Download raw source

Delivered-To: john.podesta@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.47.65 with SMTP id l59csp10065qga; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 13:51:54 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <robbymook@gmail.com> Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of robbymook@gmail.com designates 10.140.81.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.140.81.48 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of robbymook@gmail.com designates 10.140.81.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=robbymook@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com X-Received: from mr.google.com ([10.140.81.48]) by 10.140.81.48 with SMTP id e45mr20075036qgd.99.1398545514196 (num_hops = 1); Sat, 26 Apr 2014 13:51:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=EePILujuuFDWVjQv+SWQ+RQAVgBfdNyHwuJkgHzwwYg=; b=NYVXoWUobmH9VPy5s0RWKkMKaFC+fBIh2sOZHx+Cq2drBg9DuespKmYxHG3aPmAFkK X3jQ5FXMjDmkB31bEfAb0fi5wL+a/TCVbnZocIolQbzjNH4W/5z+ft9duNSqVmHpzWf/ ZQqQJxyzIKSpZ/3c5Lm6yJEr1CO1VKo72o+CGMORydKHBGsD60prnmGa30rPsgDnIOc3 tN0x0J8BP0KA+KJFBl41/fXzjLgSZIoUm98RBeYL7ZTLajZ5A9MYOQ/ZzRAOKMMLoQRI D4vX2L/HOjEDDsJOkevAMSRqNgsNNuH+mHWe8NHw9g9fsNpibL5K3zzHmhUGNvow8cvZ x83g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.81.48 with SMTP id e45mr20450923qgd.99.1398545514015; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 13:51:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.121.8 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 13:51:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 16:51:53 -0400 Message-ID: <CA+NiFyNBXXtUL6TWOHcJGg2adhy4E9SXk78sxSMnrrVeEvH3OQ@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Berman From: Robert Mook <robbymook@gmail.com> To: Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com>, David Plouffe <daplouffe@icloud.com>, John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c123f290b0a204f7f8404a --001a11c123f290b0a204f7f8404a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Had a great meeting with Berman today. We discussed him taking the lead on the strategy outlined in his memo: (1) Seeing if we can get MA and VT to push their primaries back, (2) Keep the big blue states (NY, NJ, CA, etc) from moving their primaries earlier and (3) Trying to get LA and WV to join Super Tuesday. As we discussed in NY, keeping the red states early makes sense if she has a primary (as long as there isn't a primary competitor winning significant AA votes), but also increases the likelihood the Rs nominate someone extreme. We agreed that if she gets a significant primary challenger, we need to consider changing course and getting NY, NJ, and maybe others to move their dates earlier to give her hefty early wins. Jeff is going to put together action items for each state that we will review. We may need allies to help in this process but we're going to look at each state one step at a time, limiting as much as possible the perception of direct intervention by the principals. On absentees for caucuses: he said Iowa has agreed to come with a proposal. It sounds like they will agree to SOME change, but it may be gradual (ie some in 2016, more in 2020). I don't think it's in anyone's interest right now for there to be a big fight over this...I told him that I'm sure HRC and WJC would prefer as inclusive a change as possible and I think there's organizing benefit to a more open absentee system so we can engage drop off Dems in NV and IA early. Let me know if any of this is problematic, otherwise I'll keep moving forward with Berman. --001a11c123f290b0a204f7f8404a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">Had a great meeting with Berman today. =C2=A0We discussed = him taking the lead on the strategy outlined in his memo: (1) Seeing if we = can get MA and VT to push their primaries back, (2) Keep the big blue state= s (NY, NJ, CA, etc) from moving their primaries earlier and (3) Trying to g= et LA and WV to join Super Tuesday.<div> As we discussed in NY, keeping the red states early makes sense if she has = a primary (as long as there isn't a primary competitor winning signific= ant AA votes), but also increases the likelihood the Rs nominate someone ex= treme.</div> <div>We agreed that if she gets a significant primary challenger, we need t= o consider changing course and getting NY, NJ, and maybe others to move the= ir dates earlier to give her hefty early wins.</div><div>Jeff is going to p= ut together action items for each state that we will review. =C2=A0We may n= eed allies to help in this process but we're going to look at each stat= e one step at a time, limiting as much as possible the perception of direct= intervention by the principals. =C2=A0</div> <div>On absentees for caucuses: he said Iowa has agreed to come with a prop= osal. =C2=A0It sounds like they will agree to SOME change, but it may be gr= adual (ie some in 2016, more in 2020). =C2=A0I don't think it's in = anyone's interest right now for there to be a big fight over this...I t= old him that I'm sure HRC and WJC would prefer as inclusive a change as= possible and I think there's organizing benefit to a more open absente= e system so we can engage drop off Dems in NV and IA early.</div> <div>Let me know if any of this is problematic, otherwise I'll keep mov= ing forward with Berman.</div></div> --001a11c123f290b0a204f7f8404a--