For all the talk about how bad Rudy Giuliani's campaign was (and it was bad) Hillary Clinton's has been worse. Rudy had a strategy - a bad one - and followed it to defeat.
Clinton, however, has had a few strategies. Okay, she banked on having it wrapped up by February 5, but when it became clear that this wasn't going to happen she floundered until she came up with a new strategy - focus on Texas & Ohio. {She might have had a chance in Wisconsin if she'd paid any attention there, but it looks like she'll lose again.}
So she has her new strategy, only nobody in her team seems to have read the rules about how the Texas primary works. That's gross mismanagement. Meanwhile, Obama is in another class when it comes to managing his campaign.
"While they were busy 'discovering' the rules, however, the Obama campaign had people on the ground in Texas explaining the system, organizing precincts, and making Powerpoints.
… "In this respect, Texas is simply a microcosm of the larger campaign dynamics. In fact, if the Clinton campaign were a corporation, the shareholders would have pretty good grounds for a derivative suit for Texas alone."
