters are jumping to the Clinton camp?

  • I have no idea why these women are supporting HRC

    As a person with two X chromosomes myself, this seems like lunacy. I don’t think HRC is a compelling candidate in any sense. Northeastern senator with poor communication skills and a talent for “triangulation” that pisses off the Dem base without winning over Republicans. Why would we want that?

    The Campbells and the Clintons go way back, though. In 1992 I think Ed Campbell was just about the only prominent Iowa Democrat not to support Harkin.

  • Kim Pieper

    I don’t care what you say, if she has hired Kim Pieper then she is doing affirmative action for women.  She got paid $5000 a month to lose a Democratic-leaning district by 16 points in a wave election.  If Hillary hires her she can forget about getting support from anyone who liked Spencer.

    • Kim Pieper talented

      If Hillary Clinton hires Kim Pieper for her presidential exploratory campaign, it will be a loss to the other presidential candidates.  Pieper is politically smart, an experienced field organizer and an accomplished campaign fundraiser.  She received her training from some of the best in Iowa Democratic politics – Jeff Link, Sharon Haselhoff and Matt Paul.

      Selden Spencer ran a terrific campaign for the 4th district congressional seat.  But nonetheless he was handicapped due to a late start(03/15/06), not having run for office before and having limited political experience.  He just ran because he knew the country was on the wrong track, something needed to be done and no one was stepping forward to challenge Mr. Latham.

      Democrats in the 4th CD were fortunate when Dr. Spencer “jumped in” and took on the personal sacrifices required to run a last-minute race.  Spencer also had the good luck to find a campaign manager at a late date(06/15/06) with the experience, guts and talent of Kim Pieper.  My thanks to both of them for the staff they put together, for the money they raised and for the inspiration Selden Spencer gave to us partisans in the district. 

      Now we need to build on the work done in the 2006 campaign and get Selden Spencer elected to Congress in 2008. 

       

    • Democratic-leaning district?

      Sorry, no, you are way off base. The 4th is not Democratic-leaning, and it’s hard to knock off an incumbent who’s been on the appropriations committee while in the majority party.

      I gave money but have no knowledge of how well the Spencer campaign did or whether Kim Pieper or anyone else is talented. I wouldn’t assume she is not good just because of Spencer’s performance.

      • It is dem-leaning

        But just barely.  It has a PVI of +0.4.  By no means is it an easy pick up, but it did only go 51% for Bush in 2004.  The circumstances of Spencer’s entrance into the race made things tough for him, not to mention the focus of the DCCC on the IA-01 and IA-03, plus the last minute attention on IA-02.

        • hard to knock off an appropriator

          Latham does absolutely nothing to draw attention to himself. Has he ever championed a cause or sponsored a bill? I remember in 2004 the Register asked him to give an example of a time he voted against the Republican leadership, and he couldn’t think of one. Keeps his head down and does what he’s told, and brings home the pork.

          It is going to be really hard to win that district given Latham’s profile. He doesn’t particularly offend anyone, and he’s done a lot of favors for a lot of people.

          • Latham

            Yeah, I agree that Latham is harder than average to knock off, just because he never fucking says anything or makes any kind of waves.  He just relies on the rural nature of the district and his seed company (run by the non-morons in his family) to carry his ass on election day.  I do agree that 16% is pretty bad, though.

    • P-Diddy

      I don’t know if she is officially hired – all I have heard is that she is “on board,” whatever that means.

  • Also Important to Note

    More women on the campaign means a higher possibility of foxy ladies.  Noumsayin?

Comments