Subject: Correct The Record Friday August 8, 2014 Morning Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 07:50:38 -0400
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

**

*Correct The Record Friday August 8, 2014 Morning Roundup:*

*Headlines:*

*Log Cabin Democrat opinion: Don Ernst: “Ernst: Hillary Clinton and
education”
<http://thecabin.net/interact/opinion/columns/2014-08-07/ernst-hillary-clinton-and-education#.U-SrT_ldV8F>*

“Hillary’s pathway to success, through hard work and a deep devotion to the
power of education to transform the world, started in Arkansas.”

*Chicago Sun-Times blog: Politics Early & Often: “Luis Gutierrez throws his
support behind Hillary Clinton in 2016”
<http://politics.suntimes.com/article/washington/luis-gutierrez-throws-his-support-behind-hillary-clinton-2016/thu-08072014-234pm>*

“The polls show an overwhelming amount of support for Hillary Clinton and
now Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., is ready to give her a boost as well.”

*Politico: “Clinton pens Gillibrand book intro”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/kirsten-gillibrand-book-hillary-clinton-109815.html>*

“Hillary Clinton praises Kirsten Gillibrand as a ‘great senator’ and a
‘great friend’ in a foreword to the New York Democrat’s
soon-to-be-published memoir, according to excerpts obtained by POLITICO.”

*Politico: “Hillary Clinton: Answering sexism takes practice”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/hillary-clinton-interview-with-glamour-109835.html>*

“Hillary Clinton says it can take years of experience to learn how to deal
with sexism, something she has learned the hard way.”

*The Bookseller: “Print sales increase drives S&S rise”
<http://www.thebookseller.com/news/print-sales-increase-drives-ss-rise.html>*

“Among the publisher’s best-selling titles for the period were Hillary
Clinton’s autobiography Hard Choices, and City of Heavenly Fire by
Cassandra Clare.”

*Bloomberg Businessweek: “Hillary Clinton, ‘Divergent’ Boost Publishers’
Profits”
<http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-08-07/hillary-clinton-divergent-boost-publishers-profits>*

“Hillary Clinton and the post-apocalyptic teen thriller series ‘Divergent’
gave the book divisions of CBS Corp. (CBS:US) and News Corp. (NWSA:US) a
boost as their respective broadcast and newspaper units struggled last
quarter.”

*Time: “Why Rand Paul Is Attacking Hillary Clinton”
<http://time.com/3089204/rand-paul-hillary-clinton-2016/>*

“But what matters at the moment is not accuracy, but political calculation
and execution. And Paul is quickly establishing himself as the Republican
Party’s preeminent basher of Hillary Clinton, a title that could bring him
rewards over the coming months as the 2016 presidential race heats up.”

*Philadelphia Inquirer: “'Let's make history': Local Dems hone pitch for
2016 convention”
<http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20140808__Let_s_make_history___Local_Dems_hone_pitch_for_2016_convention.html>*

“Standing in a beer garden across from the Liberty Bell, the city's leaders
vowed Thursday to lure the Democratic National Convention to Philadelphia
and announced their slogan: ‘Let's make history again.’”

*Christian Science Monitor blog: DC Decoder: “What is Bill's value to a
Hillary Clinton campaign?”
<http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Voices/2014/0807/What-is-Bill-s-value-to-a-Hillary-Clinton-campaign>*

[Subtitle:] “Is there a relationship between how people view Bill Clinton
and how they view Hillary? One data set suggests ‘yes,’ and that the
relationship is significant.”

*The Wire: “Whatever Happened to the Benghazi Select Committee?”
<http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/08/whatever-happened-to-the-benghazi-select-committee/375748/>*

“Since each party named its members to the panel, however, we've heard
barely a peep.”

*The Weekly Standard: “Hillary Clinton’s Reputation”
<http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/hillary-clinton-s-reputation_802179.html?page=1>*

“While the 2014 midterm election is still three months away, it looks as
though the Republicans are set to do quite well. Still, Clinton’s continued
polling strength cannot but cast a pall over GOP prospects for 2016.”

*CNN: “Embattled Jon Corzine to host Ready for Hillary Hamptons fundraiser”
<http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/08/07/embattled-jon-corzine-to-host-ready-for-hillary-hamptons-fundraiser/>*

“Embattled former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, the man who was at the
center of the $1.6 billion MF Global collapse, will be the co-host of a
Ready for Hillary fundraiser in the Wainscott, New York later this month.”

*Articles:*

*Log Cabin Democrat opinion: Don Ernst: “Ernst: Hillary Clinton and
education”
<http://thecabin.net/interact/opinion/columns/2014-08-07/ernst-hillary-clinton-and-education#.U-SrT_ldV8F>*

By Don Ernst, instructor of education policy at the University of Arkansas
Clinton School of Public Service

August 7, 2014, 11:28 a.m. EDT

I’ve spent my entire career in the field of education. It is the great
equalizer – the one thing that we can give our children that lasts for
generations. I loved teaching and saw the impact of education on children’s
lives. But I soon realized I could have a greater impact in the policy
field, so I got a job in the governor’s office. I still remember the day
when Governor Bill Clinton announced that his wife, Arkansas First Lady
Hillary Rodham Clinton, would chair the 15-member Arkansas Blue Ribbon
Commission that was authorized by The Quality Education Act of 1983 to
completely overhaul the Arkansas public education system by improving
standards of learning. The message sent to the citizens of Arkansas was
very clear: This Governor took seriously the role of education in improving
the lives of children and their families across the state.

Governor Clinton was criticized by many who were holding fast to the past,
those who knew well that Hillary would not rest until the work was done
with high energy and a palpable devotion to the needs of Arkansas’ children
and young people, especially those most marginalized by the lack of access
to quality education.

It is important to understand the context in which Hillary and the
Commission started their work. In 1983 there were 365 school districts in
Arkansas and according to the Arkansas Department of Education at the time:

•           192 school districts offered no art classes

•           187 school districts offered no chemistry classes and had no
classroom labs

•           167 school districts offered no physics classes

•           118 school districts offered no advanced math classes

•           163 school districts offered no foreign language classes

Looking back today, it is almost incomprehensible that so many of
Arkansas’s school children in 1983 were starting with such a severe
disadvantage compared to those in other states. Because of the leadership
of former Mississippi Governor William Winter, we in Arkansas could no
longer express the standard axiom “thank God for Mississippi.”

I remember vividly when Hillary presented the Commission’s final report to
the Arkansas General Assembly. One of Governor Clinton’s most animated
critics said, “I think we elected the wrong Clinton Governor.”

The Commission established educational standards goals for the first time
in the history of Arkansas’ public school system. Curriculum content guides
were developed in partnership with scholars, teachers and parents. Each
school district was required to offer music, art, foreign languages,
advanced math and science, computer science, additional years of language
arts, social studies, physical education and the practical arts. Class size
was reduced to 20 in Kindergarten, to 23 in grades 1-3, and 25 in grades
4-6. Academic secondary classes were limited to 30 students per class.
Sixth graders would be tested in Reading, Language Arts, Math, and Social
Studies. Students who did not perform up to standards had to be supported
by a special academic development plan that included an extended school day
or year as appropriate. Additionally, students struggling were supported by
additional counselors, a supportive alternative curriculum, and the use of
other resources. The new standards were bold for their time and included
proposals for global education and a student service requirement long
before these ideas were popular.

These details were important and set the stage for bipartisan efforts
across the United States to improve the educational lives of our children.
Republicans and Democrats alike joined an important educational bandwagon
that helped establish the role of the modern governor in educational
policy. Along with William Winter, Lamar Alexander, Jim Hunt, Tom Kean,
Mike Castle and others, Governor Clinton – with the able guidance of
Hillary – helped establish the notion of “education governor.”

There is another part of this story that is important. Governor Clinton and
Hillary took time to listen to the citizens of Arkansas, to engage them in
the details and struggles of education inequality. Hearings were held in
all 75 Arkansas counties. In many ways, it was the citizens of Arkansas who
rose to the challenge of improving the educational lives of Arkansas
children.

Without the able leadership of the Governor and his wife, I am certain the
outcomes would have been different. I certainly recognized very early that
Hillary was brilliant and was devoted to improving the lives of children.
It was no surprise to me that she would be one of the most able First
Lady’s in United States’ history and later a Senator and Secretary of State
— all accomplishments that easily fill a lifetime of great achievement.

But for me, Hillary’s pathway to success, through hard work and a deep
devotion to the power of education to transform the world, started in
Arkansas.

*Chicago Sun-Times blog: Politics Early & Often: “Luis Gutierrez throws his
support behind Hillary Clinton in 2016”
<http://politics.suntimes.com/article/washington/luis-gutierrez-throws-his-support-behind-hillary-clinton-2016/thu-08072014-234pm>*

By Chad Merda

August 7, 2014, 2:34 p.m. EDT

The polls show an overwhelming amount of support for Hillary Clinton and
now Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., is ready to give her a boost as well.

Gutierrez, who appeared on PoliticKING with Larry King, says Clinton has
what it takes.

“I will be happy to back Hillary Clinton, I think she has an astonishing
background and a readiness," Gutierrez said. "If she’s ready, I’m ready for
Hillary.”

But he says we shouldn't get ahead of ourselves and assume she'll be the
Democratic nominee.

“We’re Democrats, so we like a good fight among ourselves, you know, I
don’t think it should be a coronation," Gutierrez said. "I think in
Democracy, the person that gets the most votes is the one that wins, but
there should always be a contest for those votes.”

During the interview, Gutierrez also weighed in on Ebola, saying it's wrong
for Republicans to use use it as a scare tactic on the immigration battle.

*Politico: “Clinton pens Gillibrand book intro”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/kirsten-gillibrand-book-hillary-clinton-109815.html>*

By Maggie Haberman

August 7, 2014, 1:38 p.m. EDT

Hillary Clinton praises Kirsten Gillibrand as a “great senator” and a
“great friend” in a foreword to the New York Democrat’s
soon-to-be-published memoir, according to excerpts obtained by POLITICO.

The three-page foreword to “Off the Sidelines: Raise Your Voice, Change the
World” symbolizes the link between Clinton, who served in the U.S. Senate
from New York from 2000 through 2008, and Gillibrand, who was appointed to
succeed her when Clinton became secretary of state in 2009.

Both Clinton and Gillibrand have been particularly active in promoting
women’s rights, and much of Gillibrand’s memoir deals with her role in that
realm, including the issue of sexual assault in the military.

“The first time I shook Kirsten Gillbrand’s hand, she looked me square in
the eyes and said, ‘How can I help?’” Clinton writes. “I was running for
Senate in New York and Kirsten wanted to do everything she could for the
campaign. But there was more to it than that. Kirsten has built her whole
life around the question ‘How can I help?’”

Clinton adds: “Wherever there’s a problem to solve, a wrong to right, or a
person in need, Kirsten rolls up her sleeves and gets to work. Staying on
the sidelines just isn’t in her DNA. That’s been the story of her entire
career — as a lawyer, then as a member of the U.S. House of
Representatives, and now as a U.S. senator — and it’s the story of this
book.”

Clinton further describes the memoir as being about “a life shaped by a
deep commitment to family, public service, and hard work — and a story that
is far from finished. I hope it will serve as an inspiration to others,
especially young women, and encourage them to follow Kirsten’s example. The
health of our democracy depends on women as well as men stepping off the
sidelines to participate — to vote, debate, organize, run for office, and
lead.”

The book is due out Sept. 9 and is being published by Random House.
Gillibrand has a PAC, also called Off the Sidelines.

Gillibrand is often mentioned as a potential presidential candidate. She
has said she is not interested in running, but has publicly urged Clinton
to do so in 2016.

*Politico: “Hillary Clinton: Answering sexism takes practice”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/hillary-clinton-interview-with-glamour-109835.html>*

By Katie Glueck

August 7, 2014, 10:23 p.m. EDT

Hillary Clinton says it can take years of experience to learn how to deal
with sexism, something she has learned the hard way.

“This is not something that your average 25-year-old — well, let me talk
about myself: me at 25 — would have either fully grasped or been able to
respond to,” Clinton said in an excerpt of a conversation with Glamour
magazine.

The possible Democratic 2016 presidential front-runner recalled the
“personal” attacks she said she faced when taking the LSAT, complete with
hecklers charging: “You’re taking a place of a man who could maybe get
drafted and die in Vietnam.”

“We’re in a much better place than we were,” she said, but added that
there’s more to be done.

Clinton, whose supporters hope will be the first female president in U.S.
history, has said that she saw sexism in the way then-candidate Barack
Obama’s campaign treated her during the 2008 presidential primary.

In the interview with Glamour, Clinton stressed the importance of knowing
not just when but also how to react to sexism.

‘Now, sometimes when it is about me … you have to not just remain silent
but try to figure out a proper response — again, though, not going to the
place of anger and feeling sorry for yourself, because that kind of plays
into the hands of the sexists,” she said. “It does take practice though[.]”

While Clinton said she “generally” avoids responding to personal attacks,
she noted that she has “responded if it’s about somebody else.”

“Because if women in general are being degraded, are being dismissed,” she
said, “then I can respond in a way that demonstrates I’m not taking it
personally, but I’m really serious about rejecting that kind of behavior.”

The full interview will hit newsstands Aug. 12.

*The Bookseller: “Print sales increase drives S&S rise”
<http://www.thebookseller.com/news/print-sales-increase-drives-ss-rise.html>*

By Sarah Shaffi

August 8, 2014

Simon & Schuster’s revenues increased by 11.6% to $211m for the second
quarter of 2014, compared to the same period the year before, with the
increase “driven by higher print book sales”.

The publisher’s parent company CBS said that digital books represented “a
significant portion of sales”, with 25% of total publishing revenues coming
from digital sales in the three months to 30th June.

Among the publisher’s best-selling titles for the period were Hillary
Clinton’s autobiography Hard Choices, and City of Heavenly Fire by
Cassandra Clare.

OIBDA (operating income before depreciation and amortisation) was $24m, up
14% from $21 in the same period the year before.

CBS said the increase was “driven by revenue growth, which was partially
offset by higher royalty costs”.

CBS said its total revenues were $3.19b for the second quarter of 2014,
compaired to $3.37b in the same period the year before.

*Bloomberg Businessweek: “Hillary Clinton, ‘Divergent’ Boost Publishers’
Profits”
<http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-08-07/hillary-clinton-divergent-boost-publishers-profits>*

By Christopher Palmeri

August 7, 2014

Hillary Clinton and the post-apocalyptic teen thriller series “Divergent”
gave the book divisions of CBS Corp. (CBS:US) and News Corp. (NWSA:US) a
boost as their respective broadcast and newspaper units struggled last
quarter.

Operating income at Simon & Schuster, the publishing arm of CBS, rose 15
percent to $23 million in the period ended June 30, buoyed by “Hard
Choices,” Clinton’s memoir of her time as U.S. Secretary of State.
HarperCollins, part of News Corp., posted a 50 percent increase in profit
to $33 million, the biggest jump among the company’s five divisions, a gain
attributed to the popular book series by Veronica Roth.

Clinton’s memoir sold 191,000 hard copies in its first five weeks,
according to Nielsen, and has been on the non-fiction bestseller list.
Roth’s “Divergent” series, which was released as a movie by Lions Gate
Entertainment Corp. in March, sold more than 19 million copies in News
Corp.’s last fiscal year.

CBS reported lower second-quarter net income as revenue and operating
income declined amid a drop in advertising sales.

News Corp., completing its first full year as a standalone company after
splitting from Rupert Murdoch’s entertainment business last year, said
sales in its news division, which publishes the Wall Street Journal, fell
as advertising revenue weakened.

*Time: “Why Rand Paul Is Attacking Hillary Clinton”
<http://time.com/3089204/rand-paul-hillary-clinton-2016/>*

By Michael Scherer

August 7, 2014, 2:42 p.m. EDT

[Subtitle:] Meet the GOP's top Hillary attack dog

Some politicians attack in prose. Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul can do
it in poetry—with color, precision and language that’s hard to forget.

Over the last week, he didn’t just blame Hillary Clinton for the current
state of Libya, he said she created a “Jihadist wonderland” there. He
didn’t just knock her for not fortifying the Benghazi embassy, he said she
treated the place “as if it were Paris.”

“While she was turning down request for security, she spent $650,000 on
Facebook ads, trying to get more friends for the State Department,” he
said. “They spent $700,000 on landscaping at the Brussels embassy. They
spent $5 million on crystal glassware for the embassies around the world.”

On Friday, he asked the crowd for a moment of silence, to pray for
Clinton’s bank account. “Somebody must have been praying for her, because
she’s now worth $100, $200 million,” he followed, deadpan. “I tell you, it
was really tough giving those speeches.” Then on Tuesday, at an event for a
fellow ophthalmologist running for Congress in Iowa City, offered his
crowning rhetorical turn. “Hillary’s war in Libya, Hillary’s war in Syria,”
he said. “None of this was ever approved by Congress.”

Of course, all of these attacks were unfair, as political attacks tend to
be. Hillary did not choose to bomb Libya, though she supported the policy,
and she has broken from President Barack Obama on the strategy in Syria.
There is no evidence the question of additional security for the Benghazi
embassy ever rose to her desk at the State Department, her net worth
includes her husband’s substantial earnings, and no one serious has ever
suggested an actual connection between Belgian landscaping budgets and
American security.

But what matters at the moment is not accuracy, but political calculation
and execution. And Paul is quickly establishing himself as the Republican
Party’s preeminent basher of Hillary Clinton, a title that could bring him
rewards over the coming months as the 2016 presidential race heats up.

The strategy plays to two of Paul’s natural advantages in the current
Republican field. He is not a sitting Governor, and therefore far more free
to dip his tongue in the partisan mud. He is also running for
President—albeit without an official campaign—on the idea that he can best
distinguish himself from Clinton on key matters of foreign policy that are
likely to resonate with independent and young voters. “There are definitely
areas where Clinton has vulnerabilities that Rand is uniquely situated to
attack,” said Tim Miller, who spends his days attacking Hillary Clinton for
America Rising, an opposition research group.

Other would-be Clinton challengers have, of course, tried to get on the
Hillary-bashing bandwagon, but with lesser results. Florida Sen. Marco
Rubio made an early splash by calling Clinton a “20th century candidate,”
but most of his attacks have sounded more like Senate speeches than a
sonnet. “If she’s going to run on her record as Secretary of State, she’s
also going to have to answer for its massive failures,” he says. Texas Sen.
Tex Cruz, meanwhile, remains more likely to focus his fire on Obama, or
their joint efforts, than Hillary alone. “Internationally, the
Obama-Clinton foreign policy is a disaster,” he says.

Paul’s focus on Clinton clearly looks like a strategy to elevate himself
early in the Republican field. Soon Republicans nationwide will pivot to
focus on what may the central question of the Republican primary: Who can
actually take on Hillary Clinton and win? As far back as February, Paul was
already working on these credentials. He started by calling former
President Bill Clinton a “sexual predator” in interviews. His point was
that Democrats should be called to account for Clinton’s personal life if
they wanted to claim to be champions of women.

Those jabs were widely condemned as political malpractice, a misfire aimed
at a popular former President for failures that were long ago digested by
the public. “I’m not sure he has a strategy,” Karl Rove jabbed on Fox News.
“Frankly, Rand Paul spending a lot of time talking about the mistakes of
Bill Clinton does not look like a big agenda for the future of the country.”

Paul never really let up. For weeks in February, he found himself in
headlines pitted against the presumptive Democratic nominee.

In a crowded field, he was in pole position—where he remains to this day.

*Philadelphia Inquirer: “'Let's make history': Local Dems hone pitch for
2016 convention”
<http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20140808__Let_s_make_history___Local_Dems_hone_pitch_for_2016_convention.html>*

By Peter Dobrin

August 7, 2014, 9:01 p.m. EDT

Standing in a beer garden across from the Liberty Bell, the city's leaders
vowed Thursday to lure the Democratic National Convention to Philadelphia
and announced their slogan: "Let's make history again."

Ed Rendell, the former mayor and governor, would not say whether that was a
sly reference to the candidate he supports - Democratic front-runner
Hillary Rodham Clinton, who could be the first woman to win a major party's
nomination for president.

"You can work on figuring that out," he said with a smile.

Rendell, Mayor Nutter, U.S. Rep. Robert Brady (D., Pa.), and others spoke
at a kickoff event to anticipate next week's arrival of 18 national party
officials charged with picking the 2016 convention locale.

City officials will pull out all the stops Wednesday and Thursday when the
Democratic National Committee's selection team comes to town. The City of
Brotherly Love is one of five finalists.

The team of DNC officials, with expertise in transportation, security, and
other logistics, will stay at the Radisson Blu Warwick in Center City,
which recently underwent a $20 million face-lift. Though their itinerary
wasn't announced, they will have a packed schedule that includes stops at
the Wells Fargo Center, the hoped-for convention site, as well as at hotels
and tourist destinations such as Pat's King of Steaks.

"They are going to see one of the most incredible cities," Nutter said,
"and they are going to see sights you can't see anywhere else." He
mentioned the bell and Independence Hall.

The DNC's site selection committee plans to make its decision late this
year or in early 2015.

The nonprofit established to promote the event, Philadelphia 2016, plans to
spend $900,000 between now and November in support of the city's bid. The
committee, led by Rendell, has raised about $100,000, he said. If the city
wins, then the big "ask" begins: Backers would need to raise upward of $50
million to cover costs of hosting the event.

Rendell and Nutter have dismissed concerns about whether the city can plan
for both the Catholic Church's World Meeting of Families in 2015, which
officials hope Pope Francis will attend, and the DNC the following year. On
Thursday, Rendell said: "We're a major-league city. We can handle one
event, two events, three events."

Along with Nutter, Rendell, and Brady, the city's longtime Democratic
chairman, the crowd outside the recently opened Independence Beer Garden,
where plans for the DNC visit were announced, included local Democrats such
as City Council President Darrell L. Clarke, Councilwoman Marian B. Tasco,
State Rep. Brian K. Sims, Montgomery County Commissioners Chairman Josh
Shapiro, and at least two non-Democrats - Flyers chairman Ed Snider and
John J. McNichol, president and CEO of the Pennsylvania Convention Center
Authority.

For many, Thursday's event amounted to déjà vu - reminiscent of the city's
efforts nearly two decades ago to land a political convention, any
political convention, for 2000.

That effort started in 1996, when then-Mayor Rendell returned from the
Democratic convention in Chicago determined to bring a convention here.

Selling it strictly as a business development enterprise, Rendell and
others vowed to pursue both parties equally and hustled hard for two years,
forming a committee in December 1996.

Both parties sent large entourages - part technical staff charged with the
logistics of producing a major event, and part political people with
hangers-on. The Democratic group was larger than the GOP committee.

By contrast, the 18-member group coming to Philadelphia next week will be
relatively small, but again with a mix of political people and technical
staff. Efforts to market the city to them began last year.

"We took the Republicans, we showed them a great time," Brady said
Thursday, recalling the 2000 convention. "Now it's the Democratic time."

The DNC selection committee has already visited two of the finalist cities
- Birmingham, Ala., late last month, and Columbus, Ohio, on Wednesday. At
the latter, the committee was treated to a rally of 1,000 people wearing
T-shirts that read, "Get Your [picture of a donkey] to Columbus in 2016,"
and a tour of Ohio State University's football stadium, touted as a perfect
spot for candidates' acceptance speeches.

The committee plans to tour Brooklyn, N.Y., on Monday and Tuesday before
coming here. Its final scheduled stop is Phoenix, on Sept. 10 and 11.

Among Democratic politicos, Brooklyn is seen as Philadelphia's strongest
rival.

Before the news conference, Rendell joked that he'd poll the crowd about
New York City's new mayor - "Who's a better mayor, Mike Nutter or Bill
DeBlasio?" He predicted Nutter would win.

Inside the beer garden, Rendell told customers grabbing beers and wings,
"We will either get the convention, or Mayor Nutter will be thrown over the
Ben Franklin Bridge."

*Christian Science Monitor blog: DC Decoder: “What is Bill's value to a
Hillary Clinton campaign?”
<http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Voices/2014/0807/What-is-Bill-s-value-to-a-Hillary-Clinton-campaign>*

By Jordan Ragusa

August 7, 2014

[Subtitle:] Is there a relationship between how people view Bill Clinton
and how they view Hillary? One data set suggests "yes," and that the
relationship is significant.

In presidential elections, relationships matter.

For example, political scientists know that the relationship between
economic conditions, the number of causalities in war, and the incumbent’s
party affiliation explain the bulk of presidential election outcomes.

In the 2016 presidential election, however, there is another “relationship”
worth keeping an eye on. But rather than the correlation between two
variables, this relationship is of the social variety. I’m referring, of
course, to the marriage of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Pundits on the left claim that Bill Clinton is an asset to Hillary because
he brings legions of faithful supporters and has a high approval rating.
Pundits on the right claim that Bill Clinton is a liability because he
reminds voters of the Clintons’ personal affairs.

But when we strip this rhetoric down to its core, both sides are making the
same empirical point: As goes Bill, so goes Hillary.

But is it true? Are the Clinton’s’ “married” in the minds of voters such
that the opinion of one affects opinions of the other?

In the the first chart above, I plotted approval ratings from Gallup.com
(here and here) and Pollster.com (here) from 1992 to 2014 and created
smooth trend lines for both Clintons. According to the figure, the answer
would seem to be very clearly “yes.” We can see that Bill’s approval rating
moves up and down alongside Hillary’s approval rating.

Surprised?  No?  Let’s get a little deeper into the data.

For starters, two variables can move up and down together without being
causally related. In fact, causal relationships are notoriously hard to
identify in non-experimental data (see an old post of mine on the
relationship between Nickleback, Herpes, and Obama’s vote share in 2012).
Indeed, other factors could be causing the above patterns. In other words,
it’s possible the above patterns are a “spurious relationship.” But also,
the question here is about an individual-level relationship (what happens
in the minds of voters). Inferring an individual-level relationship from
aggregate data can lead to what’s known as an “ecological fallacy.”

In short, we need better data.

Fortunately, the American National Elections Studies (ANES) has been
conducting surveys for every presidential election from 1948 to 2012. We
can easily download the ANES data set and quickly produce some answers to
this question.

Let’s explore the relationship between opinions of Bill and Hillary Clinton
in 2000. Respondents’ opinions are measured using a “feeling thermometer”
where a score of “100” indicates the highest possible approval of the
Clintons while a score of “0” indicates the lowest possible approval. A
simple regression analysis will tell us if these two variables are indeed
related and whether that relationship is statistically meaningful or not.
The results are in the second chart above (scroll one frame to the right).

I’ll skip the boring statistical details, but basically the regression
model confirms what we see in the approval data. It would seem that that
there is a very strong positive relationship between opinions of Bill and
Hillary Clinton (indicated by the number 0.77 in the column “Coef”). We can
also see that this relationship is statistically meaningful (indicated by
the number 38.95 in the column “t”). In sum, as Bill’s approval goes up,
Hillary’s increases, and as Bill’s approval goes down, Hillary’s declines
as well.

But what about all the “other factors” that could be causing opinions of
both simultaneously?  For example, perhaps both are caused by views of
Democrats in general, raw party identification, or the performance of the
economy. In the social sciences, we call these “control” variables.

In the third chart above, I added five control variables (opinions of the
Democratic Party, opinions of the economy, a respondent’s party
identification, ideology, and gender).

Among the control variables, Democrats, respondents with a favorable
opinion of Democrats, and women all have higher opinions of Hillary
Clinton.  None of this is surprising, but again, it’s important to account
for these relationships.

But what’s most notable about the results is the magnitude of Bill’s
effect. Indeed, from the above results we can quantify Bill’s value to
Hillary’s campaign (as the title of this post suggests). In particular,
because the coefficient on the “Bill” variable is 0.465, the model
indicates that as Bill’s approval rating increases by 1 unit, Hillary’s
approval increases by just under half in the same direction.

So while it’s not a 1-to-1 relationship, Bill has a sizable effect on how
people view Hillary. Moreover, we when look at the last column on the right
(labeled “beta”), what we see is that Bill’s effect is larger in magnitude
than any other variable in the model. So not only does Bill matter, but he
matters quite a bit.

Interested in one more model? Actually, you don’t have a choice.

For some additional context on the magnitude of Bill and Hillary’s
“statistical” relationship, I wanted to see what happened if we used the
same model to predict opinions Al Gore. (See the fourth chart.)

We would expect Bill Clinton to have an effect on Al Gore’s approval rating
given that they shared the White House together (remember, these data were
collected in 2000). And indeed, that’s what we see in the results. However,
what’s notable is that the magnitude of this relationship has decreased by
about 30 percent from what the same model predicts regarding Bill’s effect
on Hillary (from 0.465 to 0.320). In short, the statistical relationship
between Bill and Hillary’s approval ratings is larger in magnitude than the
statistical relationship between Bill and his vice president.

What’s the big takeaway? In short, yes, opinions of Bill Clinton seem to
sway opinions of Hillary. While we can’t say definitively this is causal
(for example, causality could go the other way, with opinions of Hillary
could be affecting Bill’s), this relationship persists even when we control
for various factors. Perhaps most importantly, the effect is surprisingly
large in magnitude. It would seem that Hillary earns about a half increase
or decrease in her approval rating for every 1 unit change in Bill’s
approval rating. In the 2016 campaign, the so-called “Bill factor” would
matter quite a lot.

*The Wire: “Whatever Happened to the Benghazi Select Committee?”
<http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/08/whatever-happened-to-the-benghazi-select-committee/375748/>*

By Russell Berman

August 7, 2014, 4:20 p.m. EDT

Friday will mark exactly three months since House Republicans, with great
fanfare, voted to impanel the Select Committee on Benghazi – a tribunal
charged with uncovering the truth behind the 2012 terrorist attack after
five other congressional committees had apparently fallen short.

Since each party named its members to the panel, however, we've heard
barely a peep.

After an initial photo-op, the 12-member committee led by Chairman Trey
Gowdy (R-S.C.), has held no public hearings. It has issued no reports, and
the only two public statements of any kind it has released have been to
disclose that it received a pair of classified briefings.

The radio silence is by design, Republicans say.

Gowdy spent the first weeks after his appointment by Speaker John Boehner
(R-Ohio) insisting that Democrats were wrong in their predictions that the
committee would be nothing more than political theater, a show trial timed
to fire up a conservative base full of conspiracy theorists right before
the November elections.

By not rushing to hold hearings, Gowdy can demonstrate that he's taking his
time and not creating a campaign spectacle.

"There's no frustration," said an aide to one Republican member of the
panel. "It's good that it's a deliberate process and not a flash in the
pan."

While the House set an initial budget of $3.3 million for the
investigation, it gave the committee no deadline, and Gowdy has said it
will definitely go into the next Congress, which begins in January.

Gowdy, who was unavailable for an interview Thursday, told a South Carolina
newspaper, the Greenville News, earlier this week that the committee would
hold its first public hearing in September after the House returns from its
August recess. The lawmakers plan to hear testimony about security
improvements the State Department has made since the attack that killed
four Americans on Sept. 11, 2012.

The former federal prosecutor said the committee was hearing from witnesses
who had not cooperated with the other Benghazi investigations, a
development he attributed to his impartial approach.

“I know I’m biased, but one of the good parts about running an
investigation in a way that appears to be serious-minded is that witnesses
who were previously unavailable or not interested in cooperating are now
interested in cooperating. The universe of witnesses is expanding.”

The panel's slow start also was a function of bureaucratic delays; it took
time to secure office space, hire staff and obtain security clearances.
While members are not meeting while Congress it out of town, the staff that
has been hired will be working on the investigation, Gowdy told the
Greenville News.

While Democrats on the panel have not criticized Gowdy, the party has kept
up its claims that the select committee is unnecessary and a waste of its
$3.3 million taxpayer-funded budget.

They renewed those cries last week when the G.O.P.-led House Intelligence
Committee declassified a report finding there was no deliberate wrongdoing
by the Obama administration during the Benghazi attack.

The top Democrat on the Benghazi committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.),
issued a statement arguing that the new report once again demonstrates the
futility of Boehner's decision to launch a new investigation.

“The Benghazi Select Committee was created more than two months ago, but
Republican committee chairmen who were passed over continue to hold their
own hearings, release their own transcripts, and issue their own
reports—achieving exactly the opposite result Speaker Boehner promised when
he created the Select Committee and authorized its $3.3 million budget.”

And Josh Schwerin, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign
Committee, suggested in a statement to The Wire that Republicans only want
to push their Benghazi hearings closer to November.

“House Republicans are still planning on spending millions of taxpayer
dollars to ‘investigate’ claims that have already been debunked – by two
Republican-led congressional committees in the past three months.  The only
thing that this pace shows is that House Republicans took time off to sue
the president and want their hearings to be closer to election day to fire
up their Tea Party base.”

Though Democrats have yet to complain about the panel's pace, some
conservatives appearing to be chafing at the fact that Benghazi has faded
from the headline. A group on Facebook has gone so far as to change their
middle names to "Benghazi."

*The Weekly Standard: “Hillary Clinton’s Reputation”
<http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/hillary-clinton-s-reputation_802179.html?page=1>*

By Jay Cost

August 18, 2014

The rollout of Hillary Clinton’s new memoirs, Hard Choices, was not a
resounding success for the former secretary of state. She stuck her foot in
her mouth regarding her family’s vast fortune. She had trouble answering
questions about her evolution on gay marriage. Critics, on the whole, found
the book tired and shopworn.

Yet her poll numbers remain surprisingly solid. Surveys conducted by
Quinnipiac University, Fox News, and Rasmussen Reports—all taken since the
book’s release—show her with comfortable leads nationally over Rand Paul,
Chris Christie, and Jeb Bush. A mid-July CNN poll shows her with generally
strong favorable ratings, although not as positive as they were when she
wrapped up her tenure at State. Even so, respondents said they thought her
to be a “strong and decisive leader” who “generally agrees” with them on
the issues, can “manage the government effectively,” and “cares about
people” like them.

What lessons are there to draw from these numbers? The first, and probably
most obvious, is the disconnect between the political class and the greater
public. Clinton’s book rollout was a disaster among politicos and cable
news obsessives, but people who do not dedicate inordinate time to politics
and policy hardly seemed to notice. While this might be disappointing for
conservatives, who would like to see Clinton’s numbers brought back to
Earth, it is nevertheless a good reminder that what matters in the Beltway
does not necessarily play in Peoria.

The second lesson becomes apparent when we think of Clinton’s numbers in
terms of Weekly Standard online editor Daniel Halper’s new book, Clinton,
Inc. As Halper shows quite clearly, the Clintons are obsessed with brand
management and have become exceedingly skilled at maintaining the improved
reputation they have developed since the dark days of the Lewinsky scandal.
This reputation is not going to fall apart simply because of a bad book
rollout. The collapse of the Barack Obama foreign policy—of which Clinton
was an integral part—apparently has done little to diminish it. Even
Benghazi has hardly made a dent.

While the 2014 midterm election is still three months away, it looks as
though the Republicans are set to do quite well. Still, Clinton’s continued
polling strength cannot but cast a pall over GOP prospects for 2016.
Republicans hope that a faltering Barack Obama will damage Hillary
Clinton’s presidential chances. It’s true that unpopular presidents
generally drag down their successor nominees. John McCain was hurt by
George W. Bush, Hubert Humphrey by Lyndon Johnson, Adlai Stevenson by Harry
Truman, James M. Cox by Woodrow Wilson. But Clinton has something that
McCain, Humphrey, Stevenson, and Cox all lacked: a national reputation
built over a quarter-century of assiduous brand management.

The early signs of the 2016 Clinton campaign suggest a subtle break with
Obama that will reinforce her unique identity. Writing for the New
Republic, Anne Applebaum took a careful read of Hard Choices as a piece of
early campaign literature and concluded that Hillary Clinton is planning to
run a campaign akin to Richard Nixon’s 1968 “man in the arena” strategy.
She is battle-tested, experienced, ready to make the hard sacrifices for
the country, and above all somebody who can be counted upon:

“Clinton hopes to be . . . deeply non-ideological, a centrist. She intends
to run as a hard-working, fact-oriented pragmatist—someone who finds ways
to work with difficult opponents, and not only faces up to difficult
problems but also makes the compromises needed to solve them. Again and
again she portrays herself sitting across the table from Dai Bingguo or
President Putin, working hard, searching for a way forward. Similar
methods, presumably, can be applied to the Republican leadership.”

he problem for Republicans here is stark: They have run a campaign like
this for the last half-century. It has met with little success in the last
20 years, and it has never worked against the Clintons; Hillary Clinton’s
numbers suggest she would be able to “sell” the public on this
problem-solving image better than the GOP nominee could. Given a choice
between a Republican and a Clinton offering basically the same thing, there
is little reason to believe that the country will select the Republican.
Nor, for that matter, can Republicans rest on their oars and assume that
Obama’s sinking reputation will pull Hillary Clinton down as well. After
all, it hasn’t yet.

What, then, is the best response for the GOP? It is simply this: The party
must wrap itself unabashedly in the garb of reform. If Hillary Clinton
offers herself as the wise and learned hand who will rely upon her decades
of experience to guide the ship of state, Republicans have to argue that
her experience is exactly what the country doesn’t need at this moment.
They need to convince the public that, by being in Washington for the last
quarter-century, she is too committed to a broken status quo that is in
desperate need of change. The party then needs to lay out a credible and
salable agenda for that change.

This should sound familiar, for it is how Barack Obama defeated Hillary
Clinton in 2008. A message of reform resonated six years ago, and it could
very well resonate again (so long as it is carried by somebody other than
Obama!). Now as then, the country is tired and frustrated with the status
quo. The people appear to want a change in course.

Granted, this is unfamiliar territory for the Republican party. From Dwight
Eisenhower to Nixon to Gerald Ford to George H. W. Bush to Bob Dole to
George W. Bush to McCain to Mitt Romney, “fresh and new” are not its
calling cards! Only Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan broke with tradition,
and only Reagan was a political success. The party is more comfortable
offering a “Return to Normalcy,” even if the country doesn’t want normalcy.

If Hillary Clinton offers a Return to Normalcy in 2016, it is a fair bet
that the GOP will not be able to beat her by competing on the same terrain.
Instead, Republicans should focus assiduously on maximizing their gains in
this midterm election, take a few weeks to enjoy (hopefully) their victory,
and then have a serious conversation about exactly what kind of change they
want to offer the country in 2016. For that appears to be the best—perhaps
the only—way to beat Hillary Clinton.

*CNN: “Embattled Jon Corzine to host Ready for Hillary Hamptons fundraiser”
<http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/08/07/embattled-jon-corzine-to-host-ready-for-hillary-hamptons-fundraiser/>*

By Dan Merica

August 7, 2014, 3:46 p.m. EDT

Embattled former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, the man who was at the center
of the $1.6 billion MF Global collapse, will be the co-host of a Ready for
Hillary fundraiser in the Wainscott, New York later this month.

Corzine will co-sponsor the event along with special guests David Brock,
the head of Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton messaging and rapid response
group; actress Ashley Judd and Craig Smith, a longtime Clinton friend and
Ready for Hillary senior adviser.

The U.S. government sued Corzine in 2013 for his role in the collapse of
the company. The suit alleged that Corzine drove the company into the
ground and was aware of its paltry cash balance.

Corzine denied any wrongdoing in the case, but has laid low since a
bankruptcy judge approved a plan in November 2013 to repay the company's
26,000 customers.

Since then, the former New Jersey senator and governor has played a behind
the scenes role in politics. In 2012, he was a sizable bundler for
President Barack Obama.

America Rising, an anti-Clinton super PAC and research organization, seized
on the news of the event and highlighted the fact that Ready for Hillary –
a group urging Clinton to run for president in 2016 – are teaming up with
the somewhat toxic Corzine.

"Not Even Scandal-Plagued Jon Corzine Is Too Sleazy For The Clintons To
Cash In On," wrote Tim Miller, the group's executive director, in an email
to reporters.

"Just like the Clintons, Ready For Hillary will take money from anyone,"
Miller wrote.

A Ready for Hillary official confirmed the event, which was first reported
by the New York Daily News, but would not comment on Corzine's involvement.

The event is billed as "a dinner discussion about the work being done to
lay the foundation for a potential Hillary Clinton presidential campaign."

The event is being by Dan and Brooke Neidich, well known philanthropists in
New York.

*Calendar:*

*Sec. Clinton's upcoming appearances as reported online. Not an official
schedule.*

·  August 9 – Water Mill, NY: Sec. Clinton fundraises for the Clinton
Foundation at the home of George and Joan Hornig (WSJ
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/17/for-50000-best-dinner-seats-with-the-clintons-in-the-hamptons/>
)

·  August 13 – Martha’s Vinyard, MA: Sec. Clinton signs books at Bunch of
Grapes (HillaryClintonMemoir.com
<http://www.hillaryclintonmemoir.com/martha_s_vineyard_book_signing>)

·  August 16 – East Hampton, New York: Sec. Clinton signs books at
Bookhampton East Hampton (HillaryClintonMemoir.com
<http://www.hillaryclintonmemoir.com/long_island_book_signing2>)

·  August 28 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes Nexenta’s OpenSDx
Summit (BusinessWire
<http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140702005709/en/Secretary-State-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-Deliver-Keynote#.U7QoafldV8E>
)

·  September 4 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton speaks at the National Clean
Energy Summit (Solar Novis Today
<http://www.solarnovus.com/hillary-rodham-clinto-to-deliver-keynote-at-national-clean-energy-summit-7-0_N7646.html>
)

·  October 2 – Miami Beach, FL: Sec. Clinton keynotes the CREW Network
Convention & Marketplace (CREW Network
<http://events.crewnetwork.org/2014convention/>)

·  October 13 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton keynotes the UNLV Foundation
Annual Dinner (UNLV
<http://www.unlv.edu/event/unlv-foundation-annual-dinner?delta=0>)

·  ~ October 13-16 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes
salesforce.com Dreamforce
conference (salesforce.com
<http://www.salesforce.com/dreamforce/DF14/keynotes.jsp>)

 ·  December 4 – Boston, MA: Sec. Clinton speaks at the Massachusetts
Conference for Women (MCFW <http://www.maconferenceforwomen.org/speakers/>)