Fwd: Evolving the core message

From:john.podesta@gmail.com To: jpalmieri@hillaryclinton.com, jsullivan@hillaryclinton.com, rklain@aol.com, karen.l.dunn@gmail.com, dschwerin@hillaryclinton.com Date: 2016-01-27 14:46 Subject: Fwd: Evolving the core message

Sending just to the internal crew. His dissection of our message is worth paying attention to. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- John, Let me follow-up your suggestion that I read the transcript of what Hillary is actually saying. Here, I’m focusing on the Iowa town hall transcript, and happy to respond to the one you are sending. For now, I am convinced you are badly positioned, though I now believe you can readily transition to an evolved core message. I told you I thought she did great, but that was stylistically, presidentially and on foreign threats. She had energy, sounded like somebody you could trust as president and looked good. She was the one who talked about the new diversity of the country and our new values. It may be enough to win Iowa. But I think the overall message is tone death on what is happening in the country and even more, in the Democratic primary electorate. As a result, she has left the change voters to Sanders. She addresses change as biography: so you are making the vote choice about her, rather than what is happening in the country. At least in this town hall, Sanders was the only one talking about change, the country and the future. There is a pretty easy way to transition your message, and it could drive votes to you pretty quickly. I believe it is plausible. What is your core message? So, consider me a focus group of one and my take away from the town hall. Knowing your core message is the starting point to evolving it. *First, you are running on continuity with Obama.* Hillary said, we need to “build on the progress that we’ve made.” President Obama achieved great things and the great risk is “the Republicans rip away the progress and turn us backwards.” “We need to build on it, and go further.” Obama abandoned this message in his own re-elections, but you are on it. This is tone death, at best. You begin with a contested idea, even among Democrats and people who rate Obama highly. And it sears in the idea that you are incremental change, while conceding change to Sanders and the Republicans. That will make your race much harder. Which voters could you possibly be talking to? Fully 55 percent of the Rising American Electorate and three quarters of white working class women says we are on the wrong track in both WVWV and Roosevelt surveys. This is a mad starting point. In focus groups we just conducted for Roosevelt last week with African American millennials, participants could not have been more despairing: “It’s disappointing. I just think our country could do a lot better … It’s going to take a real long time to fix the mess. For real.” They describe their experience with the economy: “sad and crappy”; “I’m very disgusted”; “I’m gong to say uneasy. And just disappointed.” *Second, you are running on being ready for the job in very insecure times.* The primaries and caucuses are a way to vet the candidates, and you can see Hillary is ready. That is what Hillary said in the town hall and what the president focused on. I can’t tell you how many leaders I supported who want to run on experience and building on the progress, including David Miliband, and watched them defeated by the change candidate who get all the energy. Voters in both the primary and general election will be figuring out how to vote for change – and you have given Sanders a big opening. *Third, governing is messy and not very pretty.* And Hillary knows the idealism and promises of other candidates won’t happen. Hillary knows how to make progress. “I just keep going forward … and I’m still standing.” You sound like a grown-up lecturing these young people on don’t expect too much from all this idealism. *And fourth, Hillary has spent a lifetime fighting for change and “going after inequality.”* That is who she is. “I’ve taken on the status quo time and time again.” You can trust me to bring change because she battled for it, starting with kids and health care. She’s fought “racial inequality, sexist inequality, homophobic inequality.” Also, economic inequality, but mainly to remind people that Bill Clinton is the only president to produce greater equality. *I found that answer attractive but it does not change your core framework, though critically, it provides a ready platform to evolve it.* But for now, your core message is about the past. It is about Clinton’s character and qualities as a leader. The message is not economic, and it is not about the country. * * * * * But as we discussed, Hillary can be the candidate who can bring the change, and your discussion of biography in town halls allows you to make the transition. But you have to start by saying, “Look, all of us Democratic candidates share this critique and anger with what is happening in the country. The difference is I have a powerful personal history of fighting inequality and bringing change. And here is are the bold changes I will work to bring.” That transition takes you to what is happening in the country, it makes her bio relevant, and enables her to talk about the bold changes she wants to bring. [This is explicitly, not just finishing what Obama did or defending his progress.” My starting point is the remarkable and intense level of support for the level the playing the field message. In our most recent test for Roosevelt, we showed that bringing in trade issues in particular strengthens the message further. The reason Sanders is getting so much traction and energy is that he is articulating this message. Yes, his personal conviction is important, but what makes it work is what he is saying about the country and the ability to bring change. He is talking unapologetically about the excess at the top and the need to grow the middle class and America. I also now believe that Sanders is being helped by his use of the trade issue. Your running on “building on the progress” allows him a contrast that hurts you in the primary and general. But from the beginning, Hillary and her campaign, you affirmed in our meetings, really accepted this core economic message, even if Hillary took the edge off in delivery. Progressive Democrats were pretty united. That is key to my recommendation here. Hillary should say how united are Democrats on this core critique of the country and what needs to happen to change the rules so the country grows the middle class again. The core difference is that Hillary has a history of fighting inequality and bringing change. Sanders does not. That is why she is excited to talk about this bold agenda that will bring change. Hope this makes sense and helps. Happy to talk further. Stan