Subject: RE: WSJ Poll
From: David Binder <[email-masked]>
To: Joel Benenson <[email-masked]>, Robby Mook - HRC <[email-masked]>, Jennifer Palmieri ([email-masked]) <[email-masked]>, Kristina Schake ([email-masked]) <[email-masked]>, Brian Fallon ([email-masked]) <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, Jim Margolis <[email-masked]>, Mandy Grunwald <[email-masked]>, John Anzalone <[email-masked]>, "John Podesta ([email-masked])" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 15:45:51 -0700

So NYTimes poll comes out now and has her at 48% on honesty and trustworthiness?    With headline saying, "Hillary Clinton Gains Favor."

Regardless, I share Anzo's point on this morning call that we don't want to be affiliated with any Teflon.  It can easily wear off in the course of 18 months.

From: Joel Benenson [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 12:47 PM
To: Robby Mook - HRC; Jennifer Palmieri ([email-masked]); Kristina Schake ([email-masked]); Brian Fallon ([email-masked]); [email-masked]; Jim Margolis; Mandy Grunwald; John Anzalone; David Binder; John Podesta ([email-masked])
Subject: RE: WSJ Poll

One other interesting note:

Jeb beats Joe by 8 in head to head
HRC beats Jeb by 6

A propos of our conversation this morning we should think at some point about "electability" in general.  IF we raise stakes about consequences of GOP properly without ever saying we're the only one who can beat them... it might be something to play with later on if Bernie falters on that front.

From: Joel Benenson
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 12:44 PM
To: Robby Mook - HRC; Jennifer Palmieri ([email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>); Kristina Schake ([email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>); Brian Fallon ([email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>); Oren Shur ([email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>); Jim Margolis; Mandy Grunwald; John Anzalone ALG; David Binder
Subject: WSJ Poll

Two things I wanted to share ---

1)      HRC ratings historically have been worse when she is a candidate, which is true about everyone else --- her positive/negative in WSJ poll has ranged only from 42 to 45 positive and 36-42 negative since June of 2014, which is about when the speculation phase began.  The uptick to 42 in April, was indeed up from 36 in March but was also as high as 39 in November which is well before emails or cash stories.  Suggests that this could be noise and may be worth using with reporters on background when having discussions.

2)      Strategically --- We have been asking ourselves if Rs are picking up something on "national security" since they keep driving it.  If WSJ poll is right, they have but it has to do with GOP primary voters.

a.      When asked the top one or two items they think should be the top priority for the federal gov't:

                                                              i.      All addults say 1) Job Creation and econ growth; 2)National Security and terrorism; 3) Deficit and Spending; 4) Health care

                                                            ii.      GOP Primary Voters  from March 2012 -   1) Job creation and econ growth; 2) deficit and spending; 3)National Security, but only 20% naming as top two choice

                                                          iii.      GOP Primary Voters from April 2015 -   1) National Security and terrorism, 53% naming as top two choice; 2)deficit and spending; 3) Job Creation and Econ growth

                                                           iv.      Dem Primary Voters from April 2015 -  1) Job Creation and economic growth (61%); 2)Health care; (38%)  3)Climate Change (24% - 17% name it #1); National Security (30%; 13% as top)

They are playing to their base - I suspect Nat Security has popped with base because it has become their principle attack on Obama ---