Correct The Record Saturday July 19, 2014 Roundup

podesta-emails 9,269 words email

P17 V11 D6 P22 V14

-----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----- *[image: Inline image 1]* *Correct The Record Saturday July 19, 2014 Roundup:* *Headlines:* *Talking Points Memo: “GOP's 'Hillary Fatigue' Meme Unravels Even More With New Poll Findings” <http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gallup-poll-hillary-clinton-well-known-best-liked-fatigue-meme>* “Gallup released findings earlier this week indicating that Hillary Clinton is by far the best-known and most popular 2016 contender, which wouldn't be too notable if Republicans hadn't spent last month claiming that the country is tired of the former secretary of state.” *Washington Post: “With liberals pining for a Clinton challenger, ambitious Democrats get in position” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/with-liberals-pining-for-a-clinton-challenger-ambitious-democrats-get-in-position/2014/07/18/b2892f80-0e1b-11e4-b8e5-d0de80767fc2_story.html>* “Even as Hillary Rodham Clinton looms as the overwhelming favorite for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, the party’s base is stirring for a primary fight.” *NBC News: "Progressives Love Warren, But They're Ready to Settle for Hillary" <http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/progressives-love-warren-theyre-ready-settle-hillary-n159696>* “Progressive Democrats like Hillary Clinton just fine for the 2016 presidential race. But they like Elizabeth Warren, the feisty populist Massachusetts Senator, a lot more as a future leader for their party.” *Politico: “Warren feels the love at Netroots” <http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/elizabeth-warren-netroots-nation-2014-109114.html>* “Elizabeth Warren is far and away the biggest celebrity at Netroots Nation — and she’s loving it.” *MSNBC: “Conservative PAC raises money over possible Warren 2016 candidacy” <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/conservative-pac-raises-over-possible-warren-2016-candidacy>* “America Rising, the super PAC that has largely focused on undermining a potential Hillary Clinton candidacy, sent an email titled ‘Warren Warning’ to supporters Thursday evening asking for contributions to help thwart the popular Democrat.” *Atlanta Journal Constitution blog: Political Insider with Jim Galloway: “For Georgia Democrats, Act One has barely begun — but so has Act Two” <http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2014/07/19/for-georgia-democrats-act-one-has-barely-begun-but-so-has-act-two/>* “Following the ragged paper-towel rule, Act Two began last Thursday, with a small gathering of Hillary Clinton fans on the edge of Piedmont Park in Atlanta.” *Politico Magazine: “What’s Jill Abramson Made Of?” <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/whats-jill-abramson-made-of-109115.html#.U8qLSfldWSq>* “‘Hillary is incredibly unrealistic about journalists,’ Abramson told me. ‘She expects you to be 100 percent in her corner, especially women journalists. She got angry with me because when I became the top-ranking woman at the New York Times, she thought I should be loyal. An editor is going to be independent, always.’” *Salon: “Al Gore is the single-issue candidate we need” <http://www.salon.com/2014/07/19/al_gore_is_the_single_issue_candidate_we_need/>* [Subtitle:] “Maybe he wouldn't win, but Al Gore could still make climate change one of the biggest stories of 2016” *Articles:* *Talking Points Memo: “GOP's 'Hillary Fatigue' Meme Unravels Even More With New Poll Findings” <http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gallup-poll-hillary-clinton-well-known-best-liked-fatigue-meme>* By Tom Kludt July 19, 2014, 11:02 a.m. EDT Gallup released findings earlier this week indicating that Hillary Clinton is by far the best-known and most popular 2016 contender, which wouldn't be too notable if Republicans hadn't spent last month claiming that the country is tired of the former secretary of state. The survey showed that 91 percent of American adults are familiar with Clinton, and 55 percent have a favorable opinion of her. Clinton's numbers in both categories far exceed potential GOP rivals like Chris Christie, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush. And Gallup noted that, although Clinton's popularity has declined as she's moved from her relatively non-political role at the State Department, her standing remains stronger than in July of 2006 — a year-and-half before she ran her first presidential campaign. Essentially, the poll represents a continuation of a steady trend. But it also serves as counter-evidence to Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus, who provided no evidence late last month when he insisted that the country is sick of Clinton. "There's Hillary fatigue already out there," Priebus said during an appearance on "Meet the Press." "It's setting in. People are tired of this story. And I just happen to believe that this early run for the White House is going to come back and bite them. And it already is. People are tired of it." Priebus and other Republicans were eager to highlight Clinton's rocky book tour, widely seen as a launching pad for her White House bid, as proof that she isn't ready for prime time. Her gaffes on her personal wealth, Republicans argued, showed that she is out of touch with regular Americans. But polling at the time didn't provide much support for those claims either. *Washington Post: “With liberals pining for a Clinton challenger, ambitious Democrats get in position” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/with-liberals-pining-for-a-clinton-challenger-ambitious-democrats-get-in-position/2014/07/18/b2892f80-0e1b-11e4-b8e5-d0de80767fc2_story.html>* By Philip Rucker and Robert Costa July 18, 2014, 2:49 p.m. EDT DETROIT — On the night before her Friday keynote address to a gathering of progressive activists here, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) tried to slip into a hotel restaurant for a quiet dinner. But the former law professor has become a liberal superstar, and when a few admirers spotted her walking to the corner of the dining room, they cheered loudly. A moment later, more joined in the applause. Then one urged her, “Run for president!” The next morning at Netroots Nation, where Warren gave a fiery sermon for economic populism — “The game is rigged and it isn’t right!” — scores of swooning supporters wore faux-straw boater hats with “Warren for President” stickers and chanted, “Run, Liz, run!” Even as Hillary Rodham Clinton looms as the overwhelming favorite for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, the party’s base is stirring for a primary fight. There’s a pining for someone else, and a medley of ambitious Democrats are making moves — many of them previously unreported — to position themselves to perhaps be that someone. In stark contrast to the overt maneuvering on the Republican side, the 2016 Democratic presidential sweepstakes has been largely frozen in place as Clinton decides whether to run. But with the former secretary of state’s book tour stumbles exposing her serious vulnerability with grass-roots voters, small cracks are beginning to emerge. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) will test her folksy politics next month in Iowa, home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) is coming out this fall with a book, “Off the Sidelines,” that is part political memoir, part modern feminist playbook and certain to generate presidential buzz. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo also is publishing a memoir this fall with a wink-wink title: “All Things Possible.” Meanwhile, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley seems to respond yes to every party speaking invitation that comes his way and is slated to address Democrats in Nebraska and Mississippi in coming weeks. He also endeared himself to liberals in recent days by breaking with President Obama on how to deal with an influx of unaccompanied minors along the border. Vice President Biden is making the rounds this summer rallying key Democratic constituencies and recently spoke on a conference call with his former aides — among the hundreds of Biden alumni that date back to his 1972 Senate campaign. The call was ostensibly just to say hello, but it keeps his political circle engaged. During a recent vacation in Kiawah Island, S.C., Biden reconnected with old political friends. He played golf with Dick Harpootlian, a former state party chairman, who suggested that Biden is far more “authentic” than Clinton. “I said, ‘Mr. Vice President, I’ll drive the golf cart,’ ” Harpootlian recalled. “And he said, ‘No, no, no. . . . I’m driving this freaking golf cart. Move over.’ There are some people in this world who like to be driven and some people who like to be in the driver’s seat.” Itching to build a national network of his own, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon is heading to Aspen, Colo., next month with O’Malley for a retreat for major party donors. Nixon recently said the 2016 field could use a candidate from the heartland who, like himself, gives voice to blue-collar concerns but has red-state appeal. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has teased the possibility of a long-shot challenge to Clinton with trips to Iowa and New Hampshire — both early voting states — and plans to return to Iowa for three town hall meetings in September. One Democrat who knows a thing or two about insurgent campaigns, former senator Gary Hart of Colorado, said he intends to huddle with California Gov. Jerry Brown at their upcoming Yale Law School reunion (class of 1964) to chat about the possibility of Brown running for the White House. “Don’t rule out my law school classmate,” said Hart, who ran unsuccessfully for president in 1984 and 1988. “If you pay attention to his career, you see that he does very unexpected things.” Hart added that Clinton is cautious “politically and personally and in every way. I think her caution on Iraq cost her the nomination [in 2008]. She’s always trying to find the mythical center on controversial issues — and if you do that, someone else is going to take the bouquet for courage.” The driving force behind the Democratic maneuvering is a yearning among progressives for a candidate who will champion their economic populist agenda. Anna Galland, executive director of the liberal group MoveOn.org, said income inequality will be the driving issue for the base, just as the Iraq war was in 2008. “Our members don’t want to see their preferred candidates going to give speeches to big Wall Street banks,” Galland said, a reference to Clinton’s paid speaking gigs, including one next week to a group of financiers in Boston. “They want to see them talking about inequality.” Although Clinton turned down an invitation to Netroots, she has sought to seize on the issue in other venues. She began talking this spring about “the cancer of inequality” and told television host Charlie Roseon Thursday that if she runs she would offer a detailed agenda “to tackle [economic] growth, which is the handmaiden of inequality.” Bill and Hillary Clinton are paying close attention to Warren’s rise, said former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell, “but they are sagacious enough to understand that Elizabeth Warren couldn’t raise the money.” Former Vermont governor Howard Dean said he lost his presidential race in 2004 because Democrats “didn’t want to take a chance on the hell, fire and brimstone guy.” Dean said he thinks history will repeat itself. “There will be a primary, and there is always grousing,” said Dean, who insists he has no intention of running again. “But Hillary, who most Democrats believe has earned it and paid her dues, would have to totally implode in order for a grass-roots candidate to win the nomination.” Even Clinton’s skeptics acknowledge the difficulty of derailing her juggernaut. If they can’t defeat her, their goal is to shape the debate and pull Clinton to the left on issues like toughening regulations on Wall Street, expanding Social Security benefits and easing student loan debt. Warren, with her populist pitch, sharp rhetoric and authentic presence, is the biggest potential threat to Clinton. But although she has insisted she is not running for president, she is doing some of the things a person running for president does. Warren published a book this spring, “A Fighting Chance,” and is an in-demand surrogate in the run-up to November’s midterm elections — stumping for Senate and gubernatorial candidates in blue states and red states alike and raising more than $2.6 million for Democratic candidates. But she is not doing behind-the-scenes spadework expected for a White House run. When she headlined the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party’s Humphrey-Mondale dinner in March, Warren did not take down names and numbers of the people she met. She traveled with only one aide, hitching a ride from the airport from a local party official, said Corey Day, the party’s executive director. “There was no advance guy making sure the room was exactly right and her water was cold,” Day said. “You didn’t sense an urgency for her to build a political operation. It was just her and her message, all very low key.” By contrast, O’Malley has been getting acquainted with organizers in early voting states in addition to frequent trips. “He’s all over,” said Raymond Buckley, chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party. “He has built up significant goodwill.” Klobuchar also has kept her calendar full, getting positive reviews for speeches to Democrats in Iowa, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Texas. On Aug. 23, she will return to Iowa to stump for Senate nominee Bruce Braley, aides said. But Klobuchar has been careful to signal she wouldn’t run against Clinton, signing up last month to fundraise for Ready for Hillary, the pro-Clinton super PAC. Hart said it is foolish for Democratic hopefuls to allow Clinton’s indecision to stunt their ambitions.“What are they afraid of?” he asked. “Losing a chance to be in Clinton’s Cabinet? If that’s part of your thinking, you shouldn’t even think about running for president.” More than anyone else, Warren is speaking directly to the hopes of Democratic activists, who have grown disenchanted with Obama and hope his successor will be a strong progressive change agent. Here at Netroots, Warren railed against the influence of banks and corporations, which she said have too many “lobbyists and lawyers and plenty of friends in Congress.” “We can whine about it, we can whimper about it, or we can fight back,” Warren said, punching her first in the air. “I’m fighting back!” The crowd went wild and screamed for her to run for president. Warren, beaming, tried to hush them so she could carry on with her speech. One thing made clear by the scene in Detroit — and others like it recently in Shepherdstown, W.Va., Louisville, Ky., and Portland, Ore. — is that candidate Clinton would be running against Warren in the primaries whether or not the Massachusetts senator enters the race. “This primary will be about the Wall Street wing versus the Warren wing of the party,” said Charles Chamberlain, executive director of Democracy for America, a liberal group that spun out of Dean’s 2004 campaign. “The question is, will Hillary be with Wall Street like she’s been all along or will she evolve like the party to be with the Warren wing?” *NBC News: Progressives Love Warren, But They're Ready to Settle for Hillary <http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/progressives-love-warren-theyre-ready-settle-hillary-n159696>* By Perry Bacon Jr. June 18, 2014 DETROIT -- Progressive Democrats like Hillary Clinton just fine for the 2016 presidential race. But they like Elizabeth Warren, the feisty populist Massachusetts Senator, a lot more as a future leader for their party. The message from the more than 1,000 activists who attended Netroots Nation here was simple: they are okay with Clinton as the Democrats’ candidate. They’ve read the polls showing her huge lead. They agree with her on most issues, even as many of them complain about her huge speaking fees, ties to Wall Street and occasionally hawkish views on foreign policy. But these progressives have a dream, or really two of them. They would love to see Clinton turn into a uber-liberal like Warren who slams big banks instead of speaking at their events. Or better yet, Clinton would somehow decide not to run for president, clearing the way for their hero Warren. “I have a love-hate relationship with her (Clinton),” said Victoria Roush, a 60-year-old activist from Key West, Florida who manages a wine shop. “At any moment, I can love her, or be pissed. Some of the stuff she does I don’t like, but I can’t wait to see the first female president.” Warren, Roush said, “is her dream candidate.” “Her actions have proven she means what she says,” Roush said. This year Netroots Nation should have been dubbed Warren’s World. At one panel discussion here, an activist described her goal as electing “300 more Elizabeth Warrens” to Congress. Warren’s speech was the main event of the three-day conference, with people loudly chanting “Run, Liz, Run” during her remarks. (Vice President Biden’s appearance drew much less enthusiasm). When attendees weren’t raving about Warren, they were talking about how more Democrats should be economic populists like Warren. At the same time, the people who attend this conference are political junkies. They are aware of the challenges of a political newcomer like Warren, who had never held elective office before winning her Senate seat in 2012, taking on a powerful figure like Clinton in the Democratic primary and then trying to win the general election. "At any moment, I can love her, or be pissed. Some of the stuff she does I don’t like, but I can’t wait to see the first female president." And unlike in the run-up to the 2008 election, when many here refused to back the frontrunner Clinton and opted for stronger Iraq War critics like Barack Obama or John Edwards, liberals don’t have a huge quarrel on any single issue with Clinton. “I would support her as a strong Democrat, and she’s the strongest candidate in terms of winning,” said Bob Fertik, a liberal blogger and longtime party activist. But he added, “she hasn’t always been the most outspoken progressive champion, especially on economic issues.” David Karpf, a liberal activist who is also a political communications professor at George Washington University, described himself as “prepared and resigned for Hillary Clinton to be our next president.” “I think she’ll be excellent at being president ,but I’m not particularly excited about her being president,” he said. “I think Elizabeth Warren is the most exciting politician of our generation, but as a progressive, I just don’t believe yet that she will run for (that) office, so I haven’t gotten behind it.’ Activists here said they want to push Clinton to adopt a more populist platform, although it was not clear exactly how they can influence Clinton or in turn what would truly satisfy them. The former first lady, in her appearances over the last few months, has spoken about the problems of rising income inequality, urged a greater focus creating middle-class jobs and called for an increase in the minimum wage, in echoes of Warren. But the “Netroots” wants to see more, like Clinton casting the American economic system as ‘rigged,” or opposing some international trade agreements the way the Massachusetts senator does. Former President Bill Clinton has said Democrats should not spend too much time bashing the rich, suggesting a divide between Warren-style liberals and the Clintons. “We can’t deal with the economic inequality issue without dealing with the fact that some people are making too much,” said Brad Miller, a former North Carolina congressman who attended the conference. “Whoever the Democratic Party nominee is, is going to end up running as an economic populist, because they going to look at the polling. Even if they didn’t think that was how they going to run beforehand, they’re going to look at the polling and the consultants are going to say, ‘holy crap, you’ve got to talk about these issues.” He added, “The question is whether we’ll have someone who will actually govern that way as president.’ Activists here say that Warren leads on populist issues, such as her recent proposal to make it easier for students to refinance their student loans. That idea was eventually adopted by the Obama administration. Clinton, according to these activists, is more a follower in her populism. "Someone's gotta address the disgusting greed that's happening on Wall Street. Someone’s gotta address money in politics in this country." “I would love to see her adopt Elizabeth Warren's politics, honestly,” said the actor Mark Ruffalo, who attended part of this conference and rushed onto the elevator Warren was in after her speech just to speak with her for a few moments. “Somebody's gotta address the inequality,” he added. “Someone's gotta address the disgusting greed that's happening on Wall Street. Someone’s gotta address money in politics in this country. This is not a Democrat or Republican issue-- this affects all of us negatively. There is a mass movement of wealth into the upper class, out of the middle and lower classes-- the wealth discrepancy. We are in big trouble, and Clintonian politics of the days of old are not gonna fly. It's not popular with people -- people want to see change. And if she (Clinton) is willing to embrace those principles, then sign me up." Clinton declined an invitation to speak here. But the group “Ready for Hillary,’ which is not officially aligned with Clinton but is advised by some of her longtime aides, was one of the main sponsors of Netroots Nation. Their presence here was the latest sign of a relative détente between Clinton and progressives, who booed Clinton when she came to this conference in 2007. And for some activists, disagreements with Clinton on policy are not as significant as two other factors. Her polling suggests she would be a strong candidate to win the general election. And they want to see her make history. “It’s Hillary. It has to be. We have to break that ceiling. We need to break that ceiling,” said Sundiata Aschenge, who came to this event from St. Petersburg, Florida. *Politico: “Warren feels the love at Netroots” <http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/elizabeth-warren-netroots-nation-2014-109114.html>* By Katie Glueck July 18, 2014, 4:39 p.m. EDT DETROIT —Elizabeth Warren is far and away the biggest celebrity at Netroots Nation — and she’s loving it. In a brief interview with reporters at the annual liberal gathering, the Massachusetts senator waved off questions about the outpouring of support on the ground here, complete with chants of “Run, Liz, Run” and signs reading “Elizabeth Warren for President.” “This is about our values,” an enthusiastic Warren said after signing copies of her new book, “A Fighting Chance.” “I talked about what we’re fighting for, what progressives are fighting for, what America is for … I love being here because ultimately this is about democracy, and democracy is on our side, so I had a great time.” Warren has repeatedly said she won’t run for president in 2016, despite urging from many on the left. Pressed about her fans’ hopes, she replied that she’s focused on the midterms. “It is absolutely critical to this country,” she said of the upcoming election. “We can’t get distracted from that. But what is most important is the people who are here are people who have deeply held values, who get out and fight for what they believe in. And I respect that all the way down to my toes. So I’m delighted to be here with them because I know we’re going to be fighting on the same side, for the same values, in 2014.” *MSNBC: “Conservative PAC raises money over possible Warren 2016 candidacy” <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/conservative-pac-raises-over-possible-warren-2016-candidacy>* By Aliyah Frumin July 19, 2014, 9:44 a.m. EDT Elizabeth Warren has insisted repeatedly that she’s not running for president in 2016. But that’s not stopping conservatives from trying to use her imagined candidacy to incite the base into handing over cash to fight the Massachusetts senator. America Rising, the super PAC that has largely focused on undermining a potential Hillary Clinton candidacy, sent an email titled “Warren Warning” to supporters Thursday evening asking for contributions to help thwart the popular Democrat. “Don’t let the White House fall into Warren’s hands,” it cautions. “America can’t afford to let that happen.” The group said it would also send video trackers to Warren’s events across the country, in order to catch her in a gaffe or larger mistake that might undermine her potential candidacy. A spokeswoman for Warren did not immediately return requests for comment. But while Clinton, the former secretary of state, is clearly seriously mulling a bid, Warren – seen as a progressive bogeywoman by the right – has consistently nixed the idea. The freshman senator elected in 2012 has pledged to serve out her term and says she wants to focus on her job and on supporting Democratic candidates running for the 2014 midterm elections. “I am not running for president,” she told the Boston Globe on June 30. “Do you want to put an exclamation point at the end of that?” Most analysts agree – while liberal voters across the country might really want a Warren candidacy, it is extremely unlikely in 2016. That didn’t stop Warren supporters in Detroit screaming”Run Liz Run!” before she delivered a keynote address to Netroots Nation, a gathering of progressive activists from across the U.S. America Rising’s fundraising initiative comes on the heels of a group of Warren supporters forming a “Ready For Warren” campaign to encourage her to run. Warren’s press secretary told msnbc earlier this week that the senator “does not support this effort.” Still, Tim Miller, the executive director for America Rising, told msnbc that “Elizabeth Warren would absolutely be a formidable challenger to Hillary Clinton from the left.” Miller pointed to Warren’s recent campaigning on behalf of Democrats like West Virginia Senate candidate Natalie Tennant and Kentucky Senate candidate Alison Lindergan Grimes. “She is clearly trying to position herself as a leader in the party and an influencer in the national debate … Our job is to make sure anyone who fills that profile is held accountable.” Miller said, adding the fundraising response, so far, has been “positive.” Miller also seemed to pit Warren against Clinton Friday, tweeting, “Warren—lobbyists are the worst; Hillary—lobbyists are real people” along with a link to an America Rising video highlighting their differing remarks about lobbyists. In the video, a clip of Warren’s remarks at the Netroots conference is played. “Billionaires pay taxes at lower rates than their secretaries. How does this happen? It happens because they all have lobbyists,” says Warren. That clip is then contrasted with one from 2007, in which Clinton defends lobbyists. Clinton is asked at the same conference—then called the YearlyKos Convention – if she will continue to take money from lobbyists. “You know, I will. A lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans,” the former first lady says. Clinton, at the time, was responding to a challenge from other Democrats to stop taking cash from federal lobbyists. Clinton, at the time, added: “They represent nurses they represent social workers, yes, they represent corporations that employ a lot of people…I don’t think, based on my 35 years of fighting for what I believe in, I don’t think anybody seriously believes I’m going to be influenced by a lobbyist.” No other conservative PACs are fundraising off of a potential 2016 Warren bid so far. But Paul Lindsay, a spokesman for American Crossroads, said while there is nothing planned at the moment, “If she does decide to run, we’d certainly be right there making sure she’s held accountable for her record.” *Atlanta Journal Constitution blog: Political Insider with Jim Galloway: “For Georgia Democrats, Act One has barely begun — but so has Act Two” <http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2014/07/19/for-georgia-democrats-act-one-has-barely-begun-but-so-has-act-two/>* By Jim Galloway July 19, 2014, 9:00 a.m. EDT To understand Thomas Jefferson and his lifelong suspicion of all things British, biographer Jon Meacham writes, you have to stop thinking of the American Revolution as the brief episode that began July 4, 1776, and ended with the Battle of Yorktown five years later. Shaking off the English was a five-decade effort, Meacham argues, that began in 1764 and didn’t end until Andy Jackson settled their hash once and for all in the Battle of New Orleans in 1812. Political movements, in other words, are like paper towels. They don’t always tear along the dotted lines. In fact, they seldom do. Georgia’s most contentious general election in a dozen years will begin at 7:01 p.m. on Tuesday. One way or the other, Georgia Republicans will field a strong U.S. Senate candidate, Jack Kingston or David Perdue. They have a sitting Republican governor, Nathan Deal, and all the advantages that incumbency brings with it. But for the first time since 2002, Democrats have two capable and well-financed candidates at the top of their ticket. The legacy pair of Michelle Nunn, the U.S. Senate candidate, and Jason Carter, the candidate for governor, received encouraging poll news late last week. Surveys by Channel 2 Action News put both Carter and Nunn at the top of their respective races. If they are smart, the two candidates will send that news to every Democrat with a wallet – then closet their staffs and tell them never to mention it again. Taking over the reins of power in a state as large as Georgia won’t be a walk in park. If it were, we would mark 1980 as the beginning of Republican rule, when the upstart Mack Mattingly ousted Democratic U.S. Sen. Herman Talmadge. The real shift was still 22 years away. In fact, you have to think of the current Democratic uprising as a three-part play. We are in the middle of Act One. Act Three, the climax, is the 2018 race for governor. The governor who is elected in 2018 (or re-elected, should Carter strike gold this year) will preside over the redrawing of congressional and legislative district lines following the 2020 census. That is where the real power lies. A 2018 shutout could send Georgia Democrats wandering another decade in the desert. But you’ll notice we’ve left out the middle act, when the laws of stagecraft require the plot to thicken. Following the ragged paper-towel rule, Act Two began last Thursday, with a small gathering of Hillary Clinton fans on the edge of Piedmont Park in Atlanta. The 2016 presidential contest in Georgia is considered crucial to a Democratic clawback — an extra infusion of millions dollars that might be spent on voter contact and registration. Unlike eight years ago, the former secretary of state is quickly emerging as the consensus candidate among both black and white Democrats here. The first Atlanta meeting of “Ready for Hillary,” the stalking-horse movement anticipating Clinton’s candidacy, was a deliberately low-key affair. Organizers wanted to make sure that any fervor for 2016 didn’t overshadow Carter or Nunn, the stars of 2014. Perhaps 100 showed up for the two-hour affair – a mixture of black and white, young and old, gay and straight. “Under the radar” has been almost a byword of the Clinton group. “It’s just about all social-media driven. The real purpose of the Ready for Hillary movement is to build a donor base of small-donors, and secondly to build an email data base,” said one of its Atlanta organizers, Andy McKinnon, 64, a retired Ford Motor Co. marketer. Former Atlanta mayor Shirley Franklin was absent, but she has already signed on as a senior advisor for “Ready for Hillary.” Mayor Kasim Reed, who has his own connections to the Clinton operation, was likewise missing. But he has already laid down a Varsity hotdog bet that Clinton will take Georgia in 2016. Both Franklin and Reed were serious supporters of Barack Obama in 2008, and helped lead a stampede of African-American leaders – most notably John Lewis – that stripped Hillary Clinton of much of her black support in Georgia. “I don’t have any hesitation about supporting her this time,” Franklin said by phone on Friday, pointing to Clinton’s recent service as America’s top diplomat as an additional argument in her favor. John Eaves, the Fulton County Commission chairman, was the ranking public official at the Thursdaygathering. He had just had his May 20 re-election victory upheld in court that day, and was circulating through the event, collecting congratulations. Eaves was an Obama supporter in 2008. He, too, intends to line up behind Clinton this time. “I think the Democrats in general are solid behind her. Hillary has strong roots here. Bill Clinton is greatly admired,” said Eaves, an African-American. He admits he has no personal connections to his future presidential candidate. “I don’t but I’m going to develop some. It’s going to behoove me at some point, to develop a relationship,” he said. It is hard to underestimate the importance that Democrats are assigning to unanimity this time around. Juliana Illari, a Democrat from Cobb County, was a Clinton supporter in 2007. “It was very difficult, especially for women. We had been waiting for Hillary to run since the ERA and [1984 Democratic vice presidential candidate] Geraldine Ferraro,” Illari said. “It made some sense, but it was not a good campaign. It just wasn’t. And it was hard to engage people at a certain point. And Atlanta was ground-zero.” Ultimately, Illari adopted her own symbol of neutrality – a 1972 presidential campaign button for Shirley Chilsolm, the black Texas congresswoman. Obama supporters were the newcomers in 2008, and Clinton supporters were the party establishment, Illari said. This time, there’s no such division. Which establishes the plotline for the all-important Act Two for Democrats in Georgia: It’s Hillary’s turn. *Politico Magazine: “What’s Jill Abramson Made Of?” <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/whats-jill-abramson-made-of-109115.html#.U8qLSfldWSq>* By Gail Sheehy July 18, 2014 [Subtitle:] The fired Times editor on Hillary Clinton, sexist “double standards”—and a lifetime of daring. The first thing one notices about Jill Abramson is her short stature. The second is her intensity. When she came to my home earlier this week to speak to an NGO crowd, she slipped off her shoes and stepped up on a footstool, perspiring but indefatigable. Wearing a sleeveless print dress, she showed off a green tattoo on each upper arm. “I got them when I turned 50,” she said, to testify to her cool. The night beforehand, Abramson, who is now 60, and I sat down for a one-on-one conversation about the most daring moments in her life. She was about to break her two-month silence about being dismissed as the top woman news editor in America, and she wasn’t licking her wounds. “I’ve always been on the daring side,” she told me, adding wryly, “for better or worse.” This week’s press tour was vintage Abramson: She ran it herself by choosing what she called “kickass women,” from Cosmo’s Leslie Yazel to Fox News’ Greta van Susteren to tell her story as a proud tale of survivorship. In our chat, Abramson spoke about press freedom, her career and the powerful women she’s encountered along the way. Among them was Hillary Clinton, whom she met in 1978, while Bill Clinton was running for governor. At the time, Abramson found her to be friendly and very helpful as a source. But once Hillary became first lady, their relationship cooled. “Hillary is incredibly unrealistic about journalists,” Abramson told me. “She expects you to be 100 percent in her corner, especially women journalists. She got angry with me because when I became the top-ranking woman at the New York Times, she thought I should be loyal. An editor is going to be independent, always.” As for getting fired from a newspaper that has tolerated men with far more prickly demeanors, “It’s a double standard,” she says unflinchingly. But Abramson is not feeling sorry for herself. If anything, she’s reveling in the chance to inspire other women to take on their own battles. That’s why she launched her unconventional media tour, and I believe that’s why she spoke with me. *** With all the attention on how “tough” she is, what’s lost in the reporting is how often Abramson has been under attack. If she’s abrasive, maybe it’s because she’s had to be. After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, President George W. Bush approved the widespread eavesdropping program to hunt for terrorist activity. The Bush administration continued to push back on any stories on the spying operation, insisting it would compromise national security. After Abramson was named the first woman managing editor of the Times in 2003, she became increasingly passionate about exposing the illegal spying problem. The Times held back until 2004, when she assigned James Risen and Eric Lichtblau to break the super-scoop about the illegal spying program. The article ran in December 2005. It won a Pulitzer. Abramson has received much stronger pushback from the Obama administration on stories of national intelligence than from the Bush crowd. Recently, when she wanted to run a story about an intelligence intercept in Yemen, James Clapper, director of National Intelligence, threatened her: “You will have blood on your hands.” “Those were literally his words,” she said. With minor censoring, she ran the story. (When I called Abramson to fact-check this paragraph, the newly liberated editor said: “That’s all. I am going back to the beach.”) “I’ve had the same threat from Obama government officials,” Abramson told me. “They have argued that if I ran a story about our operations, I would be helping terrorists carry out an attack.” In some cases, she says, the information is already in the public domain. “When an intel operation goes well, the administration is happy to talk about it—for example, the capture of bin Laden. When it doesn’t go well, they don’t want it revealed.” I asked her: Was her daring nature inborn or cultivated? As a child, Jill was not a natural athlete. She was a brainy kid who attended the Ethical Culture and Fieldston School, an elite set of private academies in the Upper West Side and the Bronx, and read the New York Times each day before class. Her father liked nothing better, on summer evenings after work, than to take his little daughter to Central Park with a bat and a softball. “Keep your eye on the ball!” he’d say. “And hit hard.” These were the most useful life lessons a future editor could have had. “I’ve always been confident about competing in male-dominated environments,” she said. At age 18, Jill was one of the few women to dare to invade the all-male preserve of Harvard Yard. It was 1972 and for the first time, the university allowed women to live in a male dorm. Out of 1,200 students, almost 900 were men. Jill was one of the fraction of the 300 women who asked to move into the hostile corridors of male dorms. It was the earliest of her many invasions as a “first woman.” It excited her to dare again. Her first full-time job in journalism was at the Boston bureau of Time magazine. “It seemed daring to me to go up to people I didn’t know and get in their face and start asking questions,” she remembers. “I’d have to talk myself into doing it. But once you do, it quickly becomes second nature.” She came under the mentorship of the highest-ranking woman at Time, Sandy Burton, who had started as a secretary. “I was under the impression that the professional world must be full of accomplished women like Sandy,” Abramson said with a laugh. She never again had a woman boss. It was clearly up to her to be daring enough to crack the glass ceiling again and again. At the Wall Street Journal, where she went next, she was given two prime subjects to cover: money and politics. When she broke stories that beat the Times, an editor called to recruit her to come over to the Grey Lady. It had always been her goal to reach the pinnacle at the Times. Hired in 1997, she was soon promoted as the No. 2 editor in the Washington bureau. It was thrilling to be there for 9/11, she recalls, reporting to readers everything there was to know about Osama bin Laden. “I kept pushing for the Times to ramp up its Iraq war coverage,” she said. I asked Abramson if she’d had daring moments in her personal life. “Many,” she said. “I decided to have children at a pretty young age.” It was the very early 1980s, when the social instructions for women who wanted a big career were to wait until 35 or later, until one’s career was well-established. The Abramsons had nothing like a stable income. Jill had taken a job with Steven Brill at a startup magazine, The American Lawyer, while her husband worked for a labor union. Jill had her daughter at 29 and her son at 31. “That was a daring choice,” she told me. “And it’s the happiest choice I made in my life, because now I’m reminded that jobs come and go, but your family is forever.” *** At the gathering the next evening—organized by the Common Good, a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to encouraging civil dialogue—60 guests crowded into my overheated living room, eager for direct exposure to a woman media boss portrayed by press reports as “tough,” “abrasive,” “mercurial,” even “belligerent.” Abramson began laying out the most urgent issue on her mind: the encroachment on press freedom. Jim Risen, a colleague of hers in the Washington bureau of the Times, has recently been subpoenaed by the Justice Department. Abramson was vehement in pointing out that this is one of the eight criminal leak investigations that the Obama administration has initiated. “That is more than twice the number of criminal cases against whistleblowers that have been prosecuted in all of history,” she said. She urged the crowd to follow the news about the Risen case “because it strikes at the heart of our democracy.” She invited dialogue, and for half an hour gave clear, nuanced answers to every question. Gender bias in political reporting? “No question.” She offered advice for young women assigned to a political campaign. “Right now there are more women senior campaign aides—they’ll want to help you out, so make them your best sources.” When an audience member finally broke the ice to ask how she felt about her dismissal from the job she dearly loved, Abramson was unapologetic but not angrily defensive about her “management style. “I dig in behind the surface to get to the real story,” she asserted, “and you have to be tough to do that. But I don’t think I’m any tougher than most journalists, men or women, who strive to do that in their work.” Earlier, she and I had laughed about the management style of Abe Rosenthal, never accused of being diplomatic. A tyrant who sustained a reign of terror over the newsroom from 1968 to the mid-1980s, he was legendary for his rages, rants and homophobia. No one dared fire him, and he only left, unwillingly, when ageism retired him at 65. Why then, could she be fired for her “management style?” In her deep, gravelly voice, she said, “It’s a double standard. I am very proud of the newsroom I ran and the people I hired.” Her proudest achievement, she said, was the hiring of strong women as senior writers and editors. At the end of her first year, she could open the paper to the masthead page and for the first time ever see an equal number of women and men. She seemed genuine about looking forward to returning to her alma mater this fall and teaching Harvard students a course on narrative non-fiction. At the end of the evening, many remarked on how “likeable” Jill Abramson was. She had lived up to the advice she had given earlier. “If you are fired—and lots of people are being fired these days—show what you are made of.” John Harwood, a popular CNBC correspondent, had come along to vouch for exactly that. Having worked with Abramson twice, at the Wall Street Journal and at the Times, he told the audience, “I’ve seen all the great journalists of our generation, and there’s nobody that I have worked with who has the talent, the values, the integrity, the brains and—despite her badass exterior—who has the heart of Jill Abramson.” *Salon: “Al Gore is the single-issue candidate we need” <http://www.salon.com/2014/07/19/al_gore_is_the_single_issue_candidate_we_need/>* By Matt Rozsa July 19, 2014, 6:30 a.m. EDT [Subtitle:] Maybe he wouldn't win, but Al Gore could still make climate change one of the biggest stories of 2016 With Republican pundits speculating on the possibility of a third Mitt Romney bid for the White House, I think it’s appropriate to mention another two-time presidential candidate whose moment has come in 2016 — Al Gore. Allow me to explain. I have never met Gore, nor am I connected with anyone who has a professional interest in seeing a renaissance for Gore’s political career. Similarly, I am not writing this article in my capacities as a political columnist, graduate student or local Pennsylvania politician, but as a concerned citizen — not only of the United States, but of the world. Like President Obama, who made news this week by pointing out that the climate change crisis threatens every aspect of America’s future, I want to make sure my children will grow up in a strong country, one that is safe and secure on a healthy planet. And America needs Al Gore to make a bid for the White House because of his unique credibility on anthropogenic global warming. As the EPA explains on their website, a failure to reduce greenhouse gases in our atmosphere will have a devastating effect on “our food supply, water resources, infrastructure, ecosystems, and even our own health.” In addition, as former Navy Rear Admiral David Titley explained in a recent Op-Ed to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the confluence of violently unpredictable changes in our weather patterns and drastic reduction in vital resources will destabilize the international political scene, as the countries that stand to gain or lose the most from climate change will be compelled to overhaul their economic and foreign policies accordingly. As Titley somberly put it, “Climate change is an accelerating threat to national security.” Yet even though a recent survey of more than 12,000 peer-reviewed climate science papers found that 97 percent of climate scientists agree that global warming is man-made, a CBS News poll last May found that only 49 percent of Americans accept that climate change has been caused by human activity, with 33 percent attributing it mainly to natural patterns, 11 percent claiming it doesn’t exist, and 6 percent either saying that they don’t know or that it is caused by both. Moreover, climate change has long struggled to be taken seriously as a major national priority, a problem reinforced last month when a Bloomberg National Poll found only 5 percent of Americans ranked it as the most important issue facing the country today (placing it seventh). The good news is that, as Berkeley psychology professor Michael Ranney demonstrated in a 2012 study, people can change their minds when the dynamics of climate change are broken down for them in a straightforward and easily digestible manner. To quote snippets of the 400-word explanation that Ranney found was most persuasive: “Since the industrial age began around the year 1750, atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 40% and methane has increased by 150%. Such increases cause extra infrared light absorption, further heating Earth above its typical temperature range (even as energy from the sun stays basically the same). In other words, energy that gets to Earth has an even harder time leaving it, causing Earth’s average temperature to increase – producing global climate change… “(a) Earth absorbs most of the sunlight it receives; (b) Earth then emits the absorbed light’s energy as infrared light; (c) greenhouse gases absorb a lot of the infrared light before it can leave our atmosphere; (d) being absorbed slows the rate at which energy escapes to space; and (e) the slower passage of energy heats up the atmosphere, water, and ground.” Unfortunately, the simple science has been obscured in our political debate. While special interest groups can make some headway by lobbying, no weapon comes remotely close to the potency of a high-profile presidential campaign when it comes to mobilizing large sections of the population and transforming public opinion. Even an Academy Award-winning movie that became part of our pop culture zeitgeist — I’m referring, of course, to Gore’s iconic documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” — had a limited effect because it was viewed as the pet project of a supporting character in the ongoing American story. For better or worse, we live in a society that is over-saturated with issues and advocates; as a result, anyone who is not an active main character on today’s political stage quickly finds his or her cause lost in the noise or, at best, championed only by a static niche of activists and casual policy junkies. The people running for president, however — and in particular someone like Gore, who has the unique distinction of having won the popular vote in a general election, even if he lost the war — are never just supporting characters. This brings me to the critical detail of a hypothetical Gore candidacy: It would have to be a single-issue campaign. In part this is a fail-safe measure; while a strong case can be made that Gore would make an excellent president (a premise with which a plurality of American voters agreed in 2000), the primary objective would not be to promote Gore the man, but to guarantee due attention is paid to the threat of climate change. While other campaigns on both sides would continue the practice of focusing on several issues in the name of advancing a name brand (i.e., the individual candidate), Gore would have the advantage of representing not his own cause, but the cause of creating an environmentally sustainable future. Indeed, he wouldn’t have to actually win in the primaries to achieve his goal. As long as he consistently received a large enough percentage of the primary vote to be considered a “major player,” he would (a) keep climate change in the national headlines; and (b) force the other candidates to prioritize climate change in the hope of winning over his supporters. I don’t want to oversell what a Gore candidacy can accomplish to save our planet. Obviously it would be a game-changer if he were elected, but should the Democrats instead nominate, say, Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, Gore could force them to take a hardline stand on the issue. Even though most Democrats agree that global warming needs to be addressed, it is usually prioritized below other matters like the economy or foreign policy. This is no doubt because it is viewed as a distant threat rather than an immediate one — a perspective that may be the luxury of baby boomers, but, alas, not for the millennials who will inherit the ecological disaster they leave behind. Gore’s goal should be to force them to commit to a proactive and emphatic position on this matter, making the fight against climate change one of their top priorities, similar to what Ross Perot did for both parties on balancing the budget in 1992; Eugene McCarthy did for Democrats to mobilize opposition to the Vietnam War in 1968; or President John Tyler did to pressure the (still Jacksonian) Democrats to nominate a candidate who would annex Texas in 1844. Although there have been plenty of single-issue candidates in the past, few have had Gore’s eminence or name recognition. As such, this approach — if executed correctly, especially from a PR standpoint — could come across as refreshingly novel, helping Gore stand out from the pack. This is where the argument that Gore has a civic duty to run comes into play: If he truly believes that we are running out of time to effectively address man-made climate change, then he must appreciate the importance of elevating the issue in our national debate. While most people associate Gore with the tragedy of the 2000 presidential election, his greatest political campaign occurred more than a decade earlier, when he ran against the likes of Michael Dukakis, Dick Gephardt, Paul Simon and Jesse Jackson for the 1988 Democratic presidential nomination. Aside from Jackson, Gore was the only Democratic candidate in that race who associated himself with a clear cause, not only calling attention to the urgency of addressing global warming but striving to make it one of the central issues of the election — to no avail. As he later recalled, “I made hundreds of speeches about the greenhouse effect, the ozone problem, that were almost never reported at all. There were several occasions where I prepared the ground in advance, released advanced texts, chose the place for the speech with symbolic care — and then nothing, nothing.” Thanks in no small part to Gore’s own efforts, public awareness of this important issue has dramatically increased in the twenty-six years since that first campaign. While Gore would have probably had a better chance of beating George H. W. Bush than any of the other Democratic aspirants (his reputation as a Southern centrist made him the least vulnerable to the Bush team’s dirty tactics, which were ultimately successful against Dukakis, the eventual nominee), he simply lacked the fame and clout to force global warming onto the national radar. Today he is a former vice president, a Nobel Prize and Academy Award-winner and an elder statesman; his name and reputation alone will make him a major contender as soon as he announces his candidacy (something true of no other Democrat in 2016 except for Clinton). I know that I am asking a lot of him. Of the four Americans who were denied the presidency despite winning the popular vote, he is one of only two to have never made another bid for the White House (Andrew Jackson and Grover Cleveland both ran again — and, it’s worth noting, won). The other one, Samuel Tilden, was satisfied knowing that he would famously “receive from posterity the credit of having been elected to the highest position in the gift of the people, without any of the cares and responsibilities of the office.” While only Gore knows for certain why he has retired from electoral politics, I would imagine Tilden’s reasoning at least factors into Gore’s rationalization of his decision … to say nothing of his legacy in history. Under normal circumstances, I would agree. As Gore knows better than anyone else, however, we are running out of time to address global warming, and no weapon would be as effective in fighting it as a Gore presidential candidacy. If ever a man and a moment have met, Gore is that man and the 2016 presidential election is his moment. *Calendar:* *Sec. Clinton's upcoming appearances as reported online. Not an official schedule.* · July 19 – Madison, CT: Sec. Clinton makes “Hard Choices” book tour stop at R.J. Julia (Day of New London <http://www.theday.com/article/20140708/NWS01/140709708/1047>) · July 20 – St. Paul, MN: Sec. Clinton makes “Hard Choices” book tour stop at Common Good Books (AP <http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/07/08/hillary-clinton-plans-st-paul-stop-on-book-tour/> ) · July 20 – St. Paul, MN: Sec. Clinton visits Minn. Gov. Mark Dayton at the Governor's Mansion (Twitter <https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/490172158510112768>) · July 21 – Menlo Park, CA: Sec. Clinton visits Facebook headquarters and holds live Q&A online (Twitter <https://twitter.com/gdebenedetti/status/490269389640720384>) · ~ July 23-27 – Boston, MA: Sec. Clinton speaks at the Ameriprise Financial Conference (Politico <http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/george-w-bush-hillary-clinton-substitute-speaker-109010.html> ) · July 29 – Saratoga Springs, NY: Sec. Clinton makes “Hard Choices” book tour stop at Northshire Bookstore (Glens Falls Post-Star <http://poststar.com/news/local/clinton-to-sign-books-in-spa-city/article_a89caca2-0b57-11e4-95a6-0019bb2963f4.html> ) · August 9 – Water Mill, NY: Sec. Clinton fundraises for the Clinton Foundation at the home of George and Joan Hornig (WSJ <http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/17/for-50000-best-dinner-seats-with-the-clintons-in-the-hamptons/> ) · August 28 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes Nexenta’s OpenSDx Summit (BusinessWire <http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140702005709/en/Secretary-State-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-Deliver-Keynote#.U7QoafldV8E> ) · September 4 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton speaks at the National Clean Energy Summit (Solar Novis Today <http://www.solarnovus.com/hillary-rodham-clinto-to-deliver-keynote-at-national-clean-energy-summit-7-0_N7646.html> ) · October 2 – Miami Beach, FL: Sec. Clinton keynotes the CREW Network Convention & Marketplace (CREW Network <http://events.crewnetwork.org/2014convention/>) · October 13 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton keynotes the UNLV Foundation Annual Dinner (UNLV <http://www.unlv.edu/event/unlv-foundation-annual-dinner?delta=0>) · ~ October 13-16 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes salesforce.com Dreamforce conference (salesforce.com <http://www.salesforce.com/dreamforce/DF14/keynotes.jsp>)