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

Fwd: From The Washington Post: The Fix: How Hillary Clinton can correct the biggest mistake she made in 2008

From:cheryl.mills@gmail.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com, robbymook@gmail.com Date: 2014-03-23 12:04 Subject: Fwd: From The Washington Post: The Fix: How Hillary Clinton can correct the biggest mistake she made in 2008

fysa ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Yes. * Geoff Yes - my point was they missed the nuance so were pushing not a quality-plus narrative but just a history narrative and I think all Americans, especially women, believe in quality-plus (or added bonus of) history. So agree with you and interesting how that is being missed, which I think stems b/c folks chose history making narrative last time but really they choose change-plus history making. Best. cdm On Mar 22, 2014, at 10:47 PM, Geoff Garin <ggarin@hartresearch.com> wrote: Hi Cheryl, There's no question that a Clinton campaign in 2016 should speak to the benefits that many voters (particularly women) think would come from electing the first woman president -- particularly when that person is one of the most eloquent and effective advocates for the full participation of women and girls at home and around the world. There is a fine line to be recognized, here though: many voters (including women) are uncomfortable about being asked to vote for someone because she is a woman, even if the woman is Hillary Clinton. Women who will be the swing voters in the general election (i.e., not HRC's core supporters) want to feel they are voting for the best candidate, not the best woman candidate. Just as a reminder, here is how we summarized these findings in our report: *Electing a woman president is a very strong motivating factor among Hillary Clinton's most committed supporters, and younger voters demonstrate an above-average interest in electing a woman to the White House. For these groups, making history and breaking the "highest glass ceiling" will be a valuable organizing principle. However, electing a woman as president is less important to more marginal Clinton supporters, and we have seen clearly in the focus groups that swing voters (including swing women voters) resent being asked to support someone just because she is a woman. In this survey, an argument for Hillary Clinton framed around the idea of breaking the glass ceiling is the least effective positive case we tested. At the end of the day, swing voters are looking to elect the person who is best able to lead the country forward and make their own lives better. Breaking the glass ceiling would be a positive consequence of electing a woman, but for most voters it is not a compelling reason in itself to elect a woman.* By the way, the Gallup question asks people to volunteer what the best thing would be about a Hillary Clinton presidency, which is a little different from asking why they would vote for her. And if Gallup asks in 12 or 24 months from now what the best thing about a Clinton presidency would be, I'd love it if more people volunteer she will improve the economy, help average Americans get a better shake, or be a strong leader. What caught my attention in the Gallup numbers that people seem less opinionated about HRC now than when they asked this in 2007 - there was a significant rise the % who couldn't (or wouldn't) say anything about her either on the positive side or on the negative side. This might just be the product of Gallup's screwy polling, or an indication that there is some "out of sight/out of mind" element here. We have our next round of research underway, and will continue trying to get a good handle on these questions. Best, Geoff ----- Interesting how hard this is being pushed. Cdm A friend shared this article with you from The Washington Post: Embrace being a woman running for president.. http://wapo.st/1dbwtNo cdm