Subject: Re: Thursday Night Debate
From: Charlie Baker <[email-masked]>
To: John Podesta <[email-masked]>
Cc: Robby Mook <[email-masked]>, Ron Klain <[email-masked]>, Karen Dunn <[email-masked]>, Jake Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:29:12 -0500

NBC is building set .. We just did a format call ( more later)

On Feb 2, 2016, at 11:34 AM, John Podesta <[email-masked]> wrote:

One intangible factor--she wants this debate. We don't need to pay a king's
ransom for it, but we should try to get it and not reverse on what
constitutes best outcome.

On Tuesday, February 2, 2016, Charlie Baker <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> If Bernie makes this complicated  I think we reserve the room the debate
> was going to happen in and do a town meeting there ( and invite Bernie to
> join us)
>
> On Feb 2, 2016, at 11:07 AM, Robby Mook <[email-masked]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[email-masked]');>> wrote:
>
> I'm on the phone with Jake.  We both agree she should continue to state as
> a matter of fact that the debate is going to happen and she's looking
> forward to it.  We should not concede a bunch of things we don't want in a
> negotiation to make it happen, but we certainly shouldn't back away now.
>
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Ron Klain <[email-masked]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[email-masked]');>> wrote:
>
>> John just told me that it was unhelpful to reignite this debate, so I
>> apologize.  But I do think that we should not give away things we care
>> about to make the debate happen.  If it doesn’t happen, so be it.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Karen Dunn [mailto:[email-masked]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[email-masked]');>]
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 02, 2016 11:03 AM
>> *To:* Charlie Baker
>> *Cc:* Ron Klain; [email-masked]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[email-masked]');>; John Podesta (
>> [email-masked]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[email-masked]');>); Jake Sullivan
>> *Subject:* Re: Thursday Night Debate
>>
>>
>>
>> I continue to believe losing the rest is not such a loss since a) we will
>> probably have to slap on more debates later anyway and b) Bernie has driven
>> almost everything except the NH choice and if we no longer really want
>> that, there is no reason to give in to all his many demands. In other
>> words, I agree with Charlie and the question remains - how badly do we
>> want/need thurs.
>>
>>
>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 10:59 AM, Charlie Baker <[email-masked]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[email-masked]');>> wrote:
>>
>> I expect him to hold out. Issue is if we cancel might lose the rest.. My
>> own view is at least adebate a month would still happen if Bernie stays in
>> and we want them
>>
>>
>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 10:56 AM, Ron Klain <[email-masked]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[email-masked]');>> wrote:
>>
>> Is this locked, or is Sanders still holding out?  If he is holding out,
>> should we try to blow it up?  I know that HRC really wanted this debate on
>> Thursday night, but we have  a town hall on Wednesday to get out our
>> message, and I still hate the idea of debating on Thursday and then losing
>> on Tuesday – and would prefer our first one-on-one with Bernie to come
>> AFTER we lose in NH, and are on a path to comeback.
>>
>>
>