Subject: Correct The Record Friday November 21, 2014 Afternoon Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:11:02 -0500
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

*​**Correct The Record Friday November 21, 2014 Afternoon Roundup:*

*Tweets:*

*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: Introducing our new video, “The
American Dream: Hillary Clinton Writing A New Chapter”
http://youtu.be/Nezan76vwhc  <http://t.co/uDDJZt065U>[11/21/14, 12:15 p.m.
EST <https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/535844006136385536>]

*Headlines:*

*MSNBC: “Hillary Clinton’s first campaign ad of 2016?”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-the-first-campaign-ad-2016>*

“The video is not actually a campaign ad, as there is no Hillary Clinton
campaign. And Correct the Record, as a project of a super PAC, is legally
prohibited from coordinating with candidates. But it’s one more sign that
the people around Clinton are doing everything they can to pave the way for
her to run.”

*CNN: “Pro-Clinton groups prepare for an all-but-certain run”
<http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/21/politics/hillary-clinton-pac-meet-friday/index.html>*

“While the group will have a presence at the Ready for Hillary event --
founder David Brock will moderate a panel -- over three dozen Correct the
Record donors will meet Friday in New York to discuss Clinton and the
future.”

*MSNBC: “Can anyone stop Hillary Clinton?”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/can-anyone-stop-hillary-clinton>*

“Even among liberals, there seems to be little room at the moment for a
challenger. Exit polls from this month’s election show that 83% of
Democrats think Clinton would make a good president, while 88% of ‘solid
liberals’ view her favorably, according to a recent Pew poll. ‘Despite all
the talk about a ‘yearning’ for a more liberal candidate from the
Democratic base, we see no evidence  – at least at this point – that
liberals are unhappy with Hillary Clinton,’ the nonpartisan Cook Political
Report wrote.”

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: Philip Bump: “Hillary’s 2008 lead was never
as big as her 2016 one is”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/21/hillarys-2008-lead-was-never-as-big-as-her-2016-one-is/>*

“Her lead in 2016 is substantially larger than what she enjoyed eight years
ago. By way of example. Here's how the polling looked in the Democratic
primary in New Hampshire in 2008, via Real Clear Politics.”

*New York Times blog: NYT opinions staffer, Juliet Lapidos: “Hillary
Clinton Takes Sides on Immigration”
<http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/hillary-clinton-takes-sides-on-immigration/>*

“On the sticky issue of immigration, she’s backing President Obama’s
decision to prevent the deportation of millions of undocumented immigrants.”

*Articles:*

*MSNBC: “Hillary Clinton’s first campaign ad of 2016?”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-the-first-campaign-ad-2016>*

By Alex Seitz-Wald

November 21, 2014, 11:50 a.m. EST

Hillary Clinton has yet to declare her intentions to run for president, but
she already has the makings of a campaign team and donor network – many of
whom are meeting in New York Friday – and now she has something resembling
a campaign ad.

[VIDEO]

At a meeting of top donors and strategists associated with the Clinton
effort Friday, the pro-Clinton group Correct the Record will unveil a
slickly produced four-minute video promoting Clinton’s would-be
presidential campaign. The video includes interviews with dozens of
Americans who want Clinton to run in 2016. It will be first played at the
event hosted by another pro-Clinton group, Ready for Hillary.

The only thing missing from this would-be candidate introduction ad,
called, “The American Dream: Hillary Clinton Writing A New Chapter,” is the
candidate herself. Clinton appears in video snippets of speeches she
delivered on behalf of Democrats in Iowa and Louisiana this year, but
mostly the video focuses on Americans explaining straight-to-camera why
they want Clinton to run for president in 2016.

“As the video highlights, folks from across the country voiced their
enthusiasm about Hillary Clinton’s strength, resiliency and her vision for
the future,” said Correct the Record’s Adrienne Elrod. “The prevailing
message heard was ‘run, Hillary, run!’”

The video is not actually a campaign ad, as there is no Hillary Clinton
campaign. And Correct the Record, as a project of a super PAC, is legally
prohibited from coordinating with candidates. But it’s one more sign that
the people around Clinton are doing everything they can to pave the way for
her to run.

*CNN: “Pro-Clinton groups prepare for an all-but-certain run”
<http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/21/politics/hillary-clinton-pac-meet-friday/index.html>*

By Dan Merica

November 21, 2014, 8:56 a.m. EST

The former secretary of state's most ardent supporters and organizers will
meet Friday in New York City to discuss what now looks like an
all-but-certain Hillary Clinton campaign for president.

Ready for Hillary, a pro-Clinton super PAC that has been organizing around
a Clinton run for almost two years, is hosting an all-day strategy session
that will bring together the different groups that have been working around
a Clinton run since shortly after she left the State Department in early
2013.

The Ready for Hillary National Finance Council meeting -- which is being
held at the Sheraton Times Square in New York City -- is part rally, part
history lesson for the Clinton supporters and will bring together top
flight Democratic strategists, longtime Clinton supporters and at least
three people rumored to be the former secretary of state's next campaign
manager.

Guy Cecil, the executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign
Committee; Stephanie Schriock, the president of EMILY's List; and Ace
Smith, a political operative who worked for Clinton in 2008, have all been
rumored as likely picks for Clinton's top campaign job. All three will sit
on panels and discuss Clinton's future Friday.

Ready for Hillary has been the most high profile pro-Clinton super PAC that
sprung up to boost Clinton between her years at the State Department and
her eventual presidential run. Founded in 2013, the group has been focused
on garnering grassroots support, building a sizable list of supporters and
raising money.

The organization has worked somewhat like a ground and grassroots
operations for Clinton, dispatching volunteers to different events and
sending a campaign bus to drive across the country and rally support.

Ready for Hillary has also started to grease the wheels of state and local
politics. The group has sold or traded its email list with over 30 state
parties and donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to state parties and
local campaigns.

But Friday's meeting -- and an eventual Clinton announcement - are somewhat
of a going away party for Ready for Hillary and its young, excited staffers.

Multiple sources from the group told CNN that while Ready for Hillary will
keep working until Clinton announces her candidacy, the group will wind
down operations that day the former first lady announces.

"That is the point at which we would wind down because we are not going to
have a separate and competing field and grass roots infrastructure across
the country," said one source with knowledge of Ready for Hillary's plans.
"Rather than continuing our efforts across the country, we would tell our
supporters, 'Hillary has a campaign, go join it.'"

The day Clinton announces, the group will also make their supporter list
available to the Clinton campaign, allowing their operation to reach out
and activate the supporters Ready for Hillary have cultivated across the
country.

As Ready for Hillary prepares to fade away, two other super PACs boosting
Clinton are starting to ramp up.

Priorities USA, the super PAC tasked with big money fundraising and ad
buying, is in a place to step up the moment that Clinton declares her run.

Although the group promised not to raise money for Clinton while other
groups competed for donations around the 2014 midterms, organizers from
Priorities have been meeting with big Democratic donors across the country
and plan to contact those donors the instant Clinton announces.

The group is currently "sitting down and talking with donors" but not
"making direct asks until there is a candidate in place," said a Priorities
organizer.

"I think, once the sort of wheels are in motion, we will go back to the
folks that we are meeting with and then there will be solid fundraising off
that," the source said. "Once things really start to ramp up, that is when
we get the checks in the door."

Representatives from Priorities USA, including strategist Paul Begala,
executive director Buffy Wicks and the group's financial adviser Jonathan
Mantz, will speak at Friday's event.

Correct the Record, a communications and research outfit that has been
operating for over a year, is another pro-Clinton super PAC gearing up to
run side-by-side with a Clinton campaign.

According to a source with knowledge of the group's planning, Correct the
Record plans on ramping up in the coming months and tapping into the
research they have invested in for months.

While the group will have a presence at the Ready for Hillary event --
founder David Brock will moderate a panel -- over three dozen Correct the
Record donors will meet Friday in New York to discuss Clinton and the
future.

Brock, according to the source, will tell attendees that he has decided his
group will continue through the 2016 election and will use their rapid
response and research to push the message of the eventual Clinton campaign.

*MSNBC: “Can anyone stop Hillary Clinton?”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/can-anyone-stop-hillary-clinton>*

By Alex Seitz-Wald

November 21, 2014, 9:21 a.m. EST

Hillary Clinton will not clear the field.

Even as a cadre of the Democratic Party’s greatest minds and deepest
wallets convene in a hotel ballroom in New York City to plot Clinton’s
domination of the 2016 presidential nomination, a field of credible
challengers is beginning to take shape.

The question is whether they will be the party’s next Dennis Kuciniches –
idealistic, but ultimately doomed candidates – or Barack Obamas. So far,
Clinton-backers don’t seem too nervous.

On Thursday, former senator Jim Webb became the first person to officially
throw his hat in the ring when he announced an exploratory committee. The
decorated Vietnam veteran with populist swagger and an anti-interventionist
streak has already excited some progressives.

Like Obama, Webb would differentiate himself from Clinton on foreign
policy, and especially the Iraq War, which he famously opposed. Unlike
Obama, Webb would challenge Clinton from the political center, where some
think Clinton is even more vulnerable than on her left.

Webb has so far yet to build a political infrastructure, apparently giving
little heads up to allies about his impending announcement. Still, it was
not a complete surprise. He’s made one trip each to Iowa and New Hampshire,
and told reporters in recent months that he was seriously considering a bid.

On the other side of the ideological spectrum is Vermont Sen. Bernie
Sanders, who is so liberal he’s not even a Democrat (yet), but an
independent. Sanders has not made a final decision, but recently brought on
board top-flight Democratic strategist Tad Devine.

On Wednesday night, his wouldbe campaign team huddled for several hours at
a private home on Capitol Hill in Washington to go over the structure of
the primary process and the feasibility of a run, a source familiar with
the meeting told msnbc.

The group included Devine and business partner Mark Longabaugh, who ran
then-Sen. Bill Bradley’s 2000 presidential campaign against Al Gore in New
Hampshire, which could serve as a model for any insurgent run against
Clinton. Several other strategists were present as well, including one
involved in Obama’s 2008 bid.

“He’s looking at it very seriously, asking that all the questions that he
needs to ask about a real campaign,” said the source of Sanders, who
expects to make a decision “sooner rather than later.”

Sanders may struggle to be taken seriously by the mainstream press, but he
starts with nearly $5 million in his political coffers and a national
fundraising base that includes 750,000 campaign fundraising contacts.

The senator insists he’s not interested in running a mere protest campaign,
and those around him say he would only do it if he could mount a serious
campaign. That means raising and spending at least $50 million in the early
states, which would pay for television advertising, a full field operation
in Iowa and New Hampshire, a more modest field presence in later states, a
headquarters staff, and the resources to allow Sanders to travel and
campaign.

Sanders has visited the early several times already, and has another trip
to Iowa planned for mid-December.

All three have unique strengths that could make them appealing to Democrats
looking for a Clinton alternative.

Despite major policy differences, supporters of both Webb and Sanders cast
their candidates in some similar ways. Americans are sick and tired of
politics as usual, both camps say, and are ready to embrace an
untraditional politician who will speak to their economic needs and anxiety.

Martin O’Malley, the third candidate not named Clinton almost certain to
get into the race, would cast himself differently. O’Malley would tout his
executive experience as both governor of Maryland and mayor of Baltimore,
in contrast to the Senate careers of Clinton, Warner, and Sanders. And
while the other three are in their late sixties or early seventies,
O’Malley is almost two decades younger.

He worked harder than anyone to support fellow Democrats in key states in
2014, and recently hired a former Clinton advisor as a the Policy Director
of his nascent presidential effort. While some Democrats blamed O’Malley
for the defeat of his hand-picked replacement, those familiar with his
thinking say he’s pressing ahead. “As he sees it, it doesn’t really change
anything,” one source said.

So are any of these men capable of being the next Barack Obama?

Bill Burton, who witnessed Obama’s rise from inside as press secretary for
the 2008 presidential campaign, isn’t convinced.  “Even though President
Obama was a new senator and serious underdog, he was still one of the most
famous Democrats in the country when he announced in 2007.  None of these
other Democrats have that kind of profile or even the access to the kind of
infrastructure he was able to build so quickly,” he said.

Indeed, while Clinton skeptics are often quick to point out that Obama
blindsided Clinton, the then-senator’s rise was foreseeable in late 2006.
At roughly this point in 2008 presidential election cycle, Obama was
already emerging as a clear threat. A CNN poll released in early November
had the young senator trailing Clinton by just 11 points, and Pew dubbed
him “leading rival” to Clinton.Then-Sen. John Edwards was also attracting a
sizable portion of the vote.

Clinton was a frontrunner then, but not the same way she is now. Current
surveys consistently show Clinton leading by 50 percentage points or more.
And the would-be candidate in second place, Vice President Joe Biden, is
unlikely to run if Clinton does.

“The polls are overwhelming about what Democratic voters want, it’s not
even close,” said former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, who supporters
Clinton. “No one is going to overcome that … It wasn’t like this last time.”

In addition to being an exceptional candidate and skilled fundraiser, Obama
one other big thing going for him that the likely batch of Democrats this
time to do not: His biography.

It’s not a great time to be a white man in the Democratic politics if you
have White House ambitions, since many voters want to make history again by
electing a woman. And being a minority also gives candidates a natural base
of support.

Another former governor who has thrown his support behind Clinton, Ohio’s
Ted Strickland, who now leads the political arm of the Center for American
Progress (CAP), said that while he thinks the other potential candidates
have something to offer, Clinton remains the strongest.

“But that does not mean that I don’t appreciate Bernie Sanders, Sen.
Elizabeth Warren, Gov. Martin O’Malley – a lot of other important leaders
in the Democratic Party who can contribute to the development of an agenda
to move our country towards a more just, egalitarian set of policies,” he
told msnbc Wednesday at a CAP conference. “We need strong progressive
voices.”

Even among liberals, there seems to be little room at the moment for a
challenger. Exit polls from this month’s election show that 83% of
Democrats think Clinton would make a good president, while 88% of “solid
liberals” view her favorably, according to a recent Pew poll. “Despite all
the talk about a ‘yearning’ for a more liberal candidate from the
Democratic base, we see no evidence  – at least at this point – that
liberals are unhappy with Hillary Clinton,” the nonpartisan Cook Political
Report wrote.

That could change, however. Democracy for America, the group that grew out
of Howard  Dean’s presidential campaign, asked for their members’ opinions
on 2016 this week and found twice as many wanted Warren as Clinton, who
also finished slightly behind Sanders.

And all of these non-Clinton Democrats are largely unknown outside their
home states. That’s a challenge for them in the short run, but a big
opportunity in the long run, because it means they have plenty of room to
improve their standings.

In Iowa and New Hampshire, voters are quick to tell reporters that they
favor a competitive nominating process, suggesting the other candidates
will be given a serious look.

And the landscape is favorable this cycle in New Hampshire. A competitive
Republican primary means many independents are  likely to vote in the GOP
contest, leaving behind a more liberal pool of voters in the Democratic
primary.

Meanwhile, other candidates could still get in, though it’s unclear who.
Warren finished at the top of the DFA poll, but has repeatedly said she’s
not running and giving no signals to the contrary. Massachusetts Gov. Deval
Patrick is also popular, but seems intent on getting out of politics for
now.

“The only profile of a candidate who would have a chance, except Hillary
Clinton, would be someone like a big state governor,” said Rendell, noting
they could raise the necessary funds for a run right out of the gate.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has long harbored national ambitions, but is
loyal to the Clinton family, and was politically damaged in his reelection
bid this year.

California Gov. Jerry Brown, on the other hand, fought a bruising primary
against Bill Clinton in 1992 and is a bit of a maverick in his party. He’s
also sitting on a massive $21 million war chest, and is still raising more
money, despiting easily winning re-election this month (he says he wants to
use the money to push ballot measures in 2016).

“You never say never with Jerry Brown,” Rendell said.

Regardless, it’s clear Clinton will have a real competitive process on her
hand. There will be no coronation.

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: Philip Bump: “Hillary’s 2008 lead was never
as big as her 2016 one is”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/21/hillarys-2008-lead-was-never-as-big-as-her-2016-one-is/>*

By Philip Bump

November 21, 2014, 10:00 a.m. EST

A quick point that's been made a few times by a few people (especially
Bloomberg's Dave Weigel), but which deserves a more thorough look. Hillary
Clinton led in 2008 presidential primary polls, as we all remember, which
has often served as a "however" point in analysis of how she looks for
2016. "Hillary leads by a wide margin, however she led in 2008, too."

And that's true. But her lead in 2016 is substantially larger than what she
enjoyed eight years ago. By way of example. Here's how the polling looked
in the Democratic primary in New Hampshire in 2008, via Real Clear Politics.

[GRAPH]

Clinton led, often by a wide margin. Her largest lead was just over 21
points. (The numbers above are the Real Clear Polling average,
incidentally, not raw poll numbers.)

Iowa was much closer. In fact, Clinton often trailed other candidates,
including former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

[GRAPH]

Her largest lead in Iowa was 7.2 points.

Now compare that to 2016 polling -- which is still early, but a poll taken
today is only about 50 days before the start of the polls above.

[GRAPH]

Hillary Clinton was the front-runner in 2008, ahead of Edwards and Obama,
until she wasn't. Clinton is the front-runner for 2016, as well, ahead of a
healthy dose of empty space and then Vice President Joe Biden and Sen.
Elizabeth "No, Really, I'm Not Running" Warren (D-Mass.). It's a whole
different race.

However, that can change.

*New York Times blog: NYT opinions staffer, Juliet Lapidos: “Hillary
Clinton Takes Sides on Immigration”
<http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/hillary-clinton-takes-sides-on-immigration/>*

By Juliet Lapidos

November 21, 2014, 12:12 p.m. EST

Presumably with the 2016 presidential race in mind, Hillary Clinton has
sometimes bet that the best position is to have no position at all. She has
refused, for instance, to say whether she favors the Keystone XL oil
pipeline.

But on the sticky issue of immigration, she’s backing President Obama’s
decision to prevent the deportation of millions of undocumented immigrants.

“I support the President’s decision to begin fixing our broken immigration
system and focus finite resources on deporting felons rather than
families,” she said in a statement.

Much like the president, she justified her support for executive action by
pointing to the larger context of congressional inaction.

“I was hopeful that the bipartisan bill passed by the Senate in 2013 would
spur the House of Representatives to act, but they refused even to advance
an alternative. Their abdication of responsibility paved the way for this
executive action, which follows established precedent from Presidents of
both parties going back many decades.”

Her position itself is not surprising. As a senator she voted in favor of
President Bush’s immigration overhaul (which failed) and has generally made
it clear that she thinks reform is necessary.

But she could have ducked responding to this specific action. The fact that
she didn’t suggests that she thinks Republican complaints of “Caesarism”
will matter less in two years than immigration advocates’ gratefulness to
the Democratic Party.