This email has also been verified by Google DKIM 2048-bit RSA key

Re: Favreau

From:jsullivan@hillaryclinton.com To: jpalmieri@hillaryclinton.com CC: dschwerin@hillaryclinton.com, john.podesta@gmail.com, re47@hillaryclinton.com, kschake@hillaryclinton.com Date: 2016-02-20 00:19 Subject: Re: Favreau

Happy to talk in morning - should we do call? On Feb 19, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Jennifer Palmieri <jpalmieri@hillaryclinton.com> wrote: Yep. Looking now. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 19, 2016, at 7:52 PM, Dan Schwerin <dschwerin@hillaryclinton.com> wrote: I just sent around a draft that tries out some new "it doesn't add up" language so that might be worth looking at and discussing. And I think Jake may have talked to H about some of this as well. On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Jennifer Palmieri < jpalmieri@hillaryclinton.com> wrote: > Just re- read this note from Jon. > > It reaffirms my concern with relying on argument that his plans don't add > up as contrast. It's the kind of argument that makes his argument stronger > - his supporters will draw energy from her saying what he wants isn't real > or can't add up. > > I think arguing that you can't be a single issue candidate and showing his > ideas are bad is better terrain. Single issue reinforces a strength of > HRC's (her ability to do all part is the job). Doesn't add up reinforces a > negative view of her (she's part of the establishment and won't ever > accomplish kind of change we need). > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 18, 2016, at 3:35 PM, Dan Schwerin <dschwerin@hillaryclinton.com> > wrote: > > Sharing this advice from Favreau, for what it's worth. As you know, much > of this is very much in line with my own thinking over the past several > months. And I'd say he raises useful cautions about not letting our > "breaking barriers" message become a recitation of interest groups or isms, > and not letting "the math doesn't add up" critique turn her into a wet > blanket. That said, I think he's undervaluing the importance of keeping a > strong economic thrust at the heart of our message... anyway, food for > thought. > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Jon Favreau <jon@fenwaystrategies.com> > *Date:* February 18, 2016 at 1:34:04 PM EST > *Subject:* *Hillary * > > Very scattered thoughts, starting with a few things I've read and seen > that made me think "Ah, this should be her message": > > 1. The awesome DREAMer video you guys put out > > 2. The race speech > > 3. This David Brooks column (I know, I know, I'll go kill myself): > http://nyti.ms/1KTjYqJ > > 4. The Love and Kindness story > > Her most important job right now is to inspire people, and generate > enthusiasm. And she will not succeed by playing the pragmatist to Bernie's > idealist. No young person - no any person - who isn't the most committed > voter will head out to the polls or knock on doors for someone who tells > them that they should have more realistic expectations for what politics > can achieve (even though they should!). In 2008, we would purposely bait > her into playing the wet blanket so we could turn around and whack her for > it. The line from the New Hampshire primary night speech, "In the unlikely > story of America, there has never been anything false about hope" was a > direct retort to Hillary's line about Obama "giving everyone false hopes." > And it was devastating. > > Far more effective has been what she's been doing recently - saying that > Bernie is a single issue voter and that there are a lot more issues at > stake than Wall Street. This idea that class is the only divide and > economic issues are all that matter is a very white male centric view of > the world (a Bernie Bro view, if you will). It also reminds me of the > hilarious joke that Brian Buetler keeps making every time some asshole says > something horribly racist about Obama or sexist about Hillary or prejudice > about immigrants and Muslims - oh, let's not blame them, they're just > economically anxious. > > People are of course economically anxious, and Bernie is tapping into that > very well. But that's only half the equation. They're also being told to > blame other groups for all their problems - blacks, gays, immigrants, > Muslims, women, political correctness, etc. Fighting that intolerance and > divisiveness is just as important as fighting inequality - arguably more so > in this election because Trump has made it the defining issue. And she is > way better equipped and qualified to make that argument than Bernie is. > That's true because she's a woman. That's true because she was America's > chief diplomat. That's true because she's fought for these issues her > entire life. > > As far back as Audacity of Hope, Obama often talked about our ability to > coexist peacefully in a shrinking world as a central challenge of the 21st > century. Bill Clinton used to talk about interdependence on one another as > our central mission. > > Hillary can pick up the mantle here in a very inspiring way. She just has > to tweak it and be careful that it doesn't sound like she's listing off > interest groups - here's my black speech, here's my Latino policy, here's > my woman's event, etc. She needs to combine her policies with her record > with a vision of the country and the world where we're stronger together > than we are divided against each other. That's different than "stronger > together than we are on our own," which would be more of a Bernie/Obama '12 > message that's all about right-wing economics. This is an evolution of that > message that's primarily a response to the intolerance and bigotry of Trump > and the right. > > She should be talking about love and kindness. She should be talking about > mutual respect and tolerance. She should be talking about rebuilding the > bonds of community and rebuilding friendships, not just between nations, > but between people all over the world. Not just compassion for compassion's > sake - but because we're stronger when we're pulling together' when > everyone feels like they're part of the team. > > It reminds me of one of my favorite passages from any speech - Cuomo's 84 > convention address: > > "It's an old story. It's as old as our history. The difference between > Democrats and Republicans has always been measured in courage and > confidence. The Republicans -- The Republicans believe that the wagon train > will not make it to the frontier unless some of the old, some of the young, > some of the weak are left behind by the side of the trail. "The strong" -- > "The strong," they tell us, "will inherit the land." > > We Democrats believe in something else. We democrats believe that we can > make it all the way with the whole family intact, and we have more than > once. Ever since Franklin Roosevelt lifted himself from his wheelchair to > lift this nation from its knees -- wagon train after wagon train -- to new > frontiers of education, housing, peace; the whole family aboard, constantly > reaching out to extend and enlarge that family; lifting them up into the > wagon on the way; blacks and Hispanics, and people of every ethnic group, > and native Americans -- all those struggling to build their families and > claim some small share of America. For nearly 50 years we carried them all > to new levels of comfort, and security, and dignity, even affluence. And > remember this, some of us in this room today are here only because this > nation had that kind of confidence. And it would be wrong to forget that." > > Who better to deliver that message than First Lady-turned-Secretary of > State who could become America's first female president? > > >