I hate to take exception with a substantive portion of this article but it misses several key factors.    Not the least of which is the decision to say: “….. if you like your plan/doctor, you can keep your plan/doctor – period”….., was not made AFTER the 2012 election, it was made way, way before.  President Obama and  crew were using this talking point in 2009 and 2010 (throughout term #1) and beyond – all the way to this summer.
The article seems to blame the absence of Axelrod, Gibbs and Plouffe for that fatal Obamacare talking point mistake.  This is factually incorrect.  David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs, David Plouffe and *others*, including those still there, were all present when that decision was made.
(The Hill) Former administration officials and Democratic operatives say President Obama is ill-served by his current White House staff and must reboot his second term team following the disastrous ObamaCare rollout.
First-term insiders argue the White House’s weakness was defined by a lack of preparedness, messaging blunders and failure to keep the president informed.
They say Obama’s team lacks depth after the departures of longtime advisers David Axelrod, David Plouffe, Robert Gibbs and Patrick Gaspard, and suggest new people must be brought on.
“You basically have [White House senior adviser Dan] Pfeiffer and [deputy chief of staff] Rob Nabors running the show politically, and that’s it,” one former administration official said.
The current White House appears to have “blinders” on, said another former senior official, adding “It’s been a weak spot for them during the second term. It’s not for a lack of advice, that’s for sure.” […]
The first former official singled out Pfeiffer for criticism in the handling of that blunder, which led to repeated apologies by Obama as the White House struggled with the story.
“The thing that I hold Pfeiffer accountable for is, ‘If you like your plan, you can keep it,’ ” the former official said.
“I don’t know where the breakdown occurred on that, but it’s Obama’s ‘no new taxes’ moment,” the official said, referring to the broken promise that is widely seen as having cost President George H.W. Bush a second term.
The official said it was “hard to be polite” about the rollout: “It still escapes me how they f—ed up this badly on the president’s and the Democratic Party’s biggest legacy item in 20 years.”   (read more)
This quote (above and emboldened) sounds like Robert Gibbs talking.   Which would explain why the articles’ author(s) excused his factual participation in the talking point during their outline.
Yes, Gibbs was a better propagandist than Jay Carney from the perspective of “spin” quantification.   Gibbs was more alinsky than Carney and used the ridicule weapon with greater effectiveness.    But it’s sad we quantify “better” from the perspective of who was more character flawed and confrontational.
David Axelrod was a legislative mapper.   As White House Term-1 Bag man, his role was to take leftist beliefs, leftist policy constructs, and roadmap it to legislation.    In that role he was far better than Denis McDonough.
McDonough is not as smart as Axelrod, but what he lacks in intellect he makes up for in brute hate.    McDonough is the bag-man who will intimidate opposition to defeat, Axelrod would outwit them.
And Plouffe is still around.   The White House will never let Plouffe get too far away.   It is Plouffe who knows how to manipulate the iphone millennial’s to thinking their dear Obama is their savior, Chicago Jesus.    Without Plouffe there would be no Hope and Change.
Once the decisions were made (Jarrett), Plouffe created the image of “hope”, and Axelrod began the construct of “change”.    That’s how they rolled.