Re: Messaging Memo for 9:30am Call

C

Saw this formulation of Christie's in an article:

Speaking about a potential campaign today in Akron, Christie said, 'I've got a lot to work on before I worry about that decision and a day job that keeps me fairly busy,' according to KTIV.

Christie acknowledged today that he's 'considering' a run in 2016 while continuing to claim that he hasn't made a decision yet. 'When I do, I will certainly let everybody know,' he noted.

cdm

On Oct 25, 2014, at 11:12 PM, Nick Merrill <nmerrill@hrcoffice.com> wrote:

Hi everyone,

Attached please find a memo that Philippe and I put together that we think
captures our conversation last weekend on a beginning frame for how to
position HRC, ourselves, and our surrogates following Election Day, along
with some of our ideas on how to execute.

Talk to you all in the morning.

Nick

On 10/22/14, 11:19 AM, "Joanne Laszczych" <jlaszczych@cdmillsGroup.com>
wrote:

Call is confirmed for 9:30am EDT on Sunday, 10/26.

Please use:

Dial i: 1-530-881-1000
Code: 742374#

-----Original Message-----
From: Cheryl Mills [mailto:cheryl.mills@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:24 AM
To: Jake Sullivan
Cc: Philippe Reines; Nicholas S Merrill; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Joanne
Laszczych
Subject: Re: Follow - up Call

Does 930am work better for folks then?

cdm

On Oct 21, 2014, at 11:45 PM, Jake Sullivan <jake.sullivan@gmail.com>
wrote:

I'll be on a flight and could do 930 (Robby and I were skedded to speak
then)

On Oct 21, 2014, at 8:17 PM, Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear all

Can you advise Joanne if a call at 9am Sunday will work for a follow
up call?

Best.

cdm

<Memo 11.5.docx>

N

Hi everyone,

Attached please find a memo that Philippe and I put together that we think
captures our conversation last weekend on a beginning frame for how to
position HRC, ourselves, and our surrogates following Election Day, along
with some of our ideas on how to execute.

Talk to you all in the morning.

Nick

On 10/22/14, 11:19 AM, "Joanne Laszczych" 
wrote:

>Call is confirmed for 9:30am EDT on Sunday, 10/26.
>
>Please use:
>
>Dial i:	1-530-881-1000
>Code:  	742374#
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Cheryl Mills [mailto:cheryl.mills@gmail.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:24 AM
>To: Jake Sullivan
>Cc: Philippe Reines; Nicholas S Merrill; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Joanne
>Laszczych
>Subject: Re: Follow - up Call
>
>Does 930am work better for folks then?
>
>cdm
>
>> On Oct 21, 2014, at 11:45 PM, Jake Sullivan 
>>wrote:
>> 
>> I'll be on a flight and could do 930 (Robby and I were skedded to speak
>>then)
>> 
>>> On Oct 21, 2014, at 8:17 PM, Cheryl Mills 
>>>wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear all
>>> 
>>> Can you advise Joanne if a call at 9am Sunday will work for a follow
>>>up call?
>>> 
>>> Best. 
>>> 
>>> cdm

1 attachment

Memo 11.5.docx 123 KB

download

C

A two assumptions:

1. That we will run draft framework and message by others.

2. That we will put ourselves on timeline to discuss this with her this week.

On draft - My comments below are in text in caps in relevant sections (cut where i agreed to reduce length) - sorry on iPhone so no track changes or separate document:

.

Introduction

[AGREE WITH OBSERVATIONS AND AUDIENCE TARGET OF THE INTRODUCTION]

.

Talking points

NOTE: These are written in HRC’s voice but once agreed upon can be adapted for the communications team, surrogates, etc.

Q: Are you running for President?

•

I have not made a final decision. Ultimately though, I am hoping to get to “Yes”

•

But this is a very personal decision for me, as I IMAGINE IT IS FOR OTHERS weighing something like this. HAVING WALKED THIS PATH UNSUCCESSFULLY BEFORE, HOW HARD YOU MUST WORK TO EARN THE TRUST OF AMERICANS WHO [WANT|NEED FILL IN]. THAT'S WHY I WANT to make THIS DECISION on my own schedule, with as much thought AND INFORMATION as possible to GUIDE ME.

•

I’ve had a wonderful year and a half since stepping down as Secretary. I launched my Foundation programs, wrote a book about my TIME as Secretary of State, I gave speeches to organizations and causes. ONLY IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, HAVE I GONE out and fought for THE values I WANT FOR OUR COUNTRY IN OUR ELECTED LEADERS in the midterms.

•

[TKTK language based on the outcome of the election]

•

So the next few months are going to be invaluable as I turn my attention to this decision in earnest. I’m going to be talking to all kinds of people around the country about how to keep moving this country forward, about how we can do better. And I’m going to be talking to people who have insight into how a presidential campaign needs to look in 2015 & 2016 to have the best chance of success. I’m going to LEARN as much as possible so I can make an informed a decision about what’s best for me and what’s best for our country.

.

Managing the Message

[AGREE WITH SURROGACY FRAMEWORK]

.

Transparency

We should view this period as a pre-cursor to what would give way to a larger strategy should she decide to run. Central to that will be communicating to the press how HRC is approaching this next phase.

[AGREE]

Our message, put simply, is this:

“HRC is talking to a wide swath of people about all of the issues that will affect the future of this country, how she can impact that debate, and how a campaign TODAY SHOULD WORK. SHE WANTS TO FIND AND UNDERSTAND the best, forward-looking ideas. SO SHE WILL cast a wide net. She may not agree with everyone, and they may not agree with her; but she wants to hear from people.

.

Execution

1.

After Election Day, we work with a reporter to write about what the coming months will look like. We convey that while HRC has not decided whether to run, we expand on her public answers by explaining that she plans to spend time talking to people who have new ideas. Elements of such a story should include:

•

A sampling of people she will be reaching out to, with a heavy does on new faces and previously unsupportive faces;

•

Her reaching out to several key power centers, such as Elizabeth Warren;

THE LIST BELOW WORRIES ME - IT IS CLOSE TO THE SAME LIST YOU COULD HAVE PUT IN 2008 (WHICH YOU FLAG AS IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS FURTHER DOWN IN THIS SECTION). I WOULD SHORTEN AND/OR CATEGORIZE DIFFERENTLY AND I WOULD CONSIDER INTRODUCING NEW NAMES - REALIZE THIS IS HARD AS IT ALSO GOES TO WHO YOU WANT PRESS REACHING OUT TO AS AN AUTHORITATIVE VOICE BUT I WANT TO FLAG THIS AS AN AREA I WOULD WELCOME DISCUSSION ON OUR CALL

•

A basic list of those who legitimately have insight into the process and her thinking – including:

o

Maggie

o

CDM

o

John

o

Huma

o

Jake

o

Philippe

o

Capricia

o

Minyon

o

HRC Personal Staff

•

Similar thought needs to be given to who – if anyone – around WJC & CVC should be named – or if the point should be conveyed that they are holding their advice close to the vest. Obviously this is not as much of an issue with CVC, but the extended WJC network remains the most difficult to stay synced up with; [WE NEED TO TRY WITH "THE CLOSE TO THE VEST" APPROACH YOU OFFER FOR WJC BECAUSE HE TOO NEEDS A NARRATIVE CHANGE FROM HOW HE IS PERCEIVED TO HAVE ENGAGED LAST TIME AND WE SHOULD BE SMART ABOUT HOW SHE, HE AND THOSE TALKING CONVEY THAT BEGINNING NOW]

•

State clearly and strongly that no personnel decisions have been made of any kind, and any assumptions of such are only that – assumptions, unfounded at that;

2.

Once the story runs, we determine a natural time and place for HRC to convey her evolution of thought to a public audience. We will work with the schedule to determine what timing and setting works best.

[AGREE WITH REST]

.

Conclusion

The goal of the next 8 weeks should be to practice discipline by conveying a simple message to a wide audience to preserve HRC’s ability to be thoughtful and make decisions on her own terms, with an increasing eye toward how such a strategy would evolve if/when she “Gets to yes.”

And as stated at top, she and we need to do so as genuinely and as authentically as possible.

[TOTALLY AGREE]

cdm

On Oct 25, 2014, at 11:12 PM, Nick Merrill <nmerrill@hrcoffice.com> wrote:

Hi everyone,

Attached please find a memo that Philippe and I put together that we think
captures our conversation last weekend on a beginning frame for how to
position HRC, ourselves, and our surrogates following Election Day, along
with some of our ideas on how to execute.

Talk to you all in the morning.

Nick

On 10/22/14, 11:19 AM, "Joanne Laszczych" <jlaszczych@cdmillsGroup.com>
wrote:

Call is confirmed for 9:30am EDT on Sunday, 10/26.

Please use:

Dial i: 1-530-881-1000
Code: 742374#

-----Original Message-----
From: Cheryl Mills [mailto:cheryl.mills@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:24 AM
To: Jake Sullivan
Cc: Philippe Reines; Nicholas S Merrill; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Joanne
Laszczych
Subject: Re: Follow - up Call

Does 930am work better for folks then?

cdm

On Oct 21, 2014, at 11:45 PM, Jake Sullivan <jake.sullivan@gmail.com>
wrote:

I'll be on a flight and could do 930 (Robby and I were skedded to speak
then)

On Oct 21, 2014, at 8:17 PM, Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear all

Can you advise Joanne if a call at 9am Sunday will work for a follow
up call?

Best.

cdm

<Memo 11.5.docx>

R

This mentions the Foundation a few times. Any chance that you discussed that with her at all? I personally wouldn't suggest highlighting her Foundation work after election day but I recognizet hat's a much larger discussion with her!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 5:05 AM
Subject: Re: Messaging Memo for 9:30am Call
To: Nick Merrill <nmerrill@hrcoffice.com>
Cc: Jake Sullivan <jake.sullivan@gmail.com>, Philippe Reines <pir@hrcoffice.com>, John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com>, Robby Mook <robbymook@gmail.com>

A two assumptions:

1. That we will run draft framework and message by others.

2. That we will put ourselves on timeline to discuss this with her this week.

On draft - My comments below are in text in caps in relevant sections (cut where i agreed to reduce length) - sorry on iPhone so no track changes or separate document:

.

Introduction

[AGREE WITH OBSERVATIONS AND AUDIENCE TARGET OF THE INTRODUCTION]

.

Talking points

NOTE: These are written in HRC’s voice but once agreed upon can be adapted for the communications team, surrogates, etc.

Q: Are you running for President?

•

I have not made a final decision. Ultimately though, I am hoping to get to “Yes”

•

But this is a very personal decision for me, as I IMAGINE IT IS FOR OTHERS weighing something like this. HAVING WALKED THIS PATH UNSUCCESSFULLY BEFORE, HOW HARD YOU MUST WORK TO EARN THE TRUST OF AMERICANS WHO [WANT|NEED FILL IN]. THAT'S WHY I WANT to make THIS DECISION on my own schedule, with as much thought AND INFORMATION as possible to GUIDE ME.

•

I’ve had a wonderful year and a half since stepping down as Secretary. I launched my Foundation programs, wrote a book about my TIME as Secretary of State, I gave speeches to organizations and causes. ONLY IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, HAVE I GONE out and fought for THE values I WANT FOR OUR COUNTRY IN OUR ELECTED LEADERS in the midterms.

•

[TKTK language based on the outcome of the election]

•

So the next few months are going to be invaluable as I turn my attention to this decision in earnest. I’m going to be talking to all kinds of people around the country about how to keep moving this country forward, about how we can do better. And I’m going to be talking to people who have insight into how a presidential campaign needs to look in 2015 & 2016 to have the best chance of success. I’m going to LEARN as much as possible so I can make an informed a decision about what’s best for me and what’s best for our country.

.

Managing the Message

[AGREE WITH SURROGACY FRAMEWORK]

.

Transparency

We should view this period as a pre-cursor to what would give way to a larger strategy should she decide to run. Central to that will be communicating to the press how HRC is approaching this next phase.

[AGREE]

Our message, put simply, is this:

“HRC is talking to a wide swath of people about all of the issues that will affect the future of this country, how she can impact that debate, and how a campaign TODAY SHOULD WORK. SHE WANTS TO FIND AND UNDERSTAND the best, forward-looking ideas. SO SHE WILL cast a wide net. She may not agree with everyone, and they may not agree with her; but she wants to hear from people.

.

Execution

1.

After Election Day, we work with a reporter to write about what the coming months will look like. We convey that while HRC has not decided whether to run, we expand on her public answers by explaining that she plans to spend time talking to people who have new ideas. Elements of such a story should include:

•

A sampling of people she will be reaching out to, with a heavy does on new faces and previously unsupportive faces;

•

Her reaching out to several key power centers, such as Elizabeth Warren;

THE LIST BELOW WORRIES ME - IT IS CLOSE TO THE SAME LIST YOU COULD HAVE PUT IN 2008 (WHICH YOU FLAG AS IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS FURTHER DOWN IN THIS SECTION). I WOULD SHORTEN AND/OR CATEGORIZE DIFFERENTLY AND I WOULD CONSIDER INTRODUCING NEW NAMES - REALIZE THIS IS HARD AS IT ALSO GOES TO WHO YOU WANT PRESS REACHING OUT TO AS AN AUTHORITATIVE VOICE BUT I WANT TO FLAG THIS AS AN AREA I WOULD WELCOME DISCUSSION ON OUR CALL

•

A basic list of those who legitimately have insight into the process and her thinking – including:

o

Maggie

o

CDM

o

John

o

Huma

o

Jake

o

Philippe

o

Capricia

o

Minyon

o

HRC Personal Staff

•

Similar thought needs to be given to who – if anyone – around WJC & CVC should be named – or if the point should be conveyed that they are holding their advice close to the vest. Obviously this is not as much of an issue with CVC, but the extended WJC network remains the most difficult to stay synced up with; [WE NEED TO TRY WITH "THE CLOSE TO THE VEST" APPROACH YOU OFFER FOR WJC BECAUSE HE TOO NEEDS A NARRATIVE CHANGE FROM HOW HE IS PERCEIVED TO HAVE ENGAGED LAST TIME AND WE SHOULD BE SMART ABOUT HOW SHE, HE AND THOSE TALKING CONVEY THAT BEGINNING NOW]

•

State clearly and strongly that no personnel decisions have been made of any kind, and any assumptions of such are only that – assumptions, unfounded at that;

2.

Once the story runs, we determine a natural time and place for HRC to convey her evolution of thought to a public audience. We will work with the schedule to determine what timing and setting works best.

[AGREE WITH REST]

.

Conclusion

The goal of the next 8 weeks should be to practice discipline by conveying a simple message to a wide audience to preserve HRC’s ability to be thoughtful and make decisions on her own terms, with an increasing eye toward how such a strategy would evolve if/when she “Gets to yes.”

And as stated at top, she and we need to do so as genuinely and as authentically as possible.

[TOTALLY AGREE]

cdm

On Oct 25, 2014, at 11:12 PM, Nick Merrill <nmerrill@hrcoffice.com> wrote:

Hi everyone,

Attached please find a memo that Philippe and I put together that we think
captures our conversation last weekend on a beginning frame for how to
position HRC, ourselves, and our surrogates following Election Day, along
with some of our ideas on how to execute.

Talk to you all in the morning.

Nick

On 10/22/14, 11:19 AM, "Joanne Laszczych" <jlaszczych@cdmillsGroup.com>
wrote:

Call is confirmed for 9:30am EDT on Sunday, 10/26.

Please use:

Dial i: 1-530-881-1000
Code: 742374#

-----Original Message-----
From: Cheryl Mills [mailto:cheryl.mills@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:24 AM
To: Jake Sullivan
Cc: Philippe Reines; Nicholas S Merrill; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Joanne
Laszczych
Subject: Re: Follow - up Call

Does 930am work better for folks then?

cdm

On Oct 21, 2014, at 11:45 PM, Jake Sullivan <jake.sullivan@gmail.com>
wrote:

I'll be on a flight and could do 930 (Robby and I were skedded to speak
then)

On Oct 21, 2014, at 8:17 PM, Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear all

Can you advise Joanne if a call at 9am Sunday will work for a follow
up call?

Best.

cdm

<Memo 11.5.docx>

J

2 catches:
I think we need I to be clearer that there will be no decision in 2014 so the hounds can go back to the kennel.
I don't like what's best for me preceding what's best for the country. I like a formulation that's more like what's in the best interest of the country or to channel Roy Spence, what's the promise of America and can I help deliver it.

JP
--Sent from my iPad--
john.podesta@gmail.com
For scheduling: eryn.sepp@gmail.com

> On Oct 25, 2014, at 11:12 PM, Nick Merrill  wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Attached please find a memo that Philippe and I put together that we think
> captures our conversation last weekend on a beginning frame for how to
> position HRC, ourselves, and our surrogates following Election Day, along
> with some of our ideas on how to execute.
> 
> Talk to you all in the morning.
> 
> Nick
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/22/14, 11:19 AM, "Joanne Laszczych" 
> wrote:
> 
>> Call is confirmed for 9:30am EDT on Sunday, 10/26.
>> 
>> Please use:
>> 
>> Dial i:    1-530-881-1000
>> Code:      742374#
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Cheryl Mills [mailto:cheryl.mills@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:24 AM
>> To: Jake Sullivan
>> Cc: Philippe Reines; Nicholas S Merrill; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Joanne
>> Laszczych
>> Subject: Re: Follow - up Call
>> 
>> Does 930am work better for folks then?
>> 
>> cdm
>> 
>>> On Oct 21, 2014, at 11:45 PM, Jake Sullivan 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'll be on a flight and could do 930 (Robby and I were skedded to speak
>>> then)
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 21, 2014, at 8:17 PM, Cheryl Mills 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Dear all
>>>> 
>>>> Can you advise Joanne if a call at 9am Sunday will work for a follow
>>>> up call?
>>>> 
>>>> Best. 
>>>> 
>>>> cdm
> 
>

R

So I gave more thought to the question of how she answers questions about her speeches and it was honestly harder than I thought. We all agree she should "own" it and be genuine, but explaining that it made financial sense or how it contributed to the endowment can lead to a dangerous downward spiral about money. It's also hard to say she was doing it as part of an outreach effort because then she's saying she reached out to those who could pay...and you get into a back-and-forth about what quantity of time was paid vs not paid.

For that reason, I think (a) the speeches shouldn't be brought up proactively in any way that invites attention and (b) I think any answer needs to ultimately pivot onto offense. I wanted to reach a better conclusion, but I'm stumped. Would love it if someone has something better.

Some thoughts on language below--I tried two frames for this and centered it around presumed partisanship in the coming months (I left it vague as to whether that's around budget or CIR, etc):

OPTION ONE: Middle Class

While I am obviously spending a lot of time thinking about my future, anyone who has ever known me knows that I like to stay busy. I’ve never wanted to stop working.

Partisans will always criticize me for whatever I do – including giving speeches. They just want to have a conversation about anything other than their actual policies. These are the same people spending another month creating gridlock that makes progress on critical issues like education or infrastructure jobs impossible. [Perhaps get into "what matters is what I've been saying to every audience I speak to--that we need to get this country working again for the middle class"...my only flag here is that I'd want a researcher to confirm that this won't invite unhelpful questions].

OPTION TWO: Republican Attacks

While I am obviously spending a lot of time thinking about my future, anyone who has ever known me knows that I like to stay busy. I’ve never wanted to stop working.

But its not surprising that some very partisan groups are always going to attack me for just about anything.

That’s part of what is wrong with Washington – that we’re in a constant cycle of overwhelmingly negative campaigns before a campaign even begins. Its one of the impediments to consensus in Washington.

And the costs of that gridlock aren’t just theatrics in Washington – its middle class families who can’t afford education because Washington isn’t doing enough to keep college affordable or the construction workers who is between jobs because Congress can’t even agree on previously bipartisan priorities like funding highways.

Q&A

Do you have any concerns about the optics of giving paid speeches where you’re being paid more in one hour than the annual income of most Americans?

I’m not surprised that there are some of the more partisan groups and politicians in Washington who would attack me for just about anything – including giving speeches.

But the truth is that when it comes to income inequality and helping the middle class, there are partisan extremists who would rather talk about anything other than policies. They’re spending another month creating gridlock that makes progress on critical issues like education or infrastructure jobs impossible.

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:28 AM, John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com> wrote:

2 catches:
I think we need I to be clearer that there will be no decision in 2014 so the hounds can go back to the kennel.
I don't like what's best for me preceding what's best for the country. I like a formulation that's more like what's in the best interest of the country or to channel Roy Spence, what's the promise of America and can I help deliver it.

JP
--Sent from my iPad--
john.podesta@gmail.com
For scheduling: eryn.sepp@gmail.com

> On Oct 25, 2014, at 11:12 PM, Nick Merrill <nmerrill@hrcoffice.com> wrote:
>

> Hi everyone,
>
> Attached please find a memo that Philippe and I put together that we think
> captures our conversation last weekend on a beginning frame for how to
> position HRC, ourselves, and our surrogates following Election Day, along
> with some of our ideas on how to execute.
>
> Talk to you all in the morning.
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> On 10/22/14, 11:19 AM, "Joanne Laszczych" <jlaszczych@cdmillsGroup.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Call is confirmed for 9:30am EDT on Sunday, 10/26.
>>
>> Please use:
>>
>> Dial i: 1-530-881-1000
>> Code: 742374#
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Cheryl Mills [mailto:cheryl.mills@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:24 AM
>> To: Jake Sullivan
>> Cc: Philippe Reines; Nicholas S Merrill; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Joanne
>> Laszczych
>> Subject: Re: Follow - up Call
>>
>> Does 930am work better for folks then?
>>
>> cdm
>>
>>> On Oct 21, 2014, at 11:45 PM, Jake Sullivan <jake.sullivan@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'll be on a flight and could do 930 (Robby and I were skedded to speak
>>> then)
>>>
>>>> On Oct 21, 2014, at 8:17 PM, Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear all
>>>>
>>>> Can you advise Joanne if a call at 9am Sunday will work for a follow
>>>> up call?
>>>>
>>>> Best.
>>>>
>>>> cdm
>

> <Memo 11.5.docx>