Subject: Anger towards Wall Street and Hillary's trust issue
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:18:13 -0500

Dear John:

I attended a luncheon today with one of the most down to earth Chairman and CEO's of a billion dollar company who had an interesting reply when asked how to build a bridge between Wall Street and the anger towards it in this presidential campaign.  There might be something for you to use in his reply.

He said that he wasn't sure if the anger was really towards Wall Street or the need to just be mad. That we've created a culture of anger and Wall Street is just a symbol of that anger.  The line "I'm mad as hell and not going to take it anymore" may have been a great line in a 1970s movie, but it isn't a place  where you can effectively govern.

His take on the financial collapse  was three pronged: the government really was encouraging home ownership, the banks saw a way to make a lot of money, and the American people signed on to loans they couldn't pay.

But, when he talked about the culture of anger, I saw a way for Hillary to diffuse Bernie's mantra --
to add to it, which she does when she talks about we're not a one issue country, but that response isn't adequately diffusing Bernie's message.  What if she speaks the truth -- I'm, also angry, but not just at Wall Street.   I'm angry with the technological advancements over the past several years that have displaced workers and difficult to understand, I'm angry that to compete in a global marketplace has resulted in enormous changes to our economic system.  I'm angry at the pay inequity for women.  I'm angry at the lack of opportunities for minorities.  But, where does the anger get us?  And, how do we bring together the other half of the country who may be angry with their own set of completely different frustrations?

The job of the President is to bring together very different points of view and build consensus for a way forward.  We have to diffuse the anger, not inflame it.  How do we stop being a country of anger? Where will that ever get us?  And, here is the key to all this, it needs to be said not in anger, but from that place of gratitude that guides her.  This whole lack of trustworthiness can be overcome when she speaks from the heart, from that center of calm -- that is the kind of stability and leadership we all are craving.  She's such a wonderful human being and when she appears authentic, people respond postively.

The difference people need to see in her is that she isn't filled with the rage and anger Bernie exhibits -- she has the ability to rise above it and unite people which is the great weakness in Bernie's message.

I think if she can speak about this 'culture of anger and divisiveness' is not just about Bernie, but a message to carry forward when she's the nominee and facing Trump or Cruz.

Catherine