Subject: Correct The Record Tuesday December 2, 2014 Afternoon Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 13:57:14 -0500
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

*​**Correct The Record Tuesday December 2, 2014 Afternoon Roundup:*

*Tweets:*

*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: Share our video and join the growing
movement for @HillaryClinton <https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nezan76vwhc … <https://t.co/vPEh2Q4X3M>
 [12/2/14, 12:56 p.m. EST
<https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/539840473632739329>]

*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@HillaryClinton
<https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton> fought to preserve America's
environment for the next generation #HRC365
<https://twitter.com/hashtag/HRC365?src=hash>
http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-protecting-the-environment/ …
<http://t.co/BuixAfUBCZ> [12/2/14, 11:31 a.m. EST
<https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/539819058196013057>]

*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@SenatorBarb
<https://twitter.com/SenatorBarb>: "We want [@HillaryClinton
<https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton>] to know that there's a groundswell of
grass roots support." [12/2/14, 10:21 a.m. EST
<https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/539801585527058432>]

*Headlines:*

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: Chris Cillizza: “Hillary Clinton is
*definitely* running for president. Here’s 5 reasons why.”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/12/02/hillary-clinton-is-definitely-running-for-president-heres-5-reasons-why/>*

“Hillary Clinton is running for president. Well, not actively -- at least
not yet. But, she's running.  Here's five reasons why (and make sure to
read my colleague Aaron Blake's incorrect-but-interesting counterargument).”

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: Aaron Blake: “There’s a real chance Hillary
Clinton won’t run for president. Here are five reasons why.”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/12/02/theres-a-real-chance-hillary-clinton-wont-run-for-president-heres-5-reasons-why/>*

“Even people who really want to run often decide not to, for varying
reasons. What might those reasons be for Clinton? Below are five
conceivable hurdles.”

*Washington Post: “Potential challengers to Hillary in 2016 are beginning
to line up”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clintons-backers-say-they-welcome-a-challenge-in-the-democratic-primary/2014/12/02/4956ab52-7584-11e4-8893-97bf0c02cc5f_story.html>*

“Each of the emerging challengers also appeals to a constituency within the
Democratic Party that Clinton has struggled with in the past. And unlike
Clinton — who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential campaign
— each has distinct issues to build a campaign around.”

*Associated Press: “Clinton: Protect Obama’s Environmental Actions”
<http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HILLARY_CLINTON_?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>*

“Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said steps President
Barack Obama has taken to help the environment must be protected at all
costs.”

*MSNBC: “Why Hillary Clinton is repeating herself on fracking”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/three-times-clinton-has-repeated-herself-fracking>*

“Clinton’s book was dismissed by reviewers as boring, but it could also be
seen as 600 pages of pre-written talking points, ready to be cannibalized
for speeches, statements, and other message memos.”

*Talking Points Memo: “Where Is The Obama Of 2016? No Viable Dem Challenger
In Sight Yet” <http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/where-is-the-obama-of-2016>*

“But while things can undoubtedly change, the fact of the matter is that --
right now -- there isn't an Obama figure in 2016. It at least looks like
all Clinton has to do is decide to run.”

*Politico blog: Dylan Byers on Media: “Chuck Todd's wife aiding Jim Webb”
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/12/chuck-todds-wife-aiding-jim-webb-199431.html>*

“Kristian Denny Todd, the Democratic strategist and wife of ‘Meet The
Press’ moderator Chuck Todd, is working with former Senator Jim Webb as he
considers a 2016 presidential bid, a Webb spokesperson confirmed on
Tuesday.”

*Articles:*

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: Chris Cillizza: “Hillary Clinton is
*definitely* running for president. Here’s 5 reasons why.”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/12/02/hillary-clinton-is-definitely-running-for-president-heres-5-reasons-why/>*

By Chris Cillizza

December 2, 2014, 12:30 p.m. EST

Hillary Clinton is running for president. Well, not actively -- at least
not yet. But, she's running.  Here's five reasons why (and make sure to
read my colleague Aaron Blake's incorrect-but-interesting counterargument).

1. She's run before. One of the best predictors of future presidential bids
is past presidential bids. (Sidebar: This reality is why NO ONE should be
surprised that Joe Biden wants to run in 2016; he's already run for
president twice!)  All politics has an addictive element to it but nothing
is more alluring than the presidential race.  Hundreds of people cheering
for you at every stop you make, chanting your name, doing everything they
can to just be near you. A cadre of advisers and hangers-on. (This isn't
always so fun.) Scads of media attention. The sheer exhilaration of
competition at the highest levels. It's very, very hard to give that up
once you know it's out there. And Clinton knows it's out there -- not to
mention the fact that she undoubtedly feels as though she has unfinished
business after losing in 2008 despite starting that race as a frontrunner.
(See below for more on that.)

2. She's the biggest non-incumbent frontrunner in modern presidential
history. Clinton knows better than almost anyone the fragility of
frontrunner status in a presidential race. At the same time, she is a
considerably bigger favorite in 2016 than she ever was in 2008 -- both
because of her increased strengths but also because of the weakness of the
field beneath her. In a new Quinnipiac University poll, Clinton took 57
percent to 13 percent for Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren who continues
to insist she isn't running. No one else gets double digit support. Is it
likely that at some point over the next year that a poll (or polls) might
come out in Iowa, New Hampshire or South Carolina that show Clinton as less
than certain to be the nominee? Absolutely. But, there has never been a
path as clear as this one for a non-incumbent looking at the presidential
race.  And it won't ever come along again. Clinton knows that.

3. She's let 1,000 flowers bloom. There's "Ready for Hillary". There's
"Correct The Record". There's "Priorities USA".  That trio of groups -- all
aimed at Clinton's 2016 bid -- have steadily added former and current
confidantes of the ex-Secretary of State to their ranks. It's hard to
imagine people like Harold Ickes or Jeremy Bird, Obama's swing state
director, signing on to such an effort without some sort of wink from
Clinton that, yes, she is going to do this. She could have, at any point in
the past few years, shut down all of these groups with an indication --
private or public -- that she wasn't so sure about how she would spend her
future days. She didn't.  That's telling.

4. Her memoir was blah.  Clinton's reflection on her time at the State
Department -- "Hard Choices" -- was the book of a politician who is not yet
done being a politician.  Despite the title, Clinton took very few risks in
the re-telling of her time as the nation's top diplomat and, unlike former
Cabinet officials like Leon Panetta and Bill Gates, didn't blow up any of
her former colleagues including the man in the Oval Office at the moment.
It was written, at least in part, to help shape the narrative of her time
at State for the campaign to come. This from David Ignatius' review of
"Hard Choices" for the Post: "This is a careful book, written tactically to
burnish friendships and avoid making enemies. Perhaps that’s inevitable for
an autobiographer who is considering running for president, but there are
times when the reader feels he is being 'spun' rather than enlightened."
Yup.

5. She wants to redeem herself.  Think back on Clinton's life; it's been a
relentless series of successes at increasingly high levels, right up until
2008. That loss to Obama is the only real blemish on a resume stocked with
accomplishments up the wazoo. For someone as goal-oriented and
achievement-focused as Clinton, it's hard to imagine she hasn't spent some
decent amount of time thinking on how she could have done things
differently back in 2008. So, when presented with a golden opportunity to
"make things right", how does Clinton not do it? She doesn't not. (Double
negative for the win!)

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: Aaron Blake: “There’s a real chance Hillary
Clinton won’t run for president. Here are five reasons why.”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/12/02/theres-a-real-chance-hillary-clinton-wont-run-for-president-heres-5-reasons-why/>*

By Aaron Blake

December 2, 2014, 8:30 a.m. EST

Today on The Fix, Chris and I are exploring opposite sides of the same
argument: Whether Hillary Clinton will run for president in 2016.

Chris is pretty sure she will. Longtime political analyst Charlie Co0k is
considerably less certain, pegging it at 60-70 percent. Similarly, I tend
to think we always overestimate how likely candidates are to run. It's a
big decision, and lots of things need to happen to make it a "go." Even
people who really want to run often decide not to, for varying reasons.

What might those reasons be for Clinton? Below are five conceivable
hurdles. Let me qualify, though, that I still think it's much more likely
she runs than not. But any one of these things could be a significant
obstacle in her decision-making process.

1. The prospect of losing

It seems like we've already discussed Clinton's inevitability ad nauseam,
but that inevitability really only applies to the Democratic primary. Her
odds in the general election are headed toward being a 50/50 proposition --
and getting worse.

While Clinton's approval rating reached upwards of 60-65 percent as
secretary of state, her favorable rating in the days since she stepped down
has steadily fallen -- so much so that most recent polls show her under 50
percent (though still more positive than negative). That's pretty middling
territory.

Here's polling of a Clinton matchup with Jeb Bush:

[GRAPH]

And Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.):

[GRAPH]

And Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.):

[GRAPH]

She leads all comers, but she's also better-known than all of them. She's
also hovering around 50 percent and losing ground.

None of the charts above, we would add, include the new Quinnipiac
University poll, which shows Paul and Bush trailing Clinton by five, and
Ryan within four. Only against Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) does Clinton get more
than 46 percent of the vote.

And all of this comes as President Obama's brand continues to fade. Running
on the heels of an unpopular president of your own party who is leaving
office is hardly ideal. Ask John McCain.

For Clinton, she's got to make a decision about whether it's all worth it
to run and have basically a 50 percent chance (or less, including the
primary) to become the next president. We are a closely divided country,
and Clinton has long been a polarizing figure. She should expect nothing
less than a very tough campaign.

2. Age/health/stamina

The age thing is always a difficult one to discuss, but if Clinton wins in
2016, she would become the second-oldest president ever to assume office,
at 69 years old. Reagan was also 69 in 1981, but was closing in on his 70th
birthday.

She and Bill Clinton say she is healthy, and save for an incident in 2012
in which she fell and suffered a concussion and subsequent blood clot,
there's little reason to believe otherwise. But even Bill Clinton has
acknowledged the hurdle that is health, which he calls a "serious issue."

Perhaps as important for Clinton is the fact that she spent three straight
decades in public life before taking the last 22 months "off". She also
spent about half those three decades under the intense national scrutiny as
first lady, a 2008 presidential candidate and secretary of state (and that
doesn't include her eight years as senator of the third-largest state in
the country, New York).

Signing up for another campaign means committing to six years (if you win)
of campaigning and serving, and as much as a decade if you want to serve
two terms. That would bring Clinton to a quarter-century in the national
spotlight.

Clinton clearly has a motor; she wouldn't be in this spot if she didn't.
But getting involved in another campaign is a huge investment, and one that
very few people can afford to enter into lightly.

3. Benghazi

Whatever you think about what happened surrounding the deaths of four
Americans in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012, it certainly wasn't Clinton's
proudest moment as a public servant. Clinton even acknowledged earlier this
year that the attacks were her biggest regret as secretary of state.

She has testified in front of Congress about the episode, famously intoning
about the motivation for the attack: "What difference, at this point, does
it make?" (Side note: Coming to numerous 2016 attack ads near you.)

Republicans pilloried the Obama Administration for initially and repeatedly
saying that the attacks were random, when in fact that turned out not to be
the case. Again, that's not helpful for Clinton in 2016.

Polling suggests a slim majority of Americans are both open to further
inquiry into Benghazi and also doubt Clinton's statement that she wasn't
aware of requests for further security for the Americans in Benghazi prior
to the attack.

Clinton might think this is old news, but the moment she becomes Candidate
Clinton is when she'll start having to answer more questions about
Benghazi. The GOP will make sure of it.

4. Finances

If you think the scrutiny of the Clinton family's finances has been intense
so far, wait until she announces she is running for president.

Case in point is a Washington Post story over the holiday weekend, from Roz
Helderman and Phil Rucker, detailing the behind-the-scenes action
surrounding Clinton's March 5 speech at UCLA. And then there was the
scrutiny of her speech to UNLV, for which she was paid $225,000.

Clinton, in case you need reminding, hasn't handled questions about her
finances with aplomb. There was the time she said that she and her husband
were "dead broke" upon leaving the White House and struggled to pay
mortgages on their multi-million-dollar homes (yes, plural), then doubled
down on that claim, and also differentiated her family from the "truly well
off."

Rucker back in June detailed some grumbling about Clinton's ability to
appeal to an increasingly populist Democratic Party, and it's a fair
question to ask whether she's the right fit for her party at this point in
time.

Whether or not someone like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) were to run,
Clinton's wealth and her family's ties to Wall Street will be at issue.

Also worth noting: The moment Clinton announces is when the
$200,000-$300,000 speeches likely stop. That's a lot of future earning
potential she would be giving up.

5. Questions about the 'Obama coalition'

Conventional political wisdom has it that Democrats are well-situated for
presidential elections, while Republicans excel in midterm elections.

A more apt statement might be this: President Obama is well situated for
presidential elections, while Republicans excel in the midterms.

The fact is that Obama got young people, blacks and Latinos to turn out and
vote Democratic unlike anyone before him; that's why we call it the "Obama
coalition." But the question is whether that revolution is transferable to
someone not named Barack Obama -- i.e. are young people, African Americans
and Latinos really going to get as excited about Hillary Clinton in 2016 as
they did about Obama in 2008?

Former top Obama campaign strategist David Plouffe summed it up well
recently in an interview with the New York Times's Jonathan Martin: "We
shouldn't just assume that the Obama voters will automatically come out for
Democratic presidential candidates."

There has been plenty of chatter about Clinton expanding the Democratic
Party's appeal to white working class voters and maybe even competing in
states like Arkansas and Kentucky -- we are dubious, to say the least --
but her clearest path to victory is keeping the Obama coalition intact and
taking advantage of the blue team's need to win relatively few of the swing
states that already exist to secure a victory (rather than trying to add
more).

And if she doesn't think she can do that, her path to victory is even
narrower than some of the polls above suggest.

*Washington Post: “Potential challengers to Hillary in 2016 are beginning
to line up”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clintons-backers-say-they-welcome-a-challenge-in-the-democratic-primary/2014/12/02/4956ab52-7584-11e4-8893-97bf0c02cc5f_story.html>*

By Anne Gearan

December 2, 2014, 9:00 a.m. EST

Backers and allies of Hillary Rodham Clinton are increasingly worried about
the threat posed by a motley field of Democratic presidential hopefuls who
could complicate or even derail a Clinton candidacy in 2016 by focusing
attention on her weaknesses.

All of the possible challengers are long shots against Clinton and would
face a steep climb against the well-known former secretary of state. Many
Clinton supporters also say competition would help her by honing her
campaigning skills and discouraging the sense of entitlement that damaged
her White House bid in 2008.

But each of the emerging challengers also appeals to a constituency within
the Democratic Party that Clinton has struggled with in the past. And
unlike Clinton — who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential
campaign — each has distinct issues to build a campaign around.

Jim Webb, the former senator from Virginia who just formed an exploratory
committee, is a populist Appalachia native with potential appeal to
working-class and Southern whites. Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley has been
laying the groundwork of a campaign for months, focusing his energies on
wooing the kind of progressive activists that view Clinton with suspicion.
Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), the gadfly socialist who is also pondering a
run in the Democratic primary, represents the antiwar left still bitter
with Clinton over the war in Iraq.

Longtime Clinton family political adviser Harold Ickes said it would be a
mistake to dismiss such challengers and the dangers they pose.

“[What if] this were 2007 before Obama got into the race and you’d said,
‘Do you think Senator Obama is a threat to Hillary?’ ” Ickes asked
rhetorically. The clear answer, he suggested, is that most would have
dismissed Obama as little more than an annoyance.

But the biggest concern among many Clinton acolytes is someone who says she
is not running — Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), an economic populist who
has come to personify a longing among liberal Democrats for someone further
to Clinton’s left.

Warren especially interests and worries Bill Clinton, the unofficial top
strategist for his wife’s shadow campaign, according to two people who know
the former president well. Bill Clinton admires Warren’s stemwinder
speaking style, and Hillary Clinton echoed parts of Warren’s
sticking-up-for-the-little guy economic message during midterm speeches
this year.

During their one midterm appearance together, Clinton lavished praise on
Warren and kept her own remarks brief. Elsewhere, she tried out appeals to
working-class and underemployed voters that strategists expect to hear
again if Clinton runs.

Many Clinton backers insist that some Democratic opposition is both
inevitable and welcome, since it tends to toughen up the eventual winner
for the head-to-head contest with a Republican in the general election.
Looking at the lessons of Clinton’s bitter primary contest with Obama in
2008, Democrats also hope that Clinton will be polite, even deferential, to
potential opponents such as Webb if she runs.

Loyalists to Obama and Clinton privately agree that Obama snatched the
nomination away from Clinton in part because of her campaign’s failure to
see the upstart as a real threat.

“I have never assumed, and I think anybody would have been in error to
assume, that our party would just give its nomination to anyone,” said
Craig Smith, a longtime adviser to both Clintons who is now working for the
Ready for Hillary super PAC.

“That is not the history of our party. This isn’t how it works,” Smith told
reporters in New York at a November gathering of potential donors and
workers for a Clinton campaign. “You’ve got to go out there. You’ve got to
work for it.”

Speaker after speaker at the Ready for Hillary-sponsored event tried to
dispel the notion that Clinton will walk away with the nomination. Some
strategists outside the group, however, note that its very existence
reinforces the notion that she is the de facto choice. No other potential
candidate has anything like the pro-Clinton machinery, which includes three
major outside groups that have amassed money and an impressive list of
potential supporters.

Webb — Navy secretary in the Reagan administration, a combat veteran, an
author and a filmmaker — became the first Democrat to formally jump into
the race with the release last month of a lengthy Internet video and the
formation of an exploratory committee.

Webb did not mention Clinton in his video but appeared to take a few shots
at her as the establishment favorite. Government is “paralyzed,” Webb said,
and he wants to shake it up. He made a point of saying he is a public
servant, not a “career politician.”

“In my view, the solutions are not simply political but those of
leadership,” Webb said. “I learned long ago on the battlefields of Vietnam
that in a crisis, there is no substitute for clear-eyed leadership.”

Like Clinton, Webb is considered considered a strong defender of American
military power who is moderate on social and economic issues. They occupied
similar political space in the Senate, but Webb,who has been critical of
recent U.S. wars may have special appeal to white working-class and
Southern voters whose interests he has long championed. Webb’s exploratory
committee did not respond to requests for comment.

O’Malley, who leaves office in January, touts himself as a can-do executive
who oversaw a wave of progressive policies in Maryland, including
legalizing same-sex marriage, abolishing the death penalty and raising the
minimum wage.

Many analysts believe O’Malley would be likely to position himself as the
second candidate, ready if Clinton stumbles. He has attended more than two
dozen political events this year in the early caucus state of Iowa, where
Clinton was trounced in 2008.

Sanders’s political niche would be as an antiwar conscience candidate,
highlighting Clinton’s 2003 vote to approve the Iraq war, her support of
the war in Afghanistan and her role in helping guide the campaign in Libya
while secretary of state. U.S. military involvement in Syria came after
Clinton had stepped down, but she has said publicly that she supported an
intervention much earlier.

One danger, several strategists said, is that Clinton might be lured into
espousing base-friendly positions that would hurt her in a general
election, as GOP nominee Mitt Romney did in advocating strict immigration
measures during the 2012 Republican debates. Perhaps a bigger risk, they
said, is that a savvy primary opponent with a sharply honed message or a
fresh face could upstage her.

By comparison with those of Republicans, whose tea party wing tends to pull
centrists to the right, the differences among Democrats are more on the
margins, many Clinton supporters said. That will make it all the more
important for her to take her opponents seriously — at least on the surface
— and use them to show her strengths as a capable leader who is up to the
challenge of pulling out a third Democratic general-election win in a row,
according to the strategists.

Clinton is watching the potential field — both Democratic challengers and
possible Republican opponents — but they are essentially irrelevant to her
decision about running, friends said. They also said Clinton is genuinely
undecided and is still mulling the decision of whether to run.

Focus on Clinton’s plans, already intense, will increase after Christmas.
She has said she is likely to make a decision after Jan. 1.

That’s when other potential challengers to Clinton could also emerge.
Although the November 2016 election is still far off, other hopefuls have
less leeway to wait.

“I think there are people in the party who would like to know sooner rather
than later” what Clinton is going to do, Ickes said, starting with Webb and
O’Malley.

“Unlike Hillary, they don’t have . . . a national political apparatus, nor
do they have a national money base,” Ickes said. “And you know, there are
money people who are going to say, ‘I’m not giving to anybody until I know
what Mrs. Clinton is going to do.’ ”

One senior Democratic strategist who backs Clinton criticized Webb’s
Internet announcement, dubbing it a “14-minute hostage video.” But that
strategist and others also said that Webb elevates his stature simply by
virtue of challenging Clinton.

“If it’s one-on-one, he will, by default, be a serious candidate,” said
that strategist, who requested anonymity because Clinton has not yet said
she is running.

“There will be an opposition, and that opposition needs some outlet,” he
said. “He can be the vessel of that opposition, and then when Iowa falls
apart for him, for example, that’s it.”

*Associated Press: “Clinton: Protect Obama’s Environmental Actions”
<http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HILLARY_CLINTON_?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>*

By Deepti Hajela

December 2, 2014, 9:35 a.m. EST

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said steps President
Barack Obama has taken to help the environment must be protected at all
costs.

Clinton spoke Monday at a dinner of the League of Conservation Voters in
New York as she weighs another presidential campaign.

She told the audience that this is an exciting time for environmental
issues, and mentioned steps like the agreement the U.S. reached with China
a few weeks ago over cutting emissions.

But she didn't make any reference to another high-profile issue, the
Keystone XL pipeline. And before she attended the dinner, she was at a
fundraiser for Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who supports the
project.

Landrieu faces Republican Rep. Bill Cassidy in Saturday's runoff Senate
election.

Landrieu, who trails Cassidy in public polls, has been a vocal supporter of
her home state's oil and gas industry and unsuccessfully sought Senate
approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, which is proposed to run from Canada
to Nebraska, where it would connect with existing pipelines to carry more
than 800,000 barrels of crude oil a day to refineries along the Texas Gulf
Coast. It has been vigorously opposed by environmental groups, including
the League of Conservation Voters. The two events were held on the same
night as a televised Senate debate in Louisiana.

Clinton has declined to take a position on the pipeline, telling audiences
in Canada earlier this year that it would not be appropriate for her to
comment on it, given her previous role in Obama's administration.

The State Department has overseen a long-stalled review of the project.
While environmentalists have opposed the plan, labor unions have backed it
because of the potential economic benefits.

*MSNBC: “Why Hillary Clinton is repeating herself on fracking”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/three-times-clinton-has-repeated-herself-fracking>*

By Alex Seitz-Wald

December 2, 2014, 11:12 a.m. EST

Hillary Clinton drew applause Monday night in New York City during a
sweeping speech to an environmental group when she called for “smart
regulation” on natural gas production, including the extremely
controversial practice known as “fracking.”

Here’s what the former secretary of state and likely 2016 presidential
candidate told the League of Conservation Voters’ annual donor dinner in
Manhattan:

“Methane leaks in the production and transportation of natural gas pose a
particularly troubling threat. So it is crucial that we put in place smart
regulations and enforcement, including deciding not to drill when risks to
local communities, landscapes, and ecosystems are just too high. If we’re
smart about this, and put in the right safeguards, yes, natural gas can
play an important bridge role in the transition to a cleaner energy
economy.”

If it sounds familiar, it should.

Here’s what she said on the topic in September during a major speech on the
environment in Las Vegas:

“Methane leaks in the production and transportation of natural gas are
particularly troubling. So it’s crucial that we put in place smart
regulations and enforce them, including deciding not to drill when the
risks are too high. … Part of that bridge [to a clean energy economy] will
certainly come from natural gas.”

And here’s what she wrote in her new book, “Hard Choices”, on the topic:

“Methane leaks in the production and transportation of natural gas are
particularly worrisome. So it’s crucial that we put in place smart
regulations and enforce them, including not drilling when the risks are too
high. If we approach this challenge responsibly…we can build a bridge to a
clean energy future.”

Fracking is one of the most controversial issues on the environment today –
especially in Clinton’s adopted home state of New York, where Gov. Andrew
Cuomo regularly faces heated protests over the topic – so the former
secretary of state treads carefully when discussing it.

Clinton’s book was dismissed by reviewers as boring, but it could also be
seen as 600 pages of pre-written talking points, ready to be cannibalized
for speeches, statements, and other message memos.

“When I was first learning how to be a speechwriter, when in doubt I would
crib from ‘Living History,’ and it always ended up sounding like Hillary
Clinton,” former Clinton speechwriter Jon Lovett told msnbc in September,
referring to the former first lady’s second memoir.

*Talking Points Memo: “Where Is The Obama Of 2016? No Viable Dem Challenger
In Sight Yet” <http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/where-is-the-obama-of-2016>*

By Dylan Scott

December 2, 2014, 12:39 p.m. EST

In the nascent 2016 presidential campaign, two seemingly contradictory
things are still simultaneously true.

Nobody actually has any idea what the field is going to look like by the
time people start caucusing in Iowa. And yet Hillary Clinton is undeniably
the historically prohibitive favorite for the Democratic nomination, should
she choose to run -- far more than she was in 2008, when a hot-shot
first-term senator with some star power of his own toppled her White House
ambitions.

It is a reminder of the unpredictability of presidential politics. Things
can happen, minds do change. But for the moment anyway, there has perhaps
never been a more sure thing than Hillary Clinton in 2016.

A new CNN poll released Tuesday illustrates the state of the race. Clinton
attracts 65 percent of the Democratic primary vote in the national poll;
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who has so far said she isn't running, ranks
a distant second at 10 percent. Vice President Joe Biden sits at 9 percent.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who is openly mulling a bid, is back at 5
percent. Nobody else earns more than 1 percent.

In sizing up Clinton's 2016 changes, some people seem to remember that she
was the favorite in 2008, too, so they're looking for the next Obama who
might displace her. A Ready for Warren draft effort is in some ways the
personification of that mindset among some on the left. But Clinton's
polling advantage heading into 2016 is far beyond what she had in 2008.

The CNN poll puts Clinton up 55 points against the field. She never
approached such as lead in 2008. She rarely topped 30 points, in a couple
clear outlier polls, according to the Real Clear Politics archive. A
December 2006 USA Today poll had Clinton at 33 percent and Obama at 20
percent. The same month, CNN gave Clinton a lead of 37 percent to Obama's
15 percent.

Sizable, but not insurmountable, as history would show. Certainly not the
50-plus-point lead that Clinton has been maintaining in almost every 2016
poll.

But another feature of those polls from early in the 2008 cycle should give
all election prognosticators pause. Former Vice President Al Gore was
routinely taking between 11 and 14 percent of the primary vote. At this
point, figures like George Pataki, Chuck Hagel, Bill Richardson and Wesley
Clark were being polled. On the Republican side, national polls showed New
York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani primed to take the party's nomination.

A Washington Post/ABC News poll in December 2006 showed Giuliani up 34
percent to 26 percent over eventual GOP nominee Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). He
would eventually jump out to double-digit lead in early 2007, sometimes
besting his competitors by more than 20 points, per the RCP archive. But,
of course, the generally moderate Giuliani took an unorthodox strategy to
avoid more conservative voters in the early primaries, failed
spectacularly, and all that polling was effectively for naught.

Clinton's allies seem aware of how this all can look. "Nobody wants a
coronation" is the popular saying these days. “I have never assumed, and I
think anybody would have been in error to assume, that our party would just
give its nomination to anyone,” Craig Smith, a longtime adviser to both
Clintons and now a senior adviser to the Ready for Hillary super PAC, told
the Washington Post.

Smith might be learning all the lessons that Giuliani and Gore's polling
should offer. But while things can undoubtedly change, the fact of the
matter is that -- right now -- there isn't an Obama figure in 2016. It at
least looks like all Clinton has to do is decide to run.

*Politico blog: Dylan Byers on Media: “Chuck Todd's wife aiding Jim Webb”
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/12/chuck-todds-wife-aiding-jim-webb-199431.html>*

By Dylan Byers

December 2, 2014, 10:59 a.m. EST

Kristian Denny Todd, the Democratic strategist and wife of "Meet The Press"
moderator Chuck Todd, is working with former Senator Jim Webb as he
considers a 2016 presidential bid, a Webb spokesperson confirmed on Tuesday.

"She's been helping and advising him," Webb spokesperson Jessica Vanden
Berg said.

Todd previously served as the communications director for Webb's 2006
Senate campaign in Virginia. She is not currently being paid by Webb's
office, according to spending reports for Webb's political action committee.

Webb announced his decision to launch an exploratory committee in November:
"I made this decision after reflecting on numerous political commentaries
and listening to many knowledgeable people," he wrote on his website. "I
look forward to listening and talking with more people in the coming months
as I decide whether or not to run."