Correct The Record Friday December 12, 2014 Afternoon Roundup

From:burns.strider@americanbridge.org To: CTRFriendsFamily@americanbridge.org Date: 2014-12-12 17:06 Subject: Correct The Record Friday December 12, 2014 Afternoon Roundup

*​**Correct The Record Friday December 12, 2014 Afternoon Roundup:* *Tweets:* *Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@HillaryClinton <https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton> held WH Conference on Child Care to address the need for safe, affordable child care #HRC365 <https://twitter.com/hashtag/HRC365?src=hash> http://clinton3.nara.gov/WH/New/Childcare/about.html … <http://t.co/tvG2l3t0RI> [12/12/14, 12:29 p.m. EST <https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/543457718091411456>] *Headlines:* *MSNBC: “Democrats eager to help Republicans – tear each other apart” <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/democrats-eager-help-republicans-tear-each-other-apart>* “American Bridge’s nearly 200 page new research book, dubbed a ‘Scouting Report’ of the 2016 Republican presidential field, is a one-stop shop for controversial quotes, past scandals, questionable business ties and embarrassing photos of likely GOP presidential candidates (and some unlikely ones).” *New York Times: First Draft: “Insiders Say Clinton’s Speeches Are No Hint to Her ’16 Timeline” <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2014/12/12/?entry=6989>* “People close to Mrs. Clinton are brushing off the oft-repeated assumption in the news media that a few paid speeches she is scheduled to deliver… are indications that she will wait until at least the spring to announce whether she will seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.” *Bloomberg: Al Hunt: “Yes, Virginia, There Is a Democratic Front-Runner” <http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-12/virginia-reel-kaine-picks-clinton-over-webb>* “Senator Tim Kaine is staying with his embrace of Hillary Clinton for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, even though his fellow Virginia Democrat Jim Webb looks like he will run too.” *Washington Post blog: The Fix: “Hillary Clinton decided to postpone her presidential announcement. She might want to reconsider.” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/12/12/hillary-clinton-decided-to-postpone-her-presidential-announcement-she-might-want-to-reconsider/>* “The Warren buzz has to make some longtime Hillary allies a little skittish, reminding them of another liberal firebrand senator six years ago.” *The Hill blog: Ballot Box: “Obama alums: We're Ready for Warren” <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/226918-obama-campaign-alums-urge-warren-to-run>* “More than 300 former Obama campaign staffers have signed a letter urging Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to run for president, part of a growing effort to get the liberal champion to run.” *Associated Press: “Former Obama Aides Urging Warren Run For President” <http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WARREN_2016?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>* “Hillary Rodham Clinton has yet to announce a presidential campaign but has drawn support from a number of top former Obama aides.” *CNBC: “Bill Richardson won't support Hillary, yet” <http://www.cnbc.com/id/102263834#.>* “Bill Richardson told CNBC's ‘Squawk Box’ on Friday he's not ready to endorse Hillary Clinton should she seek the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.” *Articles:* *MSNBC: “Democrats eager to help Republicans – tear each other apart” <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/democrats-eager-help-republicans-tear-each-other-apart>* By Alex Seitz-Wald December 12, 2014, 9:56 a.m. EST Democratic super PACs generally don’t try to help out Republicans. And that’s especially true for Democratic groups whose entire purpose on this planet is to dig up dirt on their opponents, stalk them with video trackers and try to embarrass the GOP on a daily basis. And yet, that’s exactly what the latest research project from the Democratic opposition research group American Bridge may do – though it will be to help Republicans more effectively tear each other apart. American Bridge’s nearly 200 page new research book, dubbed a “Scouting Report” of the 2016 Republican presidential field, is a one-stop shop for controversial quotes, past scandals, questionable business ties and embarrassing photos of likely GOP presidential candidates (and some unlikely ones). The book, which includes 60 pages of endnotes, is billed as a “media guide” and says its intended audience is “anyone involved in politics,” according to Democratic strategist Paul Begala, who wrote the forward. And that includes the Republicans running for president themselves, according to several people involved in the production of the book, who acknowledged that one goal is to help plant information Republicans might use against each other in what’s expected to be a crowded 2016 GOP primary field. “The beauty of this book is that anyone involved in politics can find a use for it. It can be used as a reference guide for the press or as a playbook for political operatives. And if prospective GOP candidates find it useful to beat the hell out of one another, well, praise the Lord and pass the potato salad,” American Bridge President Brad Woodhouse told msnbc. Indeed, while the book focuses on lines of attacks you might expect from a Democratic group, it also dwells at length on “problems with the base” several candidates might have. And while rumor has it the best stuff has been left out and saved for later, there’s still plenty that might cause discomfort for anyone about enter a GOP primary. For instance, the book unearths a letter Texas Gov. Rick Perry wrote to then-first lady Hillary Clinton in 1993, praising her ill-fated project to overhaul the American health care system. The then-Texas agriculture commissioner’s letter opens: “Dear Mrs. Clinton: I think your efforts in trying to reform the nation’s health care system are most commendable.” And it concludes: “Your efforts are worthy … Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any assistance.” American Bridge, which has a subsidiary dedicated to promoting and defending Clinton, probably has no problem with Perry reaching out to the former first lady. But former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and the rest of the potential Republican field might. Jon Huntsman’s letters to President Obama became a liability for him during the 2012 campaign. But the other potential 2016 GOP candidates may have their own “problems with the base.” The research book, for instance, digs up a quote of Bush’s saying the GOP needs to get over it’s “nostalgia” for conservative icon Ronald Reagan, and it raises questions about Bush’s ties to a health care company that supports Obamacare. For Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who ran in 2000, and is reportedly laying the groundwork for another run in 2016, the Democratic group points to Kasich’s “deciding vote” in the House to pass the 1994 assault weapons ban. In fact, the NRA endorsed Kasich’s Democratic opponent in 2010. Beyond the conservative blasphemies, there are plenty of issues that could make it into 30-second attack ads regardless of political ideology, from Bush’s work for Lehman Brothers to Christie apparently pulling strings to get out of traffic tickets. And by putting it out there now, American Bridge is hoping Republicans do some of the dirty work for them against whoever emerges as the Republican nominee. After all, it was Newt Gingrich who first went after Mitt Romney for his tenure at the private equity firm Bain Capital in 2012. The former House speaker accused Romney of “looting” companies, while a pro-Gingrich super PAC spent millions to produce and promote a 28-minute documentary titled “When Mitt Romney Came to Town” that portrayed Romney as a heartless corporate raider. And long before Harry Reid made hay of Romney’s tax returns, Perry and Ron Paul were demanding Romney release more information about his finances. Opposition research books – the compiled binders of campaigns’ dirt-digging – are usually held confidential and protected like a state secrets, sometimes even long after the end of a campaign. But by making its opposition research public now, Democrats can hope some of it gets in the bloodstream early and for free. There may be no better way to define a candidate early ahead of a general election than by getting their primary opponents to do it for you. *New York Times: First Draft: “Insiders Say Clinton’s Speeches Are No Hint to Her ’16 Timeline” <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2014/12/12/?entry=6989>* By Amy Chozick December 12, 2014, 11:13 a.m. EST Hillary Rodham Clinton’s timeline to declare whether she will run for president rests on many factors. Keeping her commitment to the New Jersey chapter of the American Camp Association is probably not one of them. Indeed, people close to Mrs. Clinton are brushing off the oft-repeated assumption in the news media that a few paid speeches she is scheduled to deliver — at a “global perspectives” gathering in Canada in late January, at a women’s conference in Silicon Valley in February and to summer camp professionals in Atlantic City in March — are indications that she will wait until at least the spring to announce whether she will seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2016. The Harry Walker Agency, which arranges Mrs. Clinton’s paid speeches (at around $250,000 a pop) will continue to book speeches as long as it can, the people close to her said. She can always cancel. If nothing else, Mrs. Clinton’s pared-down paid speech schedule (she delivered them almost weekly before her book tour this summer) confirms aides’ insistence that she has not made up her mind about running. Mrs. Clinton’s paid speeches have been criticized, especially those she has given to hedge funds and Wall Street banks. But so far, the coming addresses are mostly aligned with her broader charitable work of advancing women and girls and early childhood development. Although the political optics of accepting money to speak while running for president may be tricky, there’s no legal reason that presidential candidates must stop delivering paid speeches once they’ve formed an exploratory committee, said Kenneth A. Gross, who leads the political law practice at Skadden Arps. “This may be the power of nonincumbency in that she is unbridled in her ability to accept speaking engagements and money for them,” he said. *Bloomberg: Al Hunt: “Yes, Virginia, There Is a Democratic Front-Runner” <http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-12/virginia-reel-kaine-picks-clinton-over-webb>* By Albert R. Hunt December 12, 2014, 11:05 a.m. EST Senator Tim Kaine is staying with his embrace of Hillary Clinton for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, even though his fellow Virginia Democrat Jim Webb looks like he will run too. "I am going to stick with Hillary," Kaine, also a former governor of Virginia, said in an interview for Friday's "Charlie Rose" PBS program. He said he believes the former secretary of state is "the best qualified person to be a great president." Many Democratic politicians are jumping on the Hillary bandwagon, but Kaine is a particularly interesting example for two reasons. One, he was an important supporter of Barack Obama in 2008 when the Illinois senator defeated Clinton for the nomination. He was on the final short-list of possible Obama running mates that summer. Second, Webb was Kaine's predecessor in the Senate; Kaine won the seat in 2012 when Webb retired. Last month, Webb launched an exploratory committee to consider running for the Democratic presidential nomination. Clinton, if she runs, would be a prohibitive favorite to get the nod, though some Democrats, including a few Clintonites, believe Webb could score political points against her. Webb is an economic populist, critical of Wall Street; she has close Wall Street ties. Webb also is a decorated Marine combat officer who is much more skeptical than Clinton about foreign interventions. Kaine was optimistic that Ms. Clinton would run: "I don't have any inside intelligence, but my intuition says yes." The full interview can be seen tonight on PBS and will later be rebroadcast on Bloomberg Television. *Washington Post blog: The Fix: “Hillary Clinton decided to postpone her presidential announcement. She might want to reconsider.” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/12/12/hillary-clinton-decided-to-postpone-her-presidential-announcement-she-might-want-to-reconsider/>* By Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake December 12, 2014, 12:40 p.m. EST Hillary Clinton, after much debate within her inner circle, appears to have put off formally entering the 2016 presidential race until the spring of 2015. "Hillary Rodham Clinton is considering the nitty-gritty details of how and when to organize a presidential campaign amid signs that she will postpone making her shadow campaign official until later in 2015 than expected, according to advisers and Democratic strategists," wrote WaPo's Anne Gearan and Matea Gold this week. That jibes with plenty of other reporting on the matter and seems as close to a consensus opinion as you will get when it comes to the remarkably opaque decision-making process of the former Secretary of State. While there are plenty of reasons that argue in favor of waiting -- legal ones in terms of how she incorporates (or doesn't) the various outside groups that have blossomed in support of her over the past few years, political ones about looking less, well, political for as long as possible -- there's also a big reason why she should at least consider announcing sooner rather than later. And it's named Elizabeth Warren. Or, at least, the energy and passion among liberals that is, at the moment, channeled through Warren. An attempt to draft the Massachusetts Senator launched formally this week and her stern opposition to the CRomnibus bill because of a provision that would ease derivative trading by corporations drew scads of national coverage. That's not to say Warren is running or even thinking about it at the moment. But, let's say the next three months play out like the last three months. The dominant narrative remains that Clinton is the heavy favorite to be the Democratic nominee. But that storyline is accompanied by another one -- which is that the heart of the Democratic party really wants Warren. And, as that storyline continues, more and more people hear about it; an actual movement develops, all fueled by the anti Wall Street populism that Warren embodies. If Clinton waits until April, let's say, to announce, it's uniquely possible that the populist/draft Warren movement in the party has grown strong enough that it has forced the Massachusetts Senator to reconsider her past denials of interest in the race. And, if Warren runs, it's a totally different race for Clinton than if she doesn't. (To be clear, Clinton would be a favorite over Warren. But not a huge one.) So, why not get in earlier -- before the Warren movement gets any more energy or excitement behind it? Plus, the sooner she gets in, the sooner Clinton can start raising the money and building the campaign infrastructures that should be her biggest advantage in the race. And, what if she used her formal campaign announcement to deliver a message on income inequality -- sending a message about how central that would be to her candidacy in 2016? In short: Make it as hard as humanly possible for Warren to reconsider or for the movement trying to get her to reconsider to gain steam. Be the prime mover. Act and make Warren, and everyone else, react. Below are our rankings of the six people either running, talking about running or being talked about as potential runners for 2016 for the Democratic nomination. The candidate ranked number one -- let's not pretend here: it's Clinton -- is considered the most likely nominee. 6. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders: Sanders is not a Democrat -- he;s a Socialist -- and he's not going to win the Democratic nomination for president. Yet, he still appears on this list, because there's a decent chance he will run. And that's more than we can say for a lot of folks. For now, Sanders is the most likely outlet for liberals who think Clinton is too closely allied with Wall Street. But, the idea that a guy who calls himself a "socialist" is going to gain real traction in this race is hard to believe. 5. Former Virginia senator Jim Webb: The one-term senator is the first real entrant in the 2016 presidential race. And there won't be any more surprising candidate. That's because Webb retired from the Senate after one term and never seemed to enjoy the political process very much -- especially the campaigning part. The fact that this is the guy some are holding up as a more liberal alternative to Clinton just doesn't really make sense. But he is a former senator and Navy secretary, so he's got some national profile. 4. Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley: A few years ago, O'Malley would have been seen as Clinton's biggest obstacle. He's a capable politician, a two-term governor and has national experience as Democratic Governors Association chairman. But O'Malley's two terms as governor ended on a low note. His approval rating dropped to 41 percent (in a blue state), and his lieutenant governor lost in the most shocking upset of the 2014 election. O'Malley seems one of the most likely big-name politicians to run, but he's hardly looking strong these days. 3. Vice President Biden: He's a two-term Vice President of the United States, a longtime senator, and he wants to run for president. Yet almost nobody thinks Biden can give Clinton a run for her money. The reason? He's a little too "Uncle Joe" and not really "President Biden." We keep going back to it, but we think it's illustrative: A Quinnipiac University poll last year showed 65 percent of Americans didn't think Biden would make a good president. And only a bare majority of Democrats (51 percent) said that he would. Biden needs to show a more presidential side before he has a shot. 2. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren: Warren is the the beating heart of the Democratic base. She is also the only person on the list other than Clinton with a track record of raising lots (and lots) of money. (Warren raised $42 million in her 2012 victory over then Sen. Scott Brown.) Combine those two factors and you see why the possibility -- albeit it slim -- chance of a Warren presidential bid intrigues so many people. She still is giving no indication she wants to run. But, if ever that changes, Warren is a bad matchup for Clinton and could give the former Secretary of State real problems. 1. Hillary Clinton: The Warren buzz has to make some longtime Hillary allies a little skittish, reminding them of another liberal firebrand senator six years ago. Given that experience, however, Clinton (and her people) should be more ready in the unlikely event Warren does reverse course and run. Clinton, over the past year, has begun to talk much more about income inequality -- a clear rhetorical bow in Warren's direction and a subtle attempt to co-opt the energy forming behind the Massachusetts Senator. Assuming Warren stays out, Clinton starts the primary further ahead than any non-incumbent in modern history. *The Hill blog: Ballot Box: “Obama alums: We're Ready for Warren” <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/226918-obama-campaign-alums-urge-warren-to-run>* By Peter Sullivan December 12, 2014, 8:38 a.m. EST More than 300 former Obama campaign staffers have signed a letter urging Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to run for president, part of a growing effort to get the liberal champion to run. The letter, posted Friday on Ready for Warren's website, cites President Obama's come-from-behind victory over Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primary, as some Democrats look for a challenger to Clinton once again. "We believed in an unlikely candidate who no one thought had a chance," the letter states. "We worked for him — and against all odds, we won in Iowa. We organized like no campaign had organized before — and won the Democratic primary." "We know that the improbable is far from impossible," it adds. The signers include Rajeev Chopra, Obama's chief information officer in both campaigns; Stephen Geer, director of online fundraising in 2008; and Catherine Bracy, director of the tech field office in San Francisco in 2012. However, many of the more prominent Obama campaign names have lined up with the Clinton campaign-in-waiting. Jim Messina, Obama's 2012 campaign manager, signed on this year as co-chairman of the pro-Clinton super PAC Priorities USA. John Podesta, currently an advisor to Obama, is expected to leave the White House soon ahead of possibly chairing a Clinton campaign. Ready for Hillary has signed on 270 Strategies, the firm of top Obama campaign aides Mitch Stewart and Jeremy Bird. The letter is far from the only effort urging Warren to run. Liberal groups, including MoveOn.org and Democracy for America, this week began campaigns to convince Warren to enter the race. Warren has repeatedly said that she is not running, and has given few indications that she is preparing to jump in. There are still some on the left who argue Clinton is not strong enough on fighting income inequality and too close to Wall Street. "Rising income inequality is the challenge of our times," the former Obama staffers' letter states. "And we want someone who will stand up for working families and take on the Wall Street banks and special interests that took down our economy." *Associated Press: “Former Obama Aides Urging Warren Run For President” <http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WARREN_2016?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>* By Ken Thomas December 12, 2014, 11:25 a.m. EST More than 300 former campaign staffers and organizers for President Barack Obama have signed on to a letter urging Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren to run for president in 2016. It's the latest effort to nudge Warren into the race. The ex-Obama staffers say they want someone who will "stand up for working families and take on the Wall Street banks and special interests." Hillary Rodham Clinton has yet to announce a presidential campaign but has drawn support from a number of top former Obama aides. But the letter from field organizers and others show the interest in a Warren campaign even though she says she's not running. MoveOn.org announced this week that it was starting a draft Warren campaign and promoting Warren in early presidential states Iowa and New Hampshire. *CNBC: “Bill Richardson won't support Hillary, yet” <http://www.cnbc.com/id/102263834#.>* By Matthew Belvedere December 12, 2014 Bill Richardson told CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Friday he's not ready to endorse Hillary Clinton should she seek the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. Richardson, who served as energy secretary and ambassador to the United Nations under President Bill Clinton, supported Barack Obama in 2008 after dropping his own Democratic bid for president. "He still won't talk to me," Richardson quipped, referring to Bill Clinton. While there should be a primary contest, he said, Hillary will likely get the 2016 nomination. And at that time, Richardson said, he would support her. The former governor of New Mexico said he's worried about what would happen if former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush gets the Republican presidential nomination. He said Bush's popularity with Latinos would make the race tough for any Democrat. Neither Hillary Clinton nor Bush have said whether they are going to run for the White House in 2016.