podesta_email_01631.txt

podesta-emails 10,902 words email

P17 D6 P22 P19 V11

-----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----- *​**Correct The Record Saturday January 10, 2015 Roundup:* *Headlines:* *MSNBC: “For 2016 Democratic hopefuls, a delay of game” <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/2016-democratic-hopefuls-delay-game>* “As compared to 2008, the field this time around could be best described as quiet, with most cooling their heels until spring.” *The New York Times: “Mitt Romney Says He’s Considering a 2016 Presidential Run” <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/us/politics/mitt-romney-says-hes-considering-a-2016-presidential-run.html?ref=politics>* “Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, told a group of donors in New York on Friday that he was considering running for president again next year, sending a signal to the party’s financiers that they should not yet commit to Jeb Bush.” *BuzzFeed: “The Last Temptation Of Mitt” <http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/the-last-temptation-of-mitt?utm_term=.td6xpxmQq#.ucJMKpYB9z>* “‘He’s not going to be intimidated by Bill Clinton sitting in the front row of a debate, looking at him,’ the adviser said of Romney. ‘His dad has run for president. He’s run before.’” *Talking Points Memo: “A Deformed Woman: Hillary Clinton and the Men Who Hate Her” <http://talkingpointsmemo.com/ts/men-who-hate-hillary-clinton>* "Here’s what happened the last time Hillary Clinton ran for president: she drove men wild. Well, certain men. Especially certain men on the right. You could recognize them by the flecks of foam in the corners of their mouths when the subject of her candidacy arose. And they’re already girding themselves for the next time around, because there’s something about Hillary that just gets them all worked up." *Politico: “Mitt Romney says he’s considering a 2016 run” <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/mitt-romney-considers-2016-presidential-campaign-114132.html>* “Mitt Romney told a group of longtime supporters on Friday that he is considering running for president, a major turnaround for a past GOP nominee who just a year ago categorically ruled out a 2016 run.” *Washington Post blog: The Fix: “What the heck is Mitt Romney doing?” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/10/what-the-heck-is-mitt-romney-doing/>* “The simplest answer is because a part of Romney would still like to be president and he doesn't want someone else -- named Jeb Bush -- to foreclose that possibility for him.” *Vox: “5 reasons every Republican is running for president” <http://www.vox.com/2015/1/9/7522657/republican-2016-primary-romney>* “5) They can all position themselves as an alternative to Hillary Clinton” *Slate: “The Warren Commission” <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/01/elizabeth_warren_does_well_in_peter_hart_focus_group_voters_not_excited.html>* [Subtitle:] “In a new focus group, voters agreed about one thing: Elizabeth Warren is one of the most intriguing contenders for 2016.” *Articles:* *MSNBC: “For 2016 Democratic hopefuls, a delay of game” <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/2016-democratic-hopefuls-delay-game>* By Alex Seitz-Wald January 9, 2015, 2:39 p.m. EST Democratic aspirants are taking a more leisurely approach to 2016, even as Republican presidential hopefuls are scrambling to lock down top political talent and raise campaign cash more quickly than their potential rivals. Flashback to this point during the 2008 presidential cycle: Three major Democratic candidates — Tom Vilsack, John Edwards, and Dennis Kucinich — had already declared their candidacies, while announcements from Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Chris Dodd were coming right around the corner in later January. As compared to 2008, the field this time around could be best described as quiet, with most cooling their heels until spring. The only candidate officially looking at a run right now is former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, who announced an exploratory committee in November. But he’s since gone dark, and hasn’t made a public appearance since Dec. 3. And spokesperson says he will be out of commission for some time as he recuperates from knee surgery. “Jim has just undergone a full knee replacement as a consequence of shrapnel wounds received from an enemy grenade,” spokesperson Craig Crawford said Friday. “He is out of the hospital and recovering quite well. The upside is he can catch up with the new season of ‘Downton Abbey.’” Webb served in Vietnam and received shrapnel wounds while shielding a fellow Marine during a daring maneuver, for which he was later awarded the Navy Cross. Earlier in the week, Crawford told msnbc that Webb is in “merely an exploratory phase.” “Right now there are no events on the schedule. That will come if Jim decides to run,” he said. Thursday night during an appearance at the University of Chicago, former Gov. Martin O’Malley said he is “seriously considering” a run in 2016, but added that he’s going to take the next few months to resettle his family after he leaves the governor’s mansion in two weeks. He told the Associated Press afterwards that he’ll make a decision on whether to run by the spring. Back in Washington, Sen. Bernie Sanders — who has also said he is seriously eyeing a run — is busy with a new job in the new Senate, and so far has no political events publicly scheduled this month, a spokesperson said, though that could change going forward. He is scheduled to headline a progressive summit in Pennsylvania in February. Sanders previously said he’ll decide in March on a possible bid for president. While the presumed front-runner on the Republican side, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, jump-started Republicans with an early declaration that he will explore entering the race, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton appears be aiming for a spring announcement date. “She’s the pacesetter in this thing,” veteran Democratic strategist Tad Devine, who is advising Sanders, told msnbc. Clinton has two speeches sponsored by a bank in Canada scheduled for later this month, and two more private appearances planned for February and March, but so far nothing else has been announced publicly. Her plans as of now also don’t include public appearances in the key presidential race state of Iowa and New Hampshire anytime soon. “Things are pretty quiet in the near term,” said Clinton spokesperson Nick Merrill. Nonetheless, there is plenty happening beneath the surface as Clinton quietly assembles a prospective campaign team. Shortening the primary campaign in an attempt to run out the clock while in a strong position is a classic move for front-runners. But with Clinton leaving the field open, some Democratic operatives are puzzled as to why her potential rivals don’t seem eager to take advantage of the vacuum. “For any of the candidates, time is the most valuable resource that they’ve got,” said John Davis, an Iowa native and former Edwards aide who went on to serve as chief of staff to Iowa Rep. Bruce Braley. “Activists and folks in Iowa are ready for candidates to get on the ground.” O’Malley, like Edwards, deployed staff and money to early presidential states to help Democratic candidates in the midterm elections before their prospective runs. But Edwards made a point of keeping his operation in the state up and running, transitioning it into a presidential run, instead of closing down shop after the midterms. While Webb has health reasons for staying off the trail, O’Malley on Thursday alluded to personal reasons relating to his family. A lack of finances could also be a hindrance for some potential candidates, since deploying a campaign requires major resource commitments. Eventually, though, candidates will make it to the field. “You can’t explore without leaving the house,” Davis said. *The New York Times: “Mitt Romney Says He’s Considering a 2016 Presidential Run” <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/us/politics/mitt-romney-says-hes-considering-a-2016-presidential-run.html?ref=politics>* By Jonathan Martin and Nicholas Confessore January 9, 2015 WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, told a group of donors in New York on Friday that he was considering running for president again next year, sending a signal to the party’s financiers that they should not yet commit to Jeb Bush. Meeting with about 30 contributors in the Manhattan office of the New York Jets owner, Woody Johnson, Mr. Romney said he was “thinking about it,” according to Spencer Zwick, a longtime adviser who was at the meeting, first reported by The Wall Street Journal. “Mitt is considering it because he thinks he can make a difference,” said Mr. Zwick, who has been among the loyalists to Mr. Romney hoping he will pursue a third race for the White House. Mr. Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, first ran for president in 2008. He had said repeatedly since his loss to President Obama in 2012 that he would not run again. His apparent interest in another bid comes as Mr. Bush, a former Florida governor, has dominated the news with a series of steps toward a presidential run. He has started both a leadership political action committee and a “super PAC,” and has begun traveling the country to meet with Republican contributors — including, this week, in the Boston area, for years Mr. Romney’s home. Mr. Bush has also repeatedly criticized Mr. Romney’s 2012 campaign in recent weeks. Mr. Zwick said that Mr. Romney’s decision would not hinge on who else was in the race, but he did acknowledge that Mr. Romney’s comments on Friday could cause some high-level Republican donors to at least hold off on committing to Mr. Bush. “If there are donors thinking in a vacuum, ‘I’m with Jeb because Mitt is not running,’ then of course they are now going to have more to think about,” he said. The two former governors are not close. Mr. Romney’s loyalists have not forgotten that Mr. Bush did not endorse Mr. Romney’s 2012 campaign until the latter half of March, when Mr. Romney already had a firm grasp on the Republican nomination. And Mr. Bush could barely conceal his dislike for how Mr. Romney handled the immigration issue in both of his presidential primary campaigns. Mr. Zwick said that Mr. Romney would most likely have to make a decision “over the next 60 days.” Mr. Romney had told donors at past events, including one in Houston shortly before last year’s election, that he did not intend to run again, but he did not rule it out. He told those supporters that he would run if it looked as though others in the Republican field could not win a general election, and if leading party figures encouraged him to enter the race. Asked what had changed since those conversations, Mr. Zwick said, “He’s looked at the landscape of issues out there.” The meeting on Friday, which included several people on a conference call line, gathered some of Mr. Romney’s top fund-raisers and donors from the 2012 campaign, including Patrick Durkin, a managing director at Barclays Capital; the investor Julian Robertson; the hedge fund manager Anthony Scaramucci; the New York Yankees president, Randy Levine; and Edward Conard, a former executive at the private equity firm Bain Capital. Mr. Johnson, the Jets owner, remains uncommitted in the 2016 race and did not participate in the discussion. Mr. Romney told the group that his wife, Ann, was increasingly in favor of a third presidential bid, although their sons had mixed emotions, according to people who attended. But he added that he believed he was “the best candidate, with the best solutions, the best ideas,” according to one of the attendees. Mr. Romney asked each person in turn what he or she thought of his chances. Some gently criticized the management of his 2012 campaign, guests said, while others encouraged him to run. Mr. Zwick emphasized that Mr. Romney recognized how difficult it could be to run a third time. “That’s why he hasn’t announced anything,” he said. *BuzzFeed: “The Last Temptation Of Mitt” <http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/the-last-temptation-of-mitt?utm_term=.td6xpxmQq#.ucJMKpYB9z>* By McKay Coppins January 9, 2015, 10:31 p.m. EST [Subtitle:] How Romney got from 11 nos to maybe on the question of 2016 — and what he has to decide before he takes the plunge. “Can you imagine what Ted Cruz is going to do to Jeb Bush?” one Romney insider tells BuzzFeed News. It wasn’t long after Mitt Romney tottered off the national stage in November, 2012, bringing an end — it seemed — to the long, tragic story of his political career, when Spencer Zwick started getting phone calls from conservative millionaires who were clamoring for one last sequel. Zwick, the square-jawed finance wunderkind who masterminded the candidate’s phenomenally successful fundraising operation in 2012, had returned after the election to the private equity firm he co-founded with Romney’s son, Tagg — but Mitt’s network of GOP money men wouldn’t stop hounding him. Inside Solamere Capital’s pristine, white-walled offices on Boston’s trendy Newbury Street, Zwick often found himself on the phone with major Republican fundraisers, bundlers, and donors putting the same questions to him. “I got calls from people every day asking, ‘Do you think he’ll do it? How can we convince him to do it?’” Zwick said in an interview with BuzzFeed News. With Friday’s news that Romney told a group of donors he was now actively considering a third presidential bid in 2016, it appears the boosters have gotten through. “Everybody in here can go tell your friends that I’m considering a run,” the former candidate told the gathering in midtown Manhattan, according to Politico. But insiders who spoke to BuzzFeed News about Romney’s evolution on the 2016 question said he only began to entertain the possibility recently, and that he still needs to weigh a number of factors — including Jeb Bush’s electability — before he decides to take the plunge. Zwick didn’t need donors to convince him that the ex-nominee should run again; as a longtime loyalist who had worked closely with Romney from the Salt Lake City Olympics to the Massachusetts governor’s office and beyond, he said he repeatedly urged his mentor to keep his options open after the 2012 election. “My argument was that 60 million people already voted for this guy,” Zwick said. “He has the experience, he has the background, he has the skill set. My view is if we’re going to beat Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren or whoever they nominate, we have to find somebody who can not only get through the primary, but who knows he can do the job. I don’t see somebody in the [Republican] field who has the skill set he does. My view is he has to do this.” But despite all the cheerleading, Zwick said Romney was genuinely averse to the idea of a third run all through 2013 and much of 2014 — a sentiment that often came through whenever reporters asked him about his political future. For example, when a New York Times reporter interviewed him a year ago after the Sundance Film Festival screening of the documentary, Mitt — a sympathetic portrayal that did much to rehabilitate his image, at least in the political class — she asked whether he would run again. His response: “Oh no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no. No, no, no.” Most political observers counted the nos (there were 11) and took the emphatic denial at face value. “I truly think that it was never a thought that he would ever do it again,” Zwick said. But then, the midterm elections kicked into gear and Romney — who became an in-demand surrogate and fundraiser, stumping in races across the country — caught the campaign bug again. “Through the 2014 elections, he spent a lot of time on the road talking to voters,” Zwick said. “He was reminded once again being on the trail that there are a lot of really important issues facing the country and he has the skill set to solve them, and that has weighed heavily on him.” The midterms also corresponded with a wave of stories in the political press about a possible Romney 2016 bid, many of which originated with supporters who wanted to fertilize the speculation. It worked; the stories ensured that hopeful donors would keep calling Zwick and other people they believed to have Romney’s ear, making the media predictions a self-fulfilling prophecy. Zwick said he couldn’t point to one day or event that changed the ex-candidate’s mind, but he eventually began to see more willingness on Romney’s part to engage the idea. Another former campaign adviser said Romney has been troubled by the Obama administration’s foreign policy, and what he sees as the disastrous consequences of the United States shrinking from its role as international leader. “Mitt has been waking up every morning watching what’s happening to the world, and he’s incredibly distressed,” said the adviser, who requested anonymity to speak without Romney’s permission. He added that the former candidate believes his widely mocked 2012 warnings about Russia being “our number one geopolitical foe” — along with other hawkish campaign rhetoric — has been vindicated by world events. “Mitt predicted everything.” As he weighs his choices in the coming weeks, Romney won’t be deterred by which candidates enter the primary, or by any displays of fundraising muscle-flexing, Zwick said. Earlier on Friday, Bloomberg Politics reported that Bush’s team set a fundraising goal of $100 million for the first three months of this year in an effort to scare off prospective primary opponents. (Bush’s spokesperson said the goal came from donors, and that their actual target is “far more modest.”) But Zwick said fundraising is the least of their concerns. “It’s a primary,” he said. “You go back, there’s always been multiple candidates in the race that could raise money…. And he has actually already won a primary before.” According to one former adviser, the biggest political question Romney will be considering as he makes his decision is whether Bush will be able to make it to the general election. “Look, Jeb’s a good guy. I think the governor likes Jeb,” the adviser said. “But Jeb is Common Core, Jeb is immigration, Jeb has been talking about raising taxes recently. Can you imagine Jeb trying to get through a Republican primary? Can you imagine what Ted Cruz is going to do to Jeb Bush? I mean, that’s going to be ugly.” The adviser added that aside from Bush, Romney doesn’t believe any of the Republicans in the field are ready to take on Hillary Clinton in the general election. “He’s not going to be intimidated by Bill Clinton sitting in the front row of a debate, looking at him,” the adviser said of Romney. “His dad has run for president. He’s run before.” *Talking Points Memo: “A Deformed Woman: Hillary Clinton and the Men Who Hate Her” <http://talkingpointsmemo.com/ts/men-who-hate-hillary-clinton>* By Laura Kipnis [No Date Mentioned] [END NOTE:] Excerpted from MEN: Notes from an Ongoing Investigation by Laura Kipnis published by METROPOLITAN BOOKS, an imprint of HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY, LLC. Copyright © 2014 by Laura Kipnis. All rights reserved. Here’s what happened the last time Hillary Clinton ran for president: she drove men wild. Well, certain men. Especially certain men on the right. You could recognize them by the flecks of foam in the corners of their mouths when the subject of her candidacy arose. And they’re already girding themselves for the next time around, because there’s something about Hillary that just gets them all worked up. But what exactly? Despise her they do, yet they’re also strangely drawn to her, in some inexplicably intimate way. She occupies their attention. They spend a lot of time thinking about her—enumerating her character flaws, dissecting her motives, analyzing her physical shortcomings with a penetrating, clinical eye: those thick ankles and dumpy hips, the ever-changing hairdos. You’d think they were talking about their first wives. There’s the same over-invested quality, an edge of spite, some ancient wound not yet repaired. And how they love conjecturing upon her sexuality! Or lack of, heh heh. Is she frigid, is she gay? Heh heh. Yes, they have many theories about her, complete with detailed forensic analyses of her marriage, probably more detailed than their thoughts about their own. My point is that you can tell a lot about a man by what he thinks about Hillary, maybe even everything. She’s not just another presidential candidate, she’s a sophisticated diagnostic instrument for calibrating male anxiety, which is running high. Understandably, given that the whole male-female, who-runs-the-world question is pretty much up for grabs. As our tour guides into these subterranean psychical thickets, I’ve enlisted a selection of Hillary’s right-wing biographers to lead the way, or more specifically, a selection of authors obsessed enough to write entire books about a woman they detest while still being lucid enough to find a commercial publisher. Unfortunately this excluded self-published works like Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton And America's Demise by Sheldon Filger, but even the painfully repetitious title screamed for the interventions of a professional editor, and life is short. I also declined to read any books that came with voodoo dolls; sadly this ruled out The Hillary Clinton Voodoo Kit: Stick It to Her, Before She Sticks It to You! by Turk Regan, but as fuming tirades were in no short supply, I felt that I could afford to be choosy. Biographies, even bad ones, are the record of a relationship: temporary marriages, so to speak. More than a few self-reflective biographers have admitted as much. And for whatever reasons, Hillary seems to attract a certain type of husband: guys with a lot of psychological baggage, emotional intensity, and messy inner lives. Let’s begin with Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., author of Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House, since if Hillary’s biographer-foes sound like embittered ex-husbands, in Tyrrell, founder and editor-in-chief of the far-right American Spectator, we’re fortunate to have a biographer who’s occasionally mused in print about his actual ex-wife. So who gets it worse—Hillary or the ex? Actually it’s a toss-up. Who would have predicted: coincidentally it turns out that Madame Tyrrell and Madame Hillary share an uncanny number of similar traits. Hillary’s a self-righteous, self-regarding narcissist, “a case study in what psychiatrists call ‘the controlling personality,” and assumes the world will share her conviction that she’s always blameless. Compare with Tyrrell on the soon-to-be-ex, from his political memoir The Conservative Crack-Up: “She resorted to tennis, then religion, and then psychotherapy. Finally she tried divorce—all common American coping mechanisms for navigating middle age.” When Tyrrell worries that suburban women will secretly identify with Hillary’s independence and break from their husbands’ politics in the privacy of the voting booth, clearly suburban women’s late-breaking independence is territory he has cause to know and fear. Hillary’s disposition is dark, sour, and conspiratorial; she has a paranoid mind, a combative style, is thin-skinned, and “prone to angry outbursts.” Whereas the ex-Mrs. T., we learn, was afflicted with “random wrath”; and as divorce negotiations were in their final stages, threatened to make the proceedings as public and lurid as possible. Hillary has “a prehensile nature,” which makes it sound like she hangs from branches by her feet. (Tyrrell has always fancied himself a latter day Mencken, flashing his big vocabulary around like a thick roll of banknotes.) And while he nowhere actually says that his ex-wife hung from branches by her feet, the reference to protracted divorce negotiations probably indicates that “grasping”—the definition of prehensile (I had to look it up)—is a characterization he wouldn’t argue with. When Tyrrell writes of Bill and Hillary that there was an emotional side to the arrangement, with each fulfilling the other’s idiosyncratic needs, as we see, he’s been there himself. Threatening ex-wives, property settlements, bad breath—not exactly lighthearted stuff. Tyrrell at least tries to be amusing about it, in the sense that love transformed into hatred can be amusing, in a bilious, horribly painful sort of way. Not so with Edward Klein, author of the bestselling The Truth About Hillary, and a tragically humorless type. When Klein rants, “As always with Hillary, it was all about her,” note the rancid flavor of marital over-familiarity—he’s really just had it with her. He’s practically venomous. Though he’s also so suspicious of her sexual proclivities that unintentional humor abounds: he’s like an angry Inspector Clouseau with gaydar. The inconvenient fact that there’s no particular evidence Hillary bends that way dissuades him not. Thus we learn that Hillary went to a college with a long tradition of lesbianism (Wellesley), where she read a lot of lesbian literature, and two of her college friends would later become out-of-the-closet lesbians, and later, some of her Wellesley classmates were invited for “sleepovers” to the White House? (Get it? Sleepovers.) In 1972, a Methodist church magazine she subscribed to published a special issue on radical lesbian and feminist themes edited by two—you guessed it—lesbians. In college, her role models were feminists who refused to wear pretty clothes, and sometimes appeared mannish; her White House Chief of Staff was also mannish looking. Though according to Klein, Hillary never much liked sex to begin with. Sounding like a Monty Python rendition of a Freudian analyst, Klein speculates about a fight Hillary once had with a college boyfriend about not wanting to go skiing; skiing, say Klein, “might have been a substitute for an honest discussion about her sexual frigidity.” The episode ended with Hillary retreating into “icy silence.” Get it? Icy. (He also quotes Richard Nixon, of all people, who says that Hillary is “ice cold.”) Yet Klein reports that Hillary had a torrid affair with Vince Foster, the deputy White House counsel (and her former law partner) who later committed suicide. This would make her a frigid closeted bisexual adulteress, for anyone keeping track. If it’s a handy truism that constant sexual innuendos mask a discomfort with sex, then Klein is one uptight dude. But there’s so much sexual angst among these guys generally, along with quite mixed feelings about the female body itself. When Klein writes of Hillary’s lower regions that though she’s “a small-boned woman from the waist up, she was squat and lumpy from the waist down, with wide hips, calves, and ankles,” the blatant bodily aversion in the phrase “squat and lumpy” isn’t just a disagreement with her health care plan. Klein’s concentration on Clinton’s physical appearance is so microscopic that you fully expect to turn the page and find an index of her moles, accompanied by a close reading of what they indicate about her moral insufficiencies. None of this is exactly a testimonial to his deep self-acuity. Or very attractive propensities in a man, it must be said. Though maybe he’s unconsciously identifying when he writes that Hillary had “always thought of herself as an ugly duckling,” and particularly hated her body, which caused her to neglect her personal appearance as a young woman, and go around dressed like a hippie in shapeless clothes, and with hair that looked like it hadn’t been washed for a month. Or secretly commiserating about her feeling “so hopelessly unattractive that she did not bother to shave her legs and underarms, and deliberately dressed badly so she would not have to compete with more attractive women in a contest she could not possibly win.” I feel compelled to note, if we’re going down this path, that—having seen a few photos of the author—this is a man who can’t have felt entirely secure about his competitive mettle on this score either. Hillary’s physicality really does loom large for her biographers. Tyrrell too spends many passages mocking her youthful hairdos, down to the thick eyebrows which once “would have collected coal dust in a Welsh mining village.” In other words, she’s an overly hairy woman, in addition to everything else. Hairdo, eyebrows—thankfully we’re not privy to data on the condition of her bikini line. Tyrrell sounds like an aspirant for the Vidal Sassoon endowed chair on the Clinton-hating Right when he concludes that Hillary’s “search for the perfect hairstyle has finally been resolved into a neatly elegant businesswoman’s coiffure” and that she “seems to have turned her hair into a major strength.” He also concedes that Hillary “flirts well” and has evolved into “a handsome woman.” Klein gets in a few digs on this point himself, as you’d expect, benevolently mentioning that Hillary’s the kind of homely woman whose looks have improved with age, then trotting out another anonymous medial expert to testify that she’s been “Botoxed to the hilt.” No, Hillary doesn’t exactly elicit the best in her foes. On the sexual creepiness meter, Klein gets some stiff competition from Carl Limbacher, who writes for the far-right news outlet NewsMax and is the author of Hillary’s Scheme: Inside the Next Clinton’s Ruthless Agenda to Take the White House. Here’s another biographer a little too keen to nose out the truth about Hillary’s sexuality: Bill Clinton is a predator, Hillary digs it, and this is the key that unlocks her character. If Hillary didn’t literally hold down the victims while Bill did the deed, she was complicit nonetheless—“a victimizer who actually enabled her husbands predations,” since “a woman with half the intellect of Hillary Clinton would understand that she’s married to a ravenous sexual predator at best—a brutal serial rapist at worst.” At least he compliments her intellect. I’m dying to know what Limbacher imagines Hillary’s wearing when he fantasizes about her in the henchwoman-to-rape role—her Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS outfit or the navy blue pantsuit. As we see, the problem for Hillary’s biographers isn’t that a woman’s aspiring to be president—none of them mount an actual argument against women as presidential candidates. The problem is that Hillary’s a deformed woman. She’s a sadist, a victim, asexual, a dyke—maybe all at once. Taking the measure of Hillary’s perverted femininity also preoccupies John Podhoretz in Can She Be Stopped: Hillary Clinton Will Be the Next President of the United States Unless… On the one hand, Podhoretz wants to like Hillary, even though he finds her tough to warm up to as a woman: she never figured out what to do with her hair and clothes, in his diagnosis, she isn’t a raving beauty, and her manner is almost pathologically unsexy. Interestingly, Podhoretz thinks this anti-feminine quality may actually work in her favor: being “neither girlish nor womanly” with a “hard to describe style” could be the perfect blend for the first woman president, he muses, since a president has to be a little scary, not seem emotional—basically she should be an unlikable bitch. “And Hillary is a bitch.” Feigning worry that saying this kind of thing makes him sounds sexist—while clearly admiring himself for saying it—he explains that a woman presidential candidate needs to show she can be manly, and if any woman politician can pass for a tough guy, it’s Hillary. This scares him, though in a sweaty, enthralled sort of way. Call him Mr. Conflicted. But maybe inner maelstroms come with the territory when Mom is the ultra-conservative doyenne and fiery anti-feminist, Midge Decter, author of numerous books denouncing the women’s movement and the dupes who fell for it. Dad is the notoriously pugnacious neo-con, Norman. When Podhoretz says, incoherently, that Hillary had an “easy path due in part to feminism,” he sounds like the dutiful son, channeling Midge. What mother could ask for more? But things can’t have been easy for John: between the powerhouse mom, the romantic impetuosities and flip-flops, and the politically strange-bedfellows current marriage (though I’m sure they’re a lovely couple), Podhoretz has more than his share of family baggage when it comes to love and politics. As has Hillary herself, needless to say—in a better world the two of them could have a fascinating heart-to-heart on the subject. Instead, Podhoretz spends a good chunk of his book proffering weird advice to Hillary on how to position herself to win the election, even while bashing her senseless at every turn. Example: to avoid being upstaged by Bill, Hillary should treat him “as though he were her father—there to provide her with emotional support and little else.” Here we pause to note that Podhoretz is someone whose career has always been upstaged by his more famous father. How can the reader keep her footing amidst this mad swirl of relatives, husbands, ambitions, and projections? By the way, Emmett Tyrrell has some free advice for Hillary too: she should get herself a divorce, and pronto. Since Bill is not only goatish but also “ithyphallic” (I had to look that up too), Hillary could present herself to women voters as “a victim of the male penile imperative,” then start dating again. I imagine Tyrrell is so pro-divorce because his own life improved so dramatically following one, especially on the penile imperative front. His fans will doubtless recall Tyrrell’s bubbly reports about life as a swinging bachelor, picking up “terrific co-eds” at various right-wing think-tank shindigs, and not returning home alone. Yes, conservatives do score, as Tyrrell—who charges Hillary with having been too self-disclosing in her memoir, Living History—makes sure to let us know. His preference is for the “soignée” and “physiologically well-appointed,” though unfortunately one of his soignée dates is mistaken for a hooker when he drops by a conservative gathering at the Lehrman Institute on his way to Au Club, a then-happening Manhattan nightspot. (A friend explains that when a conservative shows up somewhere with a beautiful woman, he’s usually paying by the hour.) Tyrrell has actually been quite the gallant about aging female Republicans in the past, waxing lyrical about right-wing sex kitten Phyllis Schlafly’s foxiness and Nancy Reagan’s large beautiful eyes, both of whom are perhaps a quarter century his senior—to which one can only say, “You go, Bob.” But could he ever go for a Democrat? As most agree, Hillary’s aging well, and Tyrrell hasn’t been entirely critical. On the plus side, she reminds him of Madame Mao, the “white boned demon” who was never more dangerous than when wearing a seductive guise, and Tyrrell is on record as a man who likes a seductive guise. However, in an exceedingly strange passage toward the end of the book, we learn that Hillary’s ultimate dream is to be commandant of a “national Cambodian re-education camp for anyone caught wearing an Adam Smith necktie or scarf.” Or perhaps it’s also an extermination camp, since he adds: “Welcome to Camp Hillary. Please remove your glasses and deposit them on the heap. (Was that a flash of gold I saw in your teeth?)” Yes, it’s off to the killing fields for Tyrrell and his kind—having received her political education at the feet of Pol Pot, it’s definitely curtains for the bourgeois enemy once Hillary takes the reins. I think Tyrrell means all this to be witty. He concludes by telling readers he’s “taking the high road, since hatred is an acid on the soul.” Here we’ve entered the realm of male hysteria, where reason and intellect go to die, though Tyrrell can be a hoot for those who find this kind of thing entertaining. Speaking of male hysteria brings us to the case of Tyrrell’s protégé at the American Spectator, David Brock, and his biography, The Seduction of Hillary Rodham. After receiving a million dollar book advance to write a smear job on Hillary similar to the one he’d previously performed on Clarence Thomas accuser Anita Hill (Brock was famously the author of the “a bit nutty and a bit slutty” line about Hill), a strange thing happened when he tried to plunge the dagger again. Somehow he couldn’t. Sure there was the stuff about the 60s radicalism that Hillary never really abandoned, including a catty analysis of her college wardrobe. And like the rest, he spends pages enumerating her bodily crimes and misdemeanors: given her thick legs she adopted the sort of “loose-fitting, flowing pants favored by the Viet Cong” (just call her Ho Chi Rodham); along with these, she sported white socks and sandals (here, even I must protest), wore no makeup, piled her hair on top of her head, and “came from the ‘look-like-shit school of feminism.’” Even once ensconced in the professional world she cut a “comic figure” with her hair fried into an Orphan Annie perm and a “huge eyebrow across her forehead that looked like a giant caterpillar.” But more of the time it’s an intermittently compassionate portrait of a gawky, brainy, well-intentioned Midwestern girl swept off her feet by a charismatic Southern charmer, who migrated to the backwaters of Arkansas—or Dogpatch, as Brock likes to call it—to advance Bill’s political fortunes, sacrificing herself and her principles for love. Bill repaid her by having sex with everyone in sight. But Hillary wasn’t a phony, and shouldn’t have had to play the part to advance Bill’s career, Brock insists—he even says that her physical appearance should never have become a political issue, notwithstanding the amount of time he devotes to cataloguing it. One of fascinating aspects of Brock’s employment situation was that he happens to be gay and the Spectator happens to regularly fulminate against gay rights, as did his yappy boss Tyrrell whenever given the chance. When Brock speculates that Hillary might have been “perversely drawn to the rejection implied by Bill’s philandering,” willing to accept compromises and humiliation in the sexual arena because of the greater good she and Bill could together accomplish, Brock—who’d once thrown a gala party to celebrate the hundredth day of Newt Gingrich’s anti-gay Contract With America—could have been describing his own career arc too. The big problem for him was that he ended up identifying with Hillary when he was supposed to be vilifying her. Some mysterious alchemy took place in the course of his writing this book: instead of exposing Hillary to the world, she exposed Brock to himself. The result was a stormy break-up with his pals on the Right: he became persona non grata in his former circles. But he and Hillary had some sort of imaginary bond, at least in Brock’s imagination. He describes waiting in line for several hours at a bookstore for Hillary to sign his copy of It Takes a Village, and where he hoped to stage their first face-to-face meeting. The question on his mind, he confesses, is what she thinks of him. But when he reaches the head of the line, faces up to the real Hillary rather than the imaginary one, identifies himself and asks when he could have an interview, Hillary’s wry reply is, “Probably never.” All biography is ultimately fiction,” Bernard Malamud wrote in Dubin’s Lives, his novel about a biographer. What would he have said about this motley collection of writers: all biography is ultimately a Rorschach test? The various Hillaries that emerge are fictive enough, yet clearly they have an inner truth for their creators. Each invents his own personal Hillary—from baroque sexual fantasies straight out of The Honeymoon Killers and girl-girl sexcapades, to big sis—then has to slay his creation, while paying tribute to her power with these displays of antagonism and ambivalence. They’re caught in her grip, but they don’t know why; they spin tales about her treachery and perversity, as if that explains it. Except that the harder they try to knock her off her perch, the more shrill and unmanned they seem. *Politico: “Mitt Romney says he’s considering a 2016 run” <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/mitt-romney-considers-2016-presidential-campaign-114132.html>* By Maggie Haberman January 9, 2015, 4:42 p.m. EST Mitt Romney told a group of longtime supporters on Friday that he is considering running for president, a major turnaround for a past GOP nominee who just a year ago categorically ruled out a 2016 run. If he follows through, it would be Romney’s third White House campaign, and it would shake up the already large field of Republicans eyeing the presidency. But even many Romney supporters are skeptical he will ultimately jump in and risk losing three times. “Everybody in here can go tell your friends that I’m considering a run,” Romney said at a private meeting in New York with about 30 former donors, according to one source. The former Massachusetts governor, who was the Republican presidential nominee in 2012, said he had a number of ideas about how to help the country, and that one of the issues he’d like to address is poverty, two people on hand at the meeting said. He also pledged that if he does decide to join the race, he would run a much different campaign than he has in the past. Romney’s 2012 race was plagued by complaints about insularity and a lack of a clear, defining message beyond being the anti-President Obama. He was caricatured by Democrats as a cold-blooded jobs killer during his private equity days, and was never able to relate to voters. The gathering was called a few weeks ago and was held in midtown Manhattan. Romney’s remarks were first reported by The Wall Street Journal. People on hand included financier Patrick Durkin, and Alex Nabab, both of whom have committed to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is also exploring a 2016 run, and were involved in events with him earlier in the week in New York City and Connecticut. That both are already on the Bush bandwagon underscores the challenge Romney would face in trying to ensure his donor network remains intact if he runs. For Romney’s former backers, the news wasn’t a complete surprise. For weeks, he has been slowly ratcheting up his rhetoric in conversations. But his decision to informally test the waters came as Bush has dominated media coverage and donor interest for the last several weeks, including the two New York-area events. And a number of the attendees, who said they were invited to a confidential meeting with Romney and were given no heads-up that he would use the gathering to make a more direct case for himself, were frustrated to find word of it had leaked. Bush has been moving to engage the extensive donor network that backed his father and his brother in their White House campaigns. That means that for Romney, the window is closing. One source close to Romney said he will likely decide within the next two months about his next move. Romney allies and former staffers have spent much of the past two years lamenting that he should have won in his 2012 campaign against President Barack Obama. Romney also ran for the White House in 2008, but lost the GOP nod to Sen. John McCain of Arizona. Just a year ago, in an interview with The New York Times, Romney ruled out a presidential run in a most emphatic manner: “Oh, no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no. No, no, no,” he said. But Romney supporters have argued that there’s a clamor for people who would like to see someone emerge as a leader for the Republican Party during a particularly fractious time, and Romney recently began making clear to donors and supporters that such talk was affecting his thinking. In addition, Romney told those gathered Friday that his wife, Ann, was now very encouraging toward his running again, a source said — a change from her past protests. The couple’s five sons, however, were split on the notion. Bush’s decision to move quickly to draw a line in the sand was in part because of Romney’s overtures to donors. Bush allies had privately grown frustrated that Romney was freezing some donors who hoped he would launch a campaign of his own. Bush announced in December that he is considering a 2016 run, and he has moved quickly since to set up a leadership PAC, dubbed “The Right to Rise” to accept donations. A super PAC with the same name has also been set up to help Bush. The former Florida governor has repeatedly said he won’t make a stark pitch to the Republican Party’s more conservative base by bending his positions to appease voters. He also has lamented that no recent GOP nominee has tried to avoid taking positions to win over GOP primary voters who are more conservative, stances that end up turning off general election voters. Bush and Romney are looking to occupy the center-right establishment lane. A sprawling array of senators, governors and former officials who appeal to different segments of the conservative base are also in the GOP’s potential 2016 mix. Among those seriously laying the groundwork for a presidential campaign are Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Marco Rubio of Florida, and Ted Cruz of Texas. Also a possibility is New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, would likely vie for the same center-right support that Romney and Bush would seek. Romney drew flak for his overtures to the right in 2012, especially on the subject of immigration. Bush has criticized the way Romney allowed himself to be defined negatively by Democrats during that campaign. Democrats at the time cast Romney, who made a fortune in the financial sector, as a heartless businessman. Romney, in turn, has argued privately that Bush, should he run in 2016, will face some of the same criticism over his own extensive business ties. Bush has recently taken steps to reduce his private sector links. And Bush allies privately point out that Romney made his business record as a private equity executive a centerpiece of his rationale for running, something the former Florida governor isn’t planning to do. At Friday’s gathering, there was a consensus among Romney supporters that he needs to reintroduce himself to the voters, in a complimentary way like the video aired about him at the GOP convention in 2012. Romney responded by saying that the damaging portraits of him are now old news and therefore less harmful. For Romney, the prospect of another campaign also is a potential boon to business: Many of his donors are also potential investors in his son Tagg’s firm, Solamere Capital. But Romney, whose late father also ran for president, has dreamed of the White House for years. His increased interest comes not just as Bush has been trying to seize the establishment lane, but as Hillary Clinton, the undeclared but overwhelming Democratic favorite, has seen her approval numbers fall in recent months. *Washington Post blog: The Fix: “What the heck is Mitt Romney doing?” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/10/what-the-heck-is-mitt-romney-doing/>* By Chris Cillizza January 10, 2015, 10:51 a.m. EST Mitt Romney sent a very clear message to a group of major donors in New York City on Friday: I'm thinking about running for president in 2016. Then, as he knew they would, those donors spread that message to every media outlet in the country. It's a stunning reversal from public -- and private -- assertions from Romney and his allies that, after two runs for president in 2008 and 2012, he was absolutely, 100 percent done with running. And that reversal begs this question: What the heck is Mitt Romney doing? Let's start by making clear what he's not doing: Running for president -- at least not yet. No one -- not even those most bullish on the prospect of Romney, part 3 -- believe that Romney has made up his mind to run. But, it's clear he is more interested in the possibility of a race than he was even a few months ago and wants to preserve the right to make his own decision. What he sees -- and wants to stop -- is the momentum in the major donor community toward former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who has been the most aggressive potential candidate in the 2016 field since the 2014 midterms ended. Bush, according to one report, has set a goal of raising $100 million over the first three months of 2015 in hopes of convincing lots of other candidates that making the race is a fool's errand. By making very clear that he's on the fence about another race, Romney freezes some not-insignificant portion of the Republican major donor base -- especially in New York and New Jersey. Rather than signing on with Jeb in the next weeks or months, many of those money men and women will wait to see what Romney does before doing anything. So, Romney is really buying himself -- and, whether intentionally or not, the rest of the potential field -- some time. He's taking the Bush pot off of boil and turning it down to simmer. Which then raises this question: Why? The simplest answer is because a part of Romney would still like to be president and he doesn't want someone else -- named Jeb Bush -- to foreclose that possibility for him. Romney has not been shy -- privately but publicly reported -- that he has doubts about Bush's ability to win the Republican nomination and the lack of any other candidate in the GOP field who presents a real challenge to de facto Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. These two paragraphs from a Politico story by Ben White and Maggie Haberman back in December are telling: “[Romney] has said, among other things, that Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor, would run into problems because of his business dealings, his work with the investment banks Lehman Brothers and Barclays, and his private equity investments. “‘You saw what they did to me with Bain [Capital],’ he has said, referring to the devastating attacks that his Republican rivals and President Barack Obama’s team launched against him for his time in private equity, according to three sources familiar with the line. ‘What do you think they’ll do to [Bush] over Barclays?’” While Bush has drawn mostly positive attention for stepping aside from various corporate and non-profit boards in advance of his likely bid, a glimpse of the potentially problematic issues Bush will have to navigate as a result of his work -- on education policy among other things -- since leaving the governor's office in 2006 came out this week in a terrific story by WaPo's Lyndsey Layton. Writing of the Foundation for Excellence in Education, Layton says: “The foundation, from which Bush resigned as chairman last week as part of his preparations for a possible White House bid, has been criticized as a backdoor vehicle for major corporations to urge state officials to adopt policies that would enrich the companies.” To hear the Romney side tell it, his renewed interest in the race is entirely born from a selfless desire to see the party win back the White House after eight years in the political wilderness. While that's likely part of his reasoning, no politician -- or human -- acts for entirely selfless reasons. Ever. Romney came close to being president in 2012 and likely believes that armed with the knowledge he has picked up over his last two bids he would be able to get to the top of the mountain this time around. To me, Romney remains an unlikely 2016 candidate. But, he clearly can't get the idea out of his head (and his heart) and so wanted to buy himself some time to make the decision on his own timetable. Mission accomplished. *Vox: “5 reasons every Republican is running for president” <http://www.vox.com/2015/1/9/7522657/republican-2016-primary-romney>* By Andrew Prokop January 9, 2015, 7:35 p.m. EST One early takeaway of the GOP's invisible primary? A whole lot of people sure look like they're going to run. On Friday, Mitt Romney told a group of donors that he was considering another run for president. Minutes later, a new report said Marco Rubio had gotten approval from his family for a run, and that he wouldn't be scared away by Jeb Bush's fundraising. Earlier in the week, Mike Huckabee ended his Fox News show to explore a bid, Jeb Bush launched a fundraising operation, Scott Walker's hiring of a likely campaign manager became known, and Chris Christie reportedly decided to move up his timetable for an announcement. Rick Santorum and Rick Perry also said they were seriously considering running. Less plausible candidates like Ben Carson, George Pataki, and Carly Fiorina have previously signaled their interest. Now, it's not certain that all of these people will end up running. And many of those who do could drop out well before the voting begins — there tends to be a winnowing of the field as some candidates fail to raise enough money and win support. But unlike in 2011-2012 — when many potentially strong contenders shied away from a bid — Republican hopefuls seem to be much more eager to run this time around. Here are five reasons why. 1) Jeb Bush would make a weak frontrunner For most of 2014, there wasn't really anyone who could be deemed a frontrunner in the GOP field. With Christie sidelined by Bridgegate , Rand Paul still getting a mixed reception from the GOP establishment, Scott Walker busy with his own reelection, and Marco Rubio damaged by his support of the Senate immigration bill, there seemed to be a vacuum in the field. Enter Jeb Bush. With an unexpectedly early announcement of an exploratory committee and an aggressive fundraising push that Michael Bender and Jonathan Allen of Bloomberg Politics describe as "shock-and-awe," he's inarguably made a strong debut and forced the other potential candidates to move up their timetables for running. Yet Bush has been out of politics for eight years. His positions on immigration and education aren't popular with conservatives. And his last name could prove to be more toxic than GOP elites currently expect — in general election polling, or even in the primary. As Ben Smith argued, he might not be in touch with how the GOP has changed since the rise of the Tea Party — and might stumble on the trail. Bush has even said that a GOP candidate this year should be willing to "lose the primary to win the general" — and maybe he will! (The first part, that is.) 2) The eight-year itch Since Harry Truman's presidency ended, there's only been one time where a party has held onto the White House for over eight years — the Reagan-Bush reign of 1981-1992. Democrats and their likely nominee Hillary Clinton would be attempting to match that rare streak. But as Brendan Nyhan wrote at the Upshot, voters seem to get tired after eight or more years of the same party, in what political scientist Alan Abramowitz calls the "time for a change" effect. More and more voters start to think that the opposition should get a shot. We've gotten some good economic news recently, and if that continues, any GOP candidate will face a tough time winning in 2016. But the economy that year will matter much more than what's happening now, and we simply don't know what conditions will be yet. And, of course, Jeb's older brother won the presidency over Al Gore when the economy was quite strong, and when President Bill Clinton was much more popular than Obama is now. 3) The 2010 and 2014 elections helped expand the GOP field and embolden the party The Obama midterm years have just been amazing for the growth of the Republican Party, so there are simply more credible contenders to go around. In 2010, the party elected a host of new governors, senators, and members of Congress including Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, and Scott Walker, as well as other potential candidates like John Kasich. (All but one GOP governor running again in 2014 won.) Beyond that, the party was emboldened by its sweeping 2014 wins. With the takeover of the Senate and most state governments, conservatism seems to be on the ascendancy, and Democrats in decline. And the news has been dominated by crises all over the world, further feeding the sense that Obama has failed. Obviously, the 2010 GOP victories didn't lead to Obama's defeat in 2012. But many potential candidates feel like they've learned from Romney's mistakes — including Romney. 4) Non-serious candidates can become more famous by running Some people run for president because they think they can win. Others run because it's an easy way to get the press — and your party's base voters — to pay attention to you. This is particularly true in our modern era of many televised debates and intense media coverage, and in 2011-2012 unlikely candidates like Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Santorum all had their moments in the sun. A no-hope candidate can use this brief spotlight to push some preferred policy ideas, as Ron Paul did. He or she can also have more mercenary motivations — for instance, hoping that newfound fame will lead to a lucrative book deal or media gig. 5) They can all position themselves as an alternative to Hillary Clinton The funny thing about Hillary Clinton being the overwhelming favorite for the Democratic nomination is that practically any Republican can contrast himself or herself to her. If you're a young and new candidate, you can point to Obama's defeat of Clinton in 2008, and argue you could do the same as the candidate of change. Why would the GOP choose a candidate of the past when they could be the party of the future? Alternatively, if you're an older, better-known candidate, you could make the case that Clinton is a formidable opponent, and that the GOP needs someone experienced and tested to take her on. If you're from a political dynasty, you can even argue that that won't hurt too much in the general election, since Clinton is too (sort of). In the view of many, Clinton's past year showed off many of her weaknesses, and made clear that she's vulnerable. We'll see how that plays out — but for now, it's an argument for any Republican to jump in the race. *Slate: “The Warren Commission” <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/01/elizabeth_warren_does_well_in_peter_hart_focus_group_voters_not_excited.html>* By John Dickerson January 9, 2015, 5:32 p.m. EST [Subtitle:] In a new focus group, voters agreed about one thing: Elizabeth Warren is one of the most intriguing contenders for 2016. When 12 voters gathered in Aurora, Colorado, for a political focus group on Thursday night, it wasn’t surprising to hear them compete to see who could bash politicians more. “If we got rid of every member of Congress and elected new people tomorrow who had no experience, I don’t think we could do any worse,” said Charlie Loan, who voted for Mitt Romney in 2012. When the group was asked to come up with phrases members of Congress should wear on wrist bracelets, they suggested “Don’t trust me, I lie,” “Looking out for me,” and “Two Faced.” But one politician escaped the voters’ ire: Elizabeth Warren. Six of the 12 said they would like to have Warren over to their house to talk, more than any other possible 2016 presidential contender they were asked about. They said she was “down to earth” and “knowledgeable.” When asked a separate question about which politician they would like to have live next door, they picked Warren over every other contender as well. Jenny Howard, an accountant with student-loan debt who voted for Romney in 2012 and Sen. John McCain in 2008, also liked Warren: “If she ran, she could be the next president because she is personable and knowledgeable and has a good handle on what’s going on in the country.” Peter Hart organized this Colorado focus group. Hart, a Democratic pollster for more than 40 years, helps conduct the Wall Street Journal/ NBC poll and has been holding these kinds of sessions for the past four presidential elections. The focus group was the first of a series of such two-hour interviews of swing voters that Hart will do leading up to the 2016 presidential election, for the Annenberg Public Policy Center to track how voter sentiment changes. These people do not represent metaphysical certitude about the country’s political opinion—it’s only 12 people after all—and we are still far from the next election so much can change, but they offer glimpses of the current stirring in the public. Their desire for change, concerns about the economy (despite news that things are better), and interest in a candidate who cares about the middle class have appeared consistently in polls and other voter forums. The affection for Warren among the group of five self-described independents, three Republicans, and four Democrats may not tell us anything about the Massachusetts senator herself. It’s possible that she is a vehicle through which they are signaling their desire for change, for something authentic and maybe new. Charlie Loan, an IT manager, says he voted the straight conservative line most recent election but he’d listen to what Warren had to say. “The little I have seen and heard from her, she seems genuine—people from [Oklahoma] usually are. Since she was formerly devoted to the Republican Party, maybe she fits in the middle somewhere, which is where I would like to see most of them be. She is clearly well-educated and seems level-headed.” If Warren is a possible vessel for change, so too is Sen. Rand Paul, who several of the conservatives found intriguing. (Sen. Ted Cruz wasn’t mentioned, even though he, like Paul and Warren, is also trying to position himself as an outsider on the inside.) Paul had a bit of the crossover appeal that Warren had. “He’s a reasonable choice,” said Andrew Regan, who described himself as a strong Democrat. “I would consider him, but I don’t know who the Democratic nominee is going to be.” Regan was emblematic of the strong desire for something new. Despite his ideological affiliations, he was happy to see Republicans in control of Congress. “I’m happy to see that Republicans took Congress. Instead of a ‘Do Nothing’ congress we have a ‘Do Something’ Congress.” Once a Democratic nominee is chosen, it’s almost certain that Regan, a self-employed beekeeper, will vote as he always has. That’s what voters usually do. The same is true with conservatives who express an openness for Warren. But Warren’s authenticity, anti-corporate message, and outsider status all reflect the desire for change that came across so clearly from most of the participants. The 2016 contenders who didn’t fare well are also two of its marquee names: Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush. Six of the 12 said they would back a law to bar all Bushes and Clintons from running. “He’s running off the Bush name and thinks that’s something,” said Howard. In a free-association exercise, the words people used to describe Bush included: “joke,” “no thank you,” “clown,” “interesting,” “don’t need him,” “intriguing,” “greedy,” and “bad scene.” (By contrast, Paul was described as “entertaining,” “interesting,” “very intriguing,” “honest,” and “freedom.”) Mention of Hillary Clinton conjured “hopeful,” “crazy,” “strong,” “spitfire,” “don’t like her,” “untrustworthy,” “more of the same,” and “next candidate, please.” Although the antipathy toward Bush and Clinton was often specific, it also could be read as a broad dislike of American politics today. Not surprisingly, the economy was the issue everyone was most concerned about. Jobs numbers were solid again on Friday and the unemployment rate is at 5.6 percent (lower than Mitt Romney said it would be under his administration by the year 2017), but the good numbers didn’t do anything to assuage the participants’ worries. Though they said lower gas prices have helped, most were skeptical things were genuinely getting better. “It’s nice to have the extra money,” said Susan Brink, a 56-year-old independent who voted for Barack Obama. “But I do kind of feel like they give us a little bit to make us happy, and then they take it away.” Rick Lamutt, a right-leaning independent who works as “a cable guy,” said that despite the good numbers, he sees the truth of the real economy in all the houses he visits where family members are moving in together and struggling to make do. “The simple fact is, regardless of what the numbers say, there’s a lot of hurting people out there,” he said. “You’ve seen on the news, ‘Everything’s fine, the economy’s great, there’s jobs everywhere!’ Well, if you want to make $9 an hour, you can go get a job, but if you want to make a wage that can support your family, good luck.” This pervasive feeling of economic insecurity drove what these voters are looking for in candidates, too. Kimberly Tyler, a 61-year-old veterinarian, wanted a candidate who understood the pinch of the middle-class lifestyle. “Most in politics have money and it’s a money game for them and they don’t relate to the middle class, and everyone in the middle class is hanging on by their fingernails.” There’s a long road before the election and while these views give us some idea of the mood, it’s important to keep in mind that even these voters are a long way off from drawing any real conclusions about specific candidates. Hart asked everyone to place themselves at a racetrack that showed how far along they were in their thinking about the next presidential contest. Most said they were in the parking lot. One woman said she was in her car taking allergy medicine—she said she was allergic to both horses and politicians. When asked whom she’d like to see in the race, she replied, “Superman.” But he hasn’t even formed a leadership PAC yet. *Calendar:* *Sec. Clinton's upcoming appearances as reported online. Not an official schedule.* · January 21 – Saskatchewan, Canada: Sec. Clinton keynotes the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce’s “Global Perspectives” series (MarketWired <http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/former-us-secretary-state-hillary-rodham-clinton-deliver-keynote-address-saskatoon-1972651.htm> ) · January 21 – Winnipeg, Canada: Sec. Clinton keynotes the Global Perspectives series (Winnipeg Free Press <http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/Clinton-coming-to-Winnipeg--284282491.html> ) · February 24 – Santa Clara, CA: Sec. Clinton to Keynote Address at Inaugural Watermark Conference for Women (PR Newswire <http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/hillary-rodham-clinton-to-deliver-keynote-address-at-inaugural-watermark-conference-for-women-283200361.html> ) · March 19 – Atlantic City, NJ: Sec. Clinton keynotes American Camp Association conference (PR Newswire <http://www.sys-con.com/node/3254649>)