Subject: Re: Evolving the core message
From: Dan Schwerin <[email-masked]>
To: Jake Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Cc: John Podesta <[email-masked]>, Jennifer Palmieri <[email-masked]>, Ron Klain <[email-masked]>, Karen Dunn <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:20:45 -0500

yes i agree -- although thicker should mean sharper, not longer.

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Jake Sullivan <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> I would posit, based on his observations, that if our case for how change
> happens is the meat of the sandwich, we need thicker bread.  The top piece
> of outrage about the current state of affairs has to be thicker, and the
> bottom piece about her bold agenda for what we’re going to do about it has
> to be thicker.
>
>
>
> How’s that for an overwrought analogy?
>
>
>
> *From:* Dan Schwerin [mailto:[email-masked]]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 27, 2016 12:15 PM
> *To:* John Podesta <[email-masked]>
> *Cc:* Jennifer Palmieri <[email-masked]>; Jake Sullivan <
> [email-masked]>; Ron Klain <[email-masked]>; Karen Dunn <
> [email-masked]>
> *Subject:* Re: Evolving the core message
>
>
>
> This is both helpful and a little frustrating. I'm curious whether his
> point about Obama holds true with the African American voters we're going
> to be appealing to in the next few weeks.  But the broader point seems well
> taken. I'm playing with an idea for Monday night's speech that might help
> modestly:
>
>
>
> I think she should speak directly to the thousands of grassroots voters,
> especially young people, who are bringing new energy and urgency to this
> race and forcing all of us to grapple with deep injustices and imbalances
> in our country (the deck is stacked, etc). She should say that she hears
> them, shares their concerns, and is glad they're reshaping our national
> debate. We all agree on the problem that needs to be solved. Now the
> question is how to actually do something about it. And then launch into our
> contrasting theories of change and her belief that ideas can't just sound
> good on paper, they have to really make a difference in people's lives.
>
>
>
> The idea here is 1) make it clear that the protest vote has been heard,
> giving permission to Democrats in later states to move on; 2) provide a
> pivot point to more authentically embrace a shared diagnosis; 3)
> disaggregate Bernie's voters from Bernie himself, so the former feel like
> they can keep shaping the party even after the latter rides off into the
> sunset.
>
>
>
> None of this changes the basic problem that compared to Bernie we're never
> going to be the "change candidate" and so we're either confident in our own
> identity or we're chasing him and offering ourselves as a pale imitation. I
> think we're on to something good with our new message that change is about
> pushing hard, getting knocked down, etc, because it puts her best
> attributes in service of progressive ends. But that's still process and
> incrementalism.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:46 AM, John Podesta <[email-masked]>
> wrote:
>
> Sending just to the internal crew. His dissection of our message is worth
> paying attention to.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Stan Greenberg* <[email-masked]>
> Date: Wednesday, January 27, 2016
> Subject: Evolving the core message
> To: John Podesta <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Stan Greenberg <[email-masked]>
>
> John,
>
>
>
> Let me follow-up your suggestion that I read the transcript of what
> Hillary is actually saying. Here, I’m focusing on the Iowa town hall
> transcript, and happy to respond to the one you are sending.  For now, I am
> convinced you are badly positioned, though I now believe you can readily
> transition to an evolved core message.
>
>
>
> I told you I thought she did great, but that was stylistically,
> presidentially and on foreign threats. She had energy, sounded like
> somebody you could trust as president and looked good. She was the one who
> talked about the new diversity of the country and our new values. It may be
> enough to win Iowa.
>
>
>
> But I think the overall message is tone death on what is happening in the
> country and even more, in the Democratic primary electorate.  As a result,
> she has left the change voters to Sanders.  She addresses change as
> biography: so you are making the vote choice about her, rather than what is
> happening in the country.  At least in this town hall, Sanders was the only
> one talking about change, the country and the future.
>
>
>
> There is a pretty easy way to transition your message, and it could drive
> votes to you pretty quickly.  I believe it is plausible.
>
>
>
> What is your core message?  So, consider me a focus group of one and my
> take away from the town hall. Knowing your core message is the starting
> point to evolving it.
>
>
>
>
>
> *First, you are running on continuity with Obama.* Hillary said, we need
> to “build on the progress that we’ve made.” President Obama achieved great
> things and the great risk is “the Republicans rip away the progress and
> turn us backwards.”  “We need to build on it, and go further.”
>
>
>
> Obama abandoned this message in his own re-elections, but you are on it.
>
>
>
> This is tone death, at best. You begin with a contested idea, even among
> Democrats and people who rate Obama highly.  And it sears in the idea that
> you are incremental change, while conceding change to Sanders and the
> Republicans. That will make your race much harder.
>
>
>
> Which voters could you possibly be talking to? Fully 55 percent of the
> Rising American Electorate and three quarters of white working class women
> says we are on the wrong track in both WVWV and Roosevelt surveys.  This is
> a mad starting point.
>
>
>
> In focus groups we just conducted for Roosevelt last week with African
> American millennials, participants could not have been more despairing:
> “It’s disappointing. I just think our country could do a lot better … It’s
> going to take a real long time to fix the mess. For real.” They describe
> their experience with the economy: “sad and crappy”; “I’m very disgusted”;
> “I’m gong to say uneasy. And just disappointed.”
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Second, you are running on being ready for the job in very insecure
> times.* The primaries and caucuses are a way to vet the candidates, and
> you can see Hillary is ready.  That is what Hillary said in the town hall
> and what the president focused on.
>
>
>
> I can’t tell you how many leaders I supported who want to run on
> experience and building on the progress, including David Miliband, and
> watched them defeated by the change candidate who get all the energy.
> Voters in both the primary and general election will be figuring out how to
> vote for change – and you have given Sanders a big opening.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Third, governing is messy and not very pretty.* And Hillary knows the
> idealism and promises of other candidates won’t happen. Hillary knows how
> to make progress. “I just keep going forward … and I’m still standing.”
> You sound like a grown-up lecturing these young people on don’t expect too
> much from all this idealism.
>
>
>
>
>
> *And fourth, Hillary has spent a lifetime fighting for change and “going
> after inequality.”*  That is who she is. “I’ve taken on the status quo
> time and time again.”  You can trust me to bring change because she battled
> for it, starting with kids and health care.  She’s fought “racial
> inequality, sexist inequality, homophobic inequality.”  Also, economic
> inequality, but mainly to remind people that Bill Clinton is the only
> president to produce greater equality.
>
>
>
> *I found that answer attractive but it does not change your core
> framework, though critically, it provides a ready platform to evolve it.*
>
>
>
> But for now, your core message is about the past. It is about Clinton’s
> character and qualities as a leader.  The message is not economic, and it
> is not about the country.
>
>
>
> * * * * *
>
>
>
> But as we discussed, Hillary can be the candidate who can bring the
> change, and your discussion of biography in town halls allows you to make
> the transition.  But you have to start by saying, “Look, all of us
> Democratic candidates share this critique and anger with what is happening
> in the country.  The difference is I have a powerful personal history of
> fighting inequality and bringing change. And here is are the bold changes I
> will work to bring.”
>
>
>
> That transition takes you to what is happening in the country, it makes
> her bio relevant, and enables her to talk about the bold changes she wants
> to bring. [This is explicitly, not just finishing what Obama did or
> defending his progress.”
>
>
>
> My starting point is the remarkable and intense level of support for the
> level the playing the field message. In our most recent test for Roosevelt,
> we showed that bringing in trade issues in particular strengthens the
> message further.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The reason Sanders is getting so much traction and energy is that he is
> articulating this message. Yes, his personal conviction is important, but
> what makes it work is what he is saying about the country and the ability
> to bring change.  He is talking unapologetically about the excess at the
> top and the need to grow the middle class and America.
>
>
>
> I also now believe that Sanders is being helped by his use of the trade
> issue.
>
>
>
> Your running on “building on the progress” allows him a contrast that
> hurts you in the primary and general.
>
>
>
> But from the beginning, Hillary and her campaign, you affirmed in our
> meetings, really accepted this core economic message, even if Hillary took
> the edge off in delivery.  Progressive Democrats were pretty united. That
> is key to my recommendation here.
>
>
>
> Hillary should say how united are Democrats on this core critique of the
> country and what needs to happen to change the rules so the country grows
> the middle class again. The core difference is that Hillary has a history
> of fighting inequality and bringing change. Sanders does not. That is why
> she is excited to talk about this bold agenda that will bring change.
>
>
>
> Hope this makes sense and helps.
>
>
>
> Happy to talk further.
>
>
>
> Stan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>