podesta_email_14808.txt

podesta-emails 2,005 words email

P17 V16 D6 V11 D1

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQQBBGBjDtIBH6DJa80zDBgR+VqlYGaXu5bEJg9HEgAtJeCLuThdhXfl5Zs32RyB I1QjIlttvngepHQozmglBDmi2FZ4S+wWhZv10bZCoyXPIPwwq6TylwPv8+buxuff B6tYil3VAB9XKGPyPjKrlXn1fz76VMpuTOs7OGYR8xDidw9EHfBvmb+sQyrU1FOW aPHxba5lK6hAo/KYFpTnimsmsz0Cvo1sZAV/EFIkfagiGTL2J/NhINfGPScpj8LB bYelVN/NU4c6Ws1ivWbfcGvqU4lymoJgJo/l9HiV6X2bdVyuB24O3xeyhTnD7laf epykwxODVfAt4qLC3J478MSSmTXS8zMumaQMNR1tUUYtHCJC0xAKbsFukzbfoRDv m2zFCCVxeYHvByxstuzg0SurlPyuiFiy2cENek5+W8Sjt95nEiQ4suBldswpz1Kv n71t7vd7zst49xxExB+tD+vmY7GXIds43Rb05dqksQuo2yCeuCbY5RBiMHX3d4nU 041jHBsv5wY24j0N6bpAsm/s0T0Mt7IO6UaN33I712oPlclTweYTAesW3jDpeQ7A ioi0CMjWZnRpUxorcFmzL/Cc/fPqgAtnAL5GIUuEOqUf8AlKmzsKcnKZ7L2d8mxG QqN16nlAiUuUpchQNMr+tAa1L5S1uK/fu6thVlSSk7KMQyJfVpwLy6068a1WmNj4 yxo9HaSeQNXh3cui+61qb9wlrkwlaiouw9+bpCmR0V8+XpWma/D/TEz9tg5vkfNo eG4t+FUQ7QgrrvIkDNFcRyTUO9cJHB+kcp2NgCcpCwan3wnuzKka9AWFAitpoAwx L6BX0L8kg/LzRPhkQnMOrj/tuu9hZrui4woqURhWLiYi2aZe7WCkuoqR/qMGP6qP EQRcvndTWkQo6K9BdCH4ZjRqcGbY1wFt/qgAxhi+uSo2IWiM1fRI4eRCGifpBtYK Dw44W9uPAu4cgVnAUzESEeW0bft5XXxAqpvyMBIdv3YqfVfOElZdKbteEu4YuOao FLpbk4ajCxO4Fzc9AugJ8iQOAoaekJWA7TjWJ6CbJe8w3thpznP0w6jNG8ZleZ6a jHckyGlx5wzQTRLVT5+wK6edFlxKmSd93jkLWWCbrc0Dsa39OkSTDmZPoZgKGRhp Yc0C4jePYreTGI6p7/H3AFv84o0fjHt5fn4GpT1Xgfg+1X/wmIv7iNQtljCjAqhD 6XN+QiOAYAloAym8lOm9zOoCDv1TSDpmeyeP0rNV95OozsmFAUaKSUcUFBUfq9FL uyr+rJZQw2DPfq2wE75PtOyJiZH7zljCh12fp5yrNx6L7HSqwwuG7vGO4f0ltYOZ dPKzaEhCOO7o108RexdNABEBAAG0Rldpa2lMZWFrcyBFZGl0b3JpYWwgT2ZmaWNl IEhpZ2ggU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBLZXkgKDIwMjEtMjAyNCmJBDEE EwEKACcFAmBjDtICGwMFCQWjmoAFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgECF4AACgkQ nG3NFyg+RUzRbh+eMSKgMYOdoz70u4RKTvev4KyqCAlwji+1RomnW7qsAK+l1s6b ugOhOs8zYv2ZSy6lv5JgWITRZogvB69JP94+Juphol6LIImC9X3P/bcBLw7VCdNA mP0XQ4OlleLZWXUEW9EqR4QyM0RkPMoxXObfRgtGHKIkjZYXyGhUOd7MxRM8DBzN yieFf3CjZNADQnNBk/ZWRdJrpq8J1W0dNKI7IUW2yCyfdgnPAkX/lyIqw4ht5UxF VGrva3PoepPir0TeKP3M0BMxpsxYSVOdwcsnkMzMlQ7TOJlsEdtKQwxjV6a1vH+t k4TpR4aG8fS7ZtGzxcxPylhndiiRVwdYitr5nKeBP69aWH9uLcpIzplXm4DcusUc Bo8KHz+qlIjs03k8hRfqYhUGB96nK6TJ0xS7tN83WUFQXk29fWkXjQSp1Z5dNCcT sWQBTxWxwYyEI8iGErH2xnok3HTyMItdCGEVBBhGOs1uCHX3W3yW2CooWLC/8Pia qgss3V7m4SHSfl4pDeZJcAPiH3Fm00wlGUslVSziatXW3499f2QdSyNDw6Qc+chK hUFflmAaavtpTqXPk+Lzvtw5SSW+iRGmEQICKzD2chpy05mW5v6QUy+G29nchGDD rrfpId2Gy1VoyBx8FAto4+6BOWVijrOj9Boz7098huotDQgNoEnidvVdsqP+P1RR QJekr97idAV28i7iEOLd99d6qI5xRqc3/QsV+y2ZnnyKB10uQNVPLgUkQljqN0wP XmdVer+0X+aeTHUd1d64fcc6M0cpYefNNRCsTsgbnWD+x0rjS9RMo+Uosy41+IxJ 6qIBhNrMK6fEmQoZG3qTRPYYrDoaJdDJERN2E5yLxP2SPI0rWNjMSoPEA/gk5L91 m6bToM/0VkEJNJkpxU5fq5834s3PleW39ZdpI0HpBDGeEypo/t9oGDY3Pd7JrMOF zOTohxTyu4w2Ql7jgs+7KbO9PH0Fx5dTDmDq66jKIkkC7DI0QtMQclnmWWtn14BS KTSZoZekWESVYhORwmPEf32EPiC9t8zDRglXzPGmJAPISSQz+Cc9o1ipoSIkoCCh 2MWoSbn3KFA53vgsYd0vS/+Nw5aUksSleorFns2yFgp/w5Ygv0D007k6u3DqyRLB W5y6tJLvbC1ME7jCBoLW6nFEVxgDo727pqOpMVjGGx5zcEokPIRDMkW/lXjw+fTy c6misESDCAWbgzniG/iyt77Kz711unpOhw5aemI9LpOq17AiIbjzSZYt6b1Aq7Wr aB+C1yws2ivIl9ZYK911A1m69yuUg0DPK+uyL7Z86XC7hI8B0IY1MM/MbmFiDo6H dkfwUckE74sxxeJrFZKkBbkEAQRgYw7SAR+gvktRnaUrj/84Pu0oYVe49nPEcy/7 5Fs6LvAwAj+JcAQPW3uy7D7fuGFEQguasfRrhWY5R87+g5ria6qQT2/Sf19Tpngs d0Dd9DJ1MMTaA1pc5F7PQgoOVKo68fDXfjr76n1NchfCzQbozS1HoM8ys3WnKAw+ Neae9oymp2t9FB3B+To4nsvsOM9KM06ZfBILO9NtzbWhzaAyWwSrMOFFJfpyxZAQ 8VbucNDHkPJjhxuafreC9q2f316RlwdS+XjDggRY6xD77fHtzYea04UWuZidc5zL VpsuZR1nObXOgE+4s8LU5p6fo7jL0CRxvfFnDhSQg2Z617flsdjYAJ2JR4apg3Es G46xWl8xf7t227/0nXaCIMJI7g09FeOOsfCmBaf/ebfiXXnQbK2zCbbDYXbrYgw6 ESkSTt940lHtynnVmQBvZqSXY93MeKjSaQk1VKyobngqaDAIIzHxNCR941McGD7F qHHM2YMTgi6XXaDThNC6u5msI1l/24PPvrxkJxjPSGsNlCbXL2wqaDgrP6LvCP9O uooR9dVRxaZXcKQjeVGxrcRtoTSSyZimfjEercwi9RKHt42O5akPsXaOzeVjmvD9 EB5jrKBe/aAOHgHJEIgJhUNARJ9+dXm7GofpvtN/5RE6qlx11QGvoENHIgawGjGX Jy5oyRBS+e+KHcgVqbmV9bvIXdwiC4BDGxkXtjc75hTaGhnDpu69+Cq016cfsh+0 XaRnHRdh0SZfcYdEqqjn9CTILfNuiEpZm6hYOlrfgYQe1I13rgrnSV+EfVCOLF4L P9ejcf3eCvNhIhEjsBNEUDOFAA6J5+YqZvFYtjk3efpM2jCg6XTLZWaI8kCuADMu yrQxGrM8yIGvBndrlmmljUqlc8/Nq9rcLVFDsVqb9wOZjrCIJ7GEUD6bRuolmRPE SLrpP5mDS+wetdhLn5ME1e9JeVkiSVSFIGsumZTNUaT0a90L4yNj5gBE40dvFplW 7TLeNE/ewDQk5LiIrfWuTUn3CqpjIOXxsZFLjieNgofX1nSeLjy3tnJwuTYQlVJO 3CbqH1k6cOIvE9XShnnuxmiSoav4uZIXnLZFQRT9v8UPIuedp7TO8Vjl0xRTajCL PdTk21e7fYriax62IssYcsbbo5G5auEdPO04H/+v/hxmRsGIr3XYvSi4ZWXKASxy a/jHFu9zEqmy0EBzFzpmSx+FrzpMKPkoU7RbxzMgZwIYEBk66Hh6gxllL0JmWjV0 iqmJMtOERE4NgYgumQT3dTxKuFtywmFxBTe80BhGlfUbjBtiSrULq59np4ztwlRT wDEAVDoZbN57aEXhQ8jjF2RlHtqGXhFMrg9fALHaRQARAQABiQQZBBgBCgAPBQJg Yw7SAhsMBQkFo5qAAAoJEJxtzRcoPkVMdigfoK4oBYoxVoWUBCUekCg/alVGyEHa ekvFmd3LYSKX/WklAY7cAgL/1UlLIFXbq9jpGXJUmLZBkzXkOylF9FIXNNTFAmBM 3TRjfPv91D8EhrHJW0SlECN+riBLtfIQV9Y1BUlQthxFPtB1G1fGrv4XR9Y4TsRj VSo78cNMQY6/89Kc00ip7tdLeFUHtKcJs+5EfDQgagf8pSfF/TWnYZOMN2mAPRRf fh3SkFXeuM7PU/X0B6FJNXefGJbmfJBOXFbaSRnkacTOE9caftRKN1LHBAr8/RPk pc9p6y9RBc/+6rLuLRZpn2W3m3kwzb4scDtHHFXXQBNC1ytrqdwxU7kcaJEPOFfC XIdKfXw9AQll620qPFmVIPH5qfoZzjk4iTH06Yiq7PI4OgDis6bZKHKyyzFisOkh DXiTuuDnzgcu0U4gzL+bkxJ2QRdiyZdKJJMswbm5JDpX6PLsrzPmN314lKIHQx3t NNXkbfHL/PxuoUtWLKg7/I3PNnOgNnDqCgqpHJuhU1AZeIkvewHsYu+urT67tnpJ AK1Z4CgRxpgbYA4YEV1rWVAPHX1u1okcg85rc5FHK8zh46zQY1wzUTWubAcxqp9K 1IqjXDDkMgIX2Z2fOA1plJSwugUCbFjn4sbT0t0YuiEFMPMB42ZCjcCyA1yysfAd DYAmSer1bq47tyTFQwP+2ZnvW/9p3yJ4oYWzwMzadR3T0K4sgXRC2Us9nPL9k2K5 TRwZ07wE2CyMpUv+hZ4ja13A/1ynJZDZGKys+pmBNrO6abxTGohM8LIWjS+YBPIq trxh8jxzgLazKvMGmaA6KaOGwS8vhfPfxZsu2TJaRPrZMa/HpZ2aEHwxXRy4nm9G Kx1eFNJO6Ues5T7KlRtl8gflI5wZCCD/4T5rto3SfG0s0jr3iAVb3NCn9Q73kiph PSwHuRxcm+hWNszjJg3/W+Fr8fdXAh5i0JzMNscuFAQNHgfhLigenq+BpCnZzXya 01kqX24AdoSIbH++vvgE0Bjj6mzuRrH5VJ1Qg9nQ+yMjBWZADljtp3CARUbNkiIg tUJ8IJHCGVwXZBqY4qeJc3h/RiwWM2UIFfBZ+E06QPznmVLSkwvvop3zkr4eYNez cIKUju8vRdW6sxaaxC/GECDlP0Wo6lH0uChpE3NJ1daoXIeymajmYxNt+drz7+pd jMqjDtNA2rgUrjptUgJK8ZLdOQ4WCrPY5pP9ZXAO7+mK7S3u9CTywSJmQpypd8hv 8Bu8jKZdoxOJXxj8CphK951eNOLYxTOxBUNB8J2lgKbmLIyPvBvbS1l1lCM5oHlw WXGlp70pspj3kaX4mOiFaWMKHhOLb+er8yh8jspM184= =5a6T -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Tom, Following up on my previous email here are some thoughts on the effectiveness of the Huckabee and Giuliani ethics attacks. There isn't really a comparable Romney attack to look at. Giuliani: The attack on Giuliani's ethics is centered around his association with Kerik and the cover up of his use of city funds to pay for his affair in the Hamptons. This was the strongest rated attack on Giuliani overall. This was, indeed, the top performing attack among those who cited special interests as a top reason for the nation being on the wrong track (43 percent very serious / 75 percent total serious). Among all other wrong track voters the ethics attack was second to the close to Bush attack. It also performed the strongest among Republican (21 percent very serious doubts, 51 percent total serious doubts) and was really the only attack that had a significant impact on Republicans. This attack is also relatively strong among white evangelicals (27/60) and is tops among those who initially support Giuliani - it appears that an ethics-based attack can work in hurting Giuliani with his base (something we also see with Huckabee). The ethics attack also scores the best of our attacks among those who shift against Giuliani on being honest and trustworthy, willing to say anything and unethical. Our regression modeling did show that the ethics attack helped drive the shift on the unethical attribute but it did not register as a driver for any of the other attributes. However, the negative fact on the cover up of Giuliani's affair, which was an element of the ethics attack, did register on the honest and trustworthy attribute. Some other groups among with the ethics attack performed well: * Moderates (32/69) * Hispanics (41/73) * Younger women (34/65) Huckabee: The attack on Huckabee's ethics is centered on his admonishment by the state ethics board and his pardoning of a convicted rapist. This was the strongest rated attack on Huckabee overall. This did not rate the highest among those who cited special interests as the reason our country in on the wrong track. The extremism attack rated significantly better (51/77 for extremism and 34/72 for ethics). The ethics and judgment attack was the best attack among independents (43/75) and Republicans (21/65). It was particularly strong among independent women (46/80). It was also clearly the top attack among those that shifted away from Huckabee on the vote (46/80) and on the honest and trustworthy (48/83) and change (50/81) attributes. However, our regression modeling showed that the ethics attack only helped drive the shift on the honest and trustworthy attribute and, even then, its significance was second to the extremism attack. In fact, as we noted in our memo, the regression modeling showed that the extremism attack was the most effective attack in shifting attributes across the board. It appears that the extremism attack not only serves as a good proxy for being to close to Bush, but also in undermining confidence in Huckabee's character and independence. Other notes on the ethics attack: * It clearly performed better among the less educated and worst among those with a post graduate degree * It was off-the-charts among Hispanics (63/90). This mirrors our findings on the Giuliani ethics hit, suggesting that Hispanics and generally open to ethics and character-based attacks. Andrew ________________________________ From: Andrew Baumann Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 1:38 PM To: '[email protected]' Cc: ic2008; Stan Greenberg; Tara McGuinness; Begala, Paul; Susan McCue; John Podesta Subject: RE: more analysis on special interest and corruption questions Tom, Here's some analysis on those who rate "Washington Dominated by special interests" as a top reason for the country being on the wrong track. I'll touch on some of the specific doubts in a following email. 325 respondents, or 14% of all those surveyed, rated this as one of the top two reasons the country is on the wrong track. Keep in mind that only those who said the country was on the wrong track were asked this follow up question, so the 20% who said right track were not asked this question. Looking only at those saying wrong track, "special interests" was named as one of the top 2 concerns by 20% of these voters, making it the 2nd most frequent response. Keep in mind that every "wrong track" subgroup is tilted towards the Democrats, as we are excluding the hard-core Republicans who say we are on the right track. With that in mind, those citing special interests is the least Democratic of the various "wrong track" groups, and is heavier in independents. The partisan breakdown of this group is 42% Democrat, 37% independent, 21% Republican. (This compares to 36/29/34 overall and 47/31/21 among all wrong track voters). This group is also slightly more male than the overall population (52% male), slightly older (55% over 50) and slightly more educated (52% college grads). Unsurprisingly, this group is initially very open to Obama, much more so than to Hillary. His leads on all three Republicans is larger, in some cases by large amounts. It is important to remember that for each match-up we only have a sample size of about 55 cases for this subgroup, so there is a large margin of error (about +/- 13%) for these numbers. Initial match-ups: Giuliani Romney Huckabee Clinton 55/28 (+27) 55/39 (+16) 44/34 (+10) Obama 70/20 (+50) 56/31 (+25) 63/29 (+34) The change among this group is heavily dependent on match-up with few clear trends emerging. One thing that does emerge, however, is that our attacks on Romney seem to be most effective with this group. Both Clinton and Obama gain ground against Romney. On the other hand, they both lose ground against Giuliani, with Clinton losing significant ground. Against Huckabee, Clinton gains a huge 23 points, while Obama loses 8 points against Huckabee. Aside from a match-up against Giuliani, Obama does seem to lose more/gain less among this group Final match-ups: Giuliani Romney Huckabee Clinton 45/32 (+13) 53/28 (+25) 59/26 (+33) Obama 66/18 (+48) 56/27 (+29) 55/28 (+27) Net Vote Difference: Giuliani Romney Huckabee Average Clinton -14 +8 +23 +8.5 Obama -2 +14 -8 +1.3 Average -8 +11 +7.5 On most Giuliani attributes we see movements similar to the overall numbers, which was high. There is larger movement on the "unethical" attribute, which shows a +38 point net shift, 10 points more than among the overall population. Of the three candidates, it's clear that we saw the worst shifts among these voters for Giuliani. It should be noted that Rudy started off in a very bad position with the voters so his numbers had less room to decrease; still, it appears we would have work to do with these voters on Giuliani. (Since 1/3 of the sample, heard each Republican's attribute, the sample size for each of these is about 110, which leads to a margin of error of about +/- 9 %) On the Romney attributes we see a very large shit of +54 on "too close to Bush," 26 points higher than among the overall population. We do not see similarly large shifts on "honest and trustworthy" or other attributes, however. Still, the large shift in this key attribute, along with the consistent shifts in the vote on Romney show that our attacks are having an effect with these voters. On the Huckabee attributes we see very large shifts, even larger than the shifts among the overall population. On being "too close to Bush" we see a +53 point shift, 13 points higher than among the overall population. We also see a -45 point shift on "honest and trustworthy," 8 points higher than among the overall population. Again, our attacks on Huckabee seem to be effective among these voters. The attacks on Hillary score similarly among this group as they do among the overall population, which is a bit of a concern since this is a more democratic group and we'd expect the attacks to have less force. Taxes is still the top hit with 41% saying it creates very serious doubts and a total of 58% saying it creates serious doubts. The attacks on Obama are weaker among this group. Again, taxes is still the most damaging, but it scores just 23% very serious / 52% total serious (compared to 37/66 among the overall population). The difference in the power of the attacks is reflected in the relative shifts against Giuliani and Romney - in both cases Obama fares better (though against Romney this is well within the margin of error). The large relative shift against Obama in the match-up against Huckabee is curious. The attacks on Giuliani are stronger than they are among the general public, with the attack on his ethics (unsurprisingly) topping the list. At 43% very serious/75% total serious this attack is strong among this group. The attacks on Romney are also very strong on this group with his support for Bush on Iraq leading the way. This attack generates 48% very serious / 73% total serious among this group (vs 35/57) overall and its strength is reflected in the very large shift on Romney being "too close to Bush." It would appear that with Romney, at least, tying him to Bush may also scar him with a taint of being corrupt and/or unethical and really damage him in the minds of these voters. Surprisingly, the top attack on Huckabee among this group is not the ethics and judgment attack centering on his parole of a convicted rapist (though it does score well), but is his right-wing extremism. 30% named his abortion extremist in our list of negative facts and the right-wing extremist attack scored-off-the charts with this group - 51% very serious, 77% total serious. He continue to see evidence that the extremist attacks serves as an effective proxy in tying Huckabee to Bush and, it would also seem, tarnishing his image on ethics and corruption. ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tom Matzzie Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 6:24 PM To: Andrew Baumann Cc: ic2008; Stan Greenberg; Tara McGuinness; Begala, Paul; Susan McCue; John Podesta Subject: Re: more analysis on special interest and corruption questions Yes and who is rating special interests as a top issue and do they move? if you look at our supporters how does that wrong track-special interest question come out. basically cut a banner looking at who rates the "washington dominated by special interests" wrong track answer as high. cut another looking at who is responding to the other strongest corruption attack (huckabee doubts battery?) On Jan 7, 2008 6:20 PM, Andrew Baumann <[email protected]> wrote: Tom, I'm not exactly clear what you are asking for. Are you talking about who is moving on the honest and trustworthy and/or unethical attributes for each candidates? Are you talking about who shifts due to our special interests attacks? ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tom Matzzie Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 6:18 PM To: ic2008; Stan Greenberg Cc: Tara McGuinness; Begala, Paul; Susan McCue; John Podesta Subject: more analysis on special interest and corruption questions GQR Team, Can we get some more analysis on the special interest and corruption questions? Who is moving on them? Dem-Indy-GOP differences. Age, gender differences. Regressions etc... How does this compare to other questions? There is the WRONG TRACK question at the beginning of the poll and then some of the questions in the doubts batteries. Thanks, -Tom