Subject: Draft NV Convention TP's
From: "Walsh, Tom" <[email-masked]>
To: "Miranda, Luis" <[email-masked]>, "Paustenbach, Mark" <[email-masked]>, "Banfill, Ryan" <[email-masked]>
Cc: Patrice Taylor <[email-masked]>, Kate Houghton <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 14:15:05 -0700

NV Convention Talking Points

Violence is Unacceptable

  *   First, let me be clear, violence and intimidation are absolutely unacceptable in our Democracy. It is incumbent upon all of us in positions of leadership to speak out.

  *   Second, this was a State Democratic Party event, and not a DNC event, and I was not present for what happened.
     *   But as I said in my initial statement, I was immediately concerned when I learned about the disruptions and when I read about the troubling details laid out in the letter from the Nevada Democratic Party.
     *   I immediately condemned the threats of violence and disruptions to the State Convention, and I have reached out to both campaigns and asked for leadership at every level of the Democratic Party to denounce anyone who threatens violence.

  *   I want to commend Roberta Lang, the Nevada Democratic Chairwoman, who was simply performing her duty as Chair.
     *   She did nothing to deserve the disgusting attacks and violent threats she has received.
     *   The individuals launching these attacks should be ashamed.
     *   Senator Sanders must condemn anyone who claims they are acting out this way to support his candidacy.

  *   Energy and passion for a candidate are absolutely welcome as part of this process.
     *   The vast majority of Democrats that have already participated in our primary have done so in the appropriate way -- with  enthusiasm and civility.
     *   If we Democrats let our passion turn to rage when things don't go our way, we are no better the worst agitators we've seen at Trump rallies.

The Rules of This Process are Not New

  *   The rules governing the Democratic Party delegate selection process have been in place for decades and the specific procedures for this cycle were agreed upon in 2014.

  *   The system for determining these rules has been fair and transparent.
     *   It is the same process that ultimately led to the nomination of Barack Obama and every other Democratic president for decades.

  *   Shouting down party leaders who are implementing these rules isn't just disruptive, it also hurts our chances of electing a Democratic president in November, and raises the possibility of a disastrous Trump presidency.
     *   If there are legitimate concerns from the supporters of either Democratic campaign, those concerns can, should and must be addressed in an orderly, civil and peaceful manner.

Alaska State Convention

  *   It is possible to show your passion and to disagree openly with our party leaders or the process in a meaningful and peaceful way.
  *   On Saturday, I was in Alaska for their state convention. This is a state that supported Senator Sanders in their primary by 82%.
  *   There were plenty of people in the room who disagree with my role as DNC Chair.
     *   But there was no shouting. No threats of violence.
  *   That's the example we should be following. And as long as we do, I'm convinced we will absolutely be a unified party at our National Convention.

If Asked About the 64 Delegates

  *   There's a lot of misinformation out there about this group of 64.
     *   Let's be careful to set the record straight.
  *   In accordance with pre-set convention rules, the Clinton campaign challenged the credentials of 64 Sanders delegates - as is the right of both campaigns.
  *   Both campaigns were equally represented in the challenge process.
     *   The committee tasked with reviewing credentials was composed of five Sanders supporters and five Clinton supporters.
  *   That committee ruled that of those 64 individuals - all but six should not be seated because they either were not registered Democrats, not registered to vote at all, or had incomplete registration information.
  *   Only 8 of the 64 individuals were even present at the convention.
  *   So the suggestion that there were 64 individuals who were marginalized to tip the scales is absolutely false.