podesta_email_20421.txt

podesta-emails 4,524 words email

D4 P19 V16 D3 D6

-----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 Sunday January 11, 2015 Roundup:* *Headlines:* *The Hill: “Clinton ready to embrace Obama on economy” <http://thehill.com/homenews/presidential-campaign/229083-clinton-ready-to-embrace-obama-on-economy>* “Clinton allies say that if the former secretary of State does in fact announce a second bid for the presidency this year, they expect that she’ll tether herself to a main slice of Obama’s legacy.” *Washington Post: Dan Balz: “A signal of distaste for dynasties bodes ill for Bush, Clinton” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-signal-of-distaste-for-dynasties-bodes-ill-for-bush-clinton/2015/01/10/079258f2-98d3-11e4-8385-866293322c2f_story.html>* “The two-hour session, moderated by Democratic pollster Peter Hart for the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, turned upside down much of the conversation about the coming presidential campaign, where Bush and Clinton occupy so much space.” *Washington Post: “Martin O’Malley blames Anthony Brown’s campaign for Md. Democrats’ loss” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/martin-omalley-blames-anthony-brown-not-his-own-record-for-md-democrats-loss/2015/01/10/f6f6e976-9874-11e4-927a-4fa2638cd1b0_story.html>* “O’Malley was ready with the answer: It was all the fault of Brown’s lousy, negative campaign.” *Los Angeles Times: “Why Jerry Brown will probably never make a fourth try at White House” <http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-pol-california-politics-20150111-story.html>* “The main reason is his age: 76” *The Hill: “Trump looking 'very seriously' at 2016 run” <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/229135-trump-looking-very-seriously-at-2016-run>* “Real estate mogul Donald Trump says he's looking ‘very seriously’ at a possible 2016 presidential run.” *New York Post: “Clinton won’t be fixing rift between de Blasio and NYPD” <http://nypost.com/2015/01/09/bill-clinton-wont-be-fixing-rift-between-de-blasio-and-nypd/>* “Former President Bill Clinton is not interested in solving tensions between the NYPD and Mayor de Blasio, Clinton’s spokesman said Thursday — a day after his name was floated at a peace summit.” *Articles:* *The Hill: “Clinton ready to embrace Obama on economy” <http://thehill.com/homenews/presidential-campaign/229083-clinton-ready-to-embrace-obama-on-economy>* By Amie Parnes December 11, 2015, 1:00 p.m. EST Hillary Clinton is ready to run on President Obama’s record when it comes to the economy. Clinton allies say that if the former secretary of State does in fact announce a second bid for the presidency this year, they expect that she’ll tether herself to a main slice of Obama’s legacy. A series of economic reports including Friday’s positive jobs numbers is adding to Democratic confidence that the economy will finally be a winner for Obama in his last two years in office, and that it will help the Democratic White House candidate in 2016. But even as Clinton embraces Obama’s economic record, they expect her to telegraph that more needs to be done to help the middle class, a message Obama will highlight in his State of the Union address later this month. They also predict that Clinton will present policies distinct from those of the Obama administration she served, and even her own husband’s administration, which is regularly credited with presiding over years of strong economic growth. This tack, allies say, will allow her to to carve out her own identity and provide her with the opportunity to speak about education, making housing more affordable and helping younger Americans find jobs and build her own narrative. “She'll be running armed with the current information and with programs and plans and polices that she wants to support,” said Ellen Tauscher, the former congresswoman who serves as undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security Affairs at the State Department under Clinton. Democratic strategist Jim Manley said that he expects Clinton to “keep pretty close to the administration’s basic economic policies. But, he added, “I wouldn’t be surprised if she found ways to exploit the growing debate on economic equality.” One longtime Clinton ally agrees with that sentiment. This source said Clinton would argue for “a Main Street platform that combines certain kinds of tax reform, trade agreements and investment strategies, perhaps fashioned around overarching goals.” “This is an approach that a Republican candidate could choose to take too; what will matter is who does it best,” the ally said. Republicans—from the RNC to the superPAC America Rising-- are already working to portray Clinton as a third term for Obama. “She has no choice but to own the Obama economic agenda because she has been in lock-step with him on it ever since 2008,” Tim Miller, the executive director for America Rising, said Friday. Miller said healthcare will fall under Obama’s economic package and Clinton has no choice but to own that piece as well. The bookHRC State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton, revealed that the secretary of state played a role in pushing along Obamacare. She voiced her support for it in a cabinet meeting and spoke to lawmakers about the issue, even though Secretaries of State rarely get involved in domestic matters. “He took her healthcare plan and then she whipped votes for it,” Miller said. “There is no path for her to distance herself from him on it.” Clinton allies say they are aware that Republicans will do everything to tie her to Obama's policies. But as Tauscher cautioned, Republicans have to be careful invoking that Clinton could be a third term Obama because Democrats could very easily say that Jeb Bush or other Republican candidates could be a third term for George W. Bush, who was president during the economic meltdown. The Democratic National Committee was quick to strike back at Jeb Bush’s intentions to run for president on Friday, putting out a release accusing the Bush team of being “the same people who not once but twice were at the helm as our nation headed into recessions, one of which was our worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.” The plan to embrace Obama’s economic record differs from Clinton’s approach to Obama on foreign policy. Even though she serves as Obama’s secretary of state, she has made a point of highlighting her differing views and strategies on Syria. In an interview with The Atlantic, she said that the administration’s decision not to get involved in the Syrian conflict was a “failure.” People in Clintonworld have also signaled recently that she would have taken a different approach to ISIS. “You never want to be a Monday morning quarterback on these issues because who knows how things would ultimately turn out but Obama has been passive on these issues,” one former Clinton aide told The Hill in September. “She would have taken a more aggressive approach.” When it comes to the economy though, Clinton could face a different set of challenges in a Democratic primary. Progressives have bashed her support of Wall Street and have insinuated that she cares more about protecting the well-heeled over the middle class. But Tauscher pushed back at that notion calling that debate “distracting.” “The question should be how do we get a Main Street thriving and doing well and how do we get a responsible Wall Street that is stimulating jobs,” she said. “It’s not an either or.” *Washington Post: Dan Balz: “A signal of distaste for dynasties bodes ill for Bush, Clinton” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-signal-of-distaste-for-dynasties-bodes-ill-for-bush-clinton/2015/01/10/079258f2-98d3-11e4-8385-866293322c2f_story.html>* By Dan Balz January 10, 2015, 8:10 p.m. EST AURORA, Colo. — It’s been a good few weeks for Jeb Bush, who has been setting the pace among prospective 2016 presidential candidates — at least in the view of some in the elite world of political donors, strategists and commentators. But even before the news that Mitt Romney is thinking about a third campaign, a dissenting view on Bush was registered here Thursday night. A dozen Denver-area residents spent two hours dissecting the state of the country and its politics. The 12 participants — Democrats, Republicans and independents — are weary of political dynasties. They were dismissive, sometimes harshly, in their assessments of Bush, the former Florida governor. They were also chilly toward former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton. When the name of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was introduced into the conversation, however, many of those around the table, regardless of party affiliation, responded positively. To this group, who spoke in stark terms throughout the evening about the economic challenges of working Americans, Warren has struck a chord. The two-hour session, moderated by Democratic pollster Peter Hart for the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, turned upside down much of the conversation about the coming presidential campaign, where Bush and Clinton occupy so much space. It is important to emphasize that this was simply one group of 12 people. They are not necessarily a representative cross section of the entire population, any more than a dozen donors or a dozen strategists would be. But as with all recruited focus groups, the collective impressions and individual observations provide a valuable counterpoint to the conversation that is taking place among political insiders. The participants in Aurora have barely begun to engage with their 2016 choices; most are not even close to the starting line. But they are underwhelmed by the prospect of a race pitting another Bush against another Clinton. When Charlie Loan, an IT program manager and Republican-leaning independent, said half-seriously that he would be happy if Congress would pass a law banning anyone named Bush or Clinton from running, half the people in the room agreed. Reactions to Bush were viscerally negative. When the participants were asked for short impressions of him, the responses included the following: “Joke.” “No, thank you.” “Clown.” “Don’t need him.” “Greedy.” “Again?” One said, “intriguing” and another said, “interesting.” That’s as close as anyone came to outright enthusiasm for Bush. Hart asked the group which individual from a long list of current politicians they would least like to have as a next-door neighbor. Eight named Bush. “I’m tired of it,” said Brandon Graham, an IT systems engineer and Democratic-leaning independent. Jenny Howard, who works in accounting and voted for Romney in 2012, said, “He’s running off the Bush name and thinks that means something.” Clinton fared slightly better. Instant impressions included the following: “Don’t like.” “Strong.” “Spitfire.” “Untrustworthy.” “More of the same.” “Politician, but gets things done.” The reactions echoed what has been found in polls and in other focus groups, which is that Clinton has stature but remains a polarizing figure. Most of the prospective presidential candidates were only vague figures to these Coloradans. When names such as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) or Gov. Scott Walker (R-Wis.) or Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) or Mike Huckabee, the former Republican governor of Arkansas, were raised, many indicated they didn’t know enough to have even a superficial impression. Of those in the Republican field, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) drew positive comments, not necessarily because the members of the group know that much about him, but because they find him new and intriguing. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) was better known but not admired. Warren proved the exception to all this. Quick impressions voiced about her were highly positive: “Passionate.” “Smart.” “Sincere.” “Knowledgeable.” “Intelligent.” “Capable.” One person said, “questionable.” That was as close to a negative reaction as she got in that round. There were other signs that Warren, who has said repeatedly that she is not running for president in 2016, had caught the eyes and ears of people in the room. She was the popular choice as a next-door neighbor, seen as genuine and personable. Even one of the most conservative members of the group said this. Several said that if they could pick from a long list of national politicians, they would prefer to have the chance to have a long conversation with Warren, describing her as both articulate and down to earth. “She’s a strong woman, and I’d like to sit down and pick her brain,” said Susan Brink, an independent who backed President Obama. Howard, an independent who voted Republican in both 2012 and 2014, was among those who offered an admiring view of Warren. “If she ran, I think she could be the next president,” she said. What’s behind all this? The rest of the discussion on Thursday helped to explain why the participants feel the way they do, from the lack of enthusiasm for Clinton to the obvious disaffection with Bush to the comments about Warren. These voters distrust elected officials and are disgusted by what they regard as the privileged lives they lead. To them, Bush and Clinton represent a political class that is seen as living lives apart from those they represent, people who are seen as out for themselves rather than for ordinary people. “They want your vote, but I feel like once they have that, the American citizens end up being voiceless,” said Karstyn Butler, a homemaker and caterer who voted for Obama. Just as significant was the feeling that the economic recovery has not touched most people. Rick Lamutt, a cable company technician who said he leans Republican and voted for Romney, said he sees the problem every day. “I’m in 10, 12, 15 homes a day, every day,” he said. “People are hurting. . . It’s just crazy to see what people are doing just to pay their bills.” He scoffed at talk of a rising economy with plentiful jobs available. “If you want to make $9 an hour, you can get a job,” he said. “But if you want to make a wage that can support your family, good luck.” Howard offered her situation as evidence. She said her husband has been out of work for more than a year. Meanwhile, she carries a hefty student-loan debt, with monthly payments that she said are nearly twice what she spends for housing. Those realities are shaping the qualities these voters say they are looking for in the next president. Andrew Regan, a beekeeper and Democratic voter, said the next president should be “someone who understands what everyone in America is going through — someone that we can relate to, someone who we understand and someone who understands us.” After the group had departed into the freezing drizzle outside, Hart stayed behind to sum up what he had taken away from the conversation. The group had started predictably, he said, and then turned quite unpredictable. He found several things to be notable. “One is [that] the political classes told us it’s going to be Bush against Clinton. But these people are hundreds of miles away from that choice,” he said. “Essentially what they’re telling us is, ‘I don’t trust these people. They’re part of an establishment that I don’t like.’ ” That was one turning point, he said. The other was Warren. “Elizabeth Warren, from every part on the compass, had a level of support,” he said. “She’s not invisible. She’s not unknown. She’s not undefined.” And, he added, she has reached them on the issue that so many spoke about, which was their own economic concerns. “You couldn’t leave this without feeling how hard-pressed these people are and how they’re looking for someone who will be a voice for their cause,” he said. “And Elizabeth Warren has broken through.” That, he added, was wholly unexpected when the focus group was organized. *Washington Post: “Martin O’Malley blames Anthony Brown’s campaign for Md. Democrats’ loss” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/martin-omalley-blames-anthony-brown-not-his-own-record-for-md-democrats-loss/2015/01/10/f6f6e976-9874-11e4-927a-4fa2638cd1b0_story.html>* By Robert McCartney January 10, 2015, 5:35 p.m. EST Martin O’Malley has accomplished so much in eight years as Maryland’s governor that it seemed a shame to start an interview about his legacy by focusing on where he came up short. There was no getting around it. The question of the hour: If O’Malley (D) did such a great job, why did the state’s voters reject his handpicked successor, Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown (D)? Moreover, how does a man who is “very seriously considering” running for president in 2016 explain Brown’s loss to Democratic primary voters across the country? O’Malley was ready with the answer: It was all the fault of Brown’s lousy, negative campaign. The governor, who steps down from office in 1­­ 1/2 weeks, insisted that voters had not repudiated his performance, especially on the economy. Instead, he contended, the Brown team effectively ceded the issue to Republican Larry Hogan, the governor-elect. “They made a tactical decision not to defend the record or talk about it, and we saw the results that we saw,” O’Malley said in a half-hour phone conversation Friday. It’s an understandable answer, for a politician, and there’s some truth in it. But it’s ultimately unsatisfying and leaves O’Malley vulnerable to the charge that he delivered at best a mixed record on jobs and taxes. After all, voters are savvy enough to know whether they’re satisfied with the economy. They don’t need politicians’ ads to tell them. The bottom line: O’Malley either should have handled the economy better, or exerted more control over Brown’s campaign. Probably both. The Free State Democrats’ November fiasco adds a burden to what is already a long-shot potential presidential candidacy for O’Malley. He barely registers in national polls and is still working to develop an inspiring stump speech. O’Malley acknowledged that Brown’s defeat was a distasteful conclusion to his term. “It turned the sweetness to bittersweet,” he said. Although claiming he didn’t want to second-guess Brown’s campaign, he went right ahead and did so. O’Malley said Brown should have copied the playbook from his 2010 reelection victory, when he defended tax increases as necessary to protect investments in education and other services. Instead, Brown distanced himself from O’Malley. He tried to discredit Hogan with ads assailing the Republican over abortion and gun control. Hogan won perhaps the year’s biggest upset principally by lambasting tax increases during the ­O’Malley-Brown administration. “You have to offer an affirmative economic message to the voters,” O’Malley said. “If you give voters a choice between a Democrat who promises to do nothing and a Republican who promises to do nothing, they’re generally going to side with the Republican, because they’re better at that than we are.” O’Malley has amassed an impressive list of achievements with strong appeal to the liberal activists who vote in Democratic primaries. Highlights include approval of same-sex marriage, repeal of the death penalty and granting in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants. He also has spent heavily on education and is one of the nation’s most pro-environment governors. He can point to genuine successes in the economy, such as protecting the state’s triple-A bond rating through a severe recession. Although Virginia is widely seen as being more friendly to businesses, Maryland’s job growth since the bottom of the recession by some measures has exceeded that of its neighbor to the south. The problem is: Beating Virginia is not much to crow about. With the cutbacks in federal spending, both states are near the bottom of the list nationwide for economic growth. Then there’s the question of why O’Malley is handing off a budget deficit to Hogan. “This is a state that despite many tax increases in recent years, despite increases in tolls, and despite the introduction of gaming, continues to suffer a structural deficit,” economist Anirban Basu, owner of the Sage Policy Group in Baltimore, said. (Basu is serving on Hogan’s transition team, but he didn’t endorse the Republican, and his firm is nonpartisan.) Basu and other economists faulted O’Malley — along with leaders of the District and Virginia — for not doing enough to diversify the region’s economy to reduce its dependence on federal dollars. It’s not clear whether any of these criticisms are deterring O’Malley from seeking the presidency next year. He says he expects to decide within “a couple of months” and isn’t afraid of taking on Hillary Clinton if she jumps in. If Clinton opts out, O’Malley’s checklist of liberal activism could serve him well in a wide-open primary race. But the Brown loss, and reservations about his economic record, will still need explaining. *Los Angeles Times: “Why Jerry Brown will probably never make a fourth try at White House” <http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-pol-california-politics-20150111-story.html>* By Mark Z. Barabak January 11, 2015, 5:00 a.m. EST Jerry Brown will almost certainly never be president of the United States, a fact that disappoints no one so much as Jerry Brown himself. It's not for lack of trying. California's governor has made three attempts at the White House, the first in 1976, scarcely more than a year after taking office. He was 38. Brown ran and lost a second time in 1980, while in his second term as governor, and again in 1992, campaigning as an insurgent taking on the system's moneyed interests (a posture long since abandoned by the political wayside). Those who know Brown and have discussed the matter with him say the Democrat's presidential ambitions may have dimmed over the last two decades, a reluctant bow to reality, but they have never entirely gone away. But, alas, from Brown's perspective, the four-term governor who delivered a combined inaugural and State of the State address last week in Sacramento is no longer considered presidential material, notwithstanding November's landslide reelection and his stewardship of the nation's most populous and important state. The main reason is his age: 76 If Brown were, say, 10 or more years younger, he would doubtless be in the thick of speculation over the 2016 contest and a serious contender for the Democratic nomination. It's not hard imagining Monday's speech serving as his opening salvo. (Instead of live-streaming to eager political insiders in the early-voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire, however, Brown had to settle for national coverage on C-SPAN.) When he took office, Brown noted, "the state was deep in debt — $26 billion — and our unemployment rate was 12.1%. Now the state budget, after a decade of turbulence, is finally balanced…. California has seen more than 1.3 million new jobs created in just four years, and the unemployment rate has dropped to 7.2%." Yes, the state faces billions in unfunded pension and other liabilities that threaten its long-term financial stability, as Brown himself pointed out. And a 7.2% unemployment rate is hardly cause for dancing in the streets. But politicians tend to be graded on a curve and contrasted with those who came before them. "He can make a pretty good case he's gotten the state out of the fiscal mess he inherited, which is a good credential for a California Democrat," said Bill Carrick, a longtime party strategist who worked for Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy's presidential campaign when Brown made his second try for the White House. But there are other considerations, besides Brown's age, that argue against another quixotic tilt at the White House. He is, after all, only nine years older than Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic front-runner. And if she chooses not to run, it seems highly likely Vice President Joe Biden would jump into the suddenly wide-open fight for the party's nomination. He's 72. One big hurdle facing Brown is the inherent difficulty of running for president and simultaneously serving as California governor. As Dan Schnur, a veteran political strategist now teaching at USC, once put it, "There aren't any direct flights from Sacramento to Manchester [N.H.], and you can't run the state from a cellphone at O'Hare [airport]." He should know. Schnur was part of then-Gov. Pete Wilson's administration when he waged a spectacularly unsuccessful 1996 run for president. It seems no accident that Ronald Reagan also failed the first time he sought the White House, in 1968, while serving as California governor. But beyond age and logistical difficulties, there is another factor that has helped force Brown to abandon his White House dreams, apparently once and for all: He is acutely aware of his legacy, according to several who have taken up the subject with him, and is mindful of the damage he would suffer were he to launch another unsuccessful campaign for president. Instead of being remembered as the governor who brought California back from the brink — a not-insignificant achievement to stack next to those of his legendary father, former Gov. Pat Brown — he would become the Democrats' Harold Stassen, a onetime political wonder who turned into a campaign punch line. "California feeds on change and great undertakings," Jerry Brown said in Monday's swearing-in speech, "but the path of wisdom counsels us to ground ourselves and nurture carefully all we have started." Intended or not, that may be the best explanation Brown ever gives for why he's staying put in Sacramento. *The Hill: “Trump looking 'very seriously' at 2016 run” <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/229135-trump-looking-very-seriously-at-2016-run>* By Rachel Huggins January 11, 2015, 6:00 a.m. EST Real estate mogul Donald Trump says he's looking “very seriously” at a possible 2016 presidential run. Stoking 2016 speculation, the hotel magnate and "Celebrity Apprentice" host will test the waters in the nation’s first-in-the-south primary state next weekend, delivering a keynote address to South Carolina's Tea Party convention on Jan. 17. “I’m going to Iowa. I’m going to South Carolina. I’m going to New Hampshire … I do very well in the polls. I do well in that kind of world [politics] … I’ll be doing it, and I’ll be looking at it [a presidential run] very seriously,” he said in an interview on "The Cats Roundtable," host John Catsimatidis's Sunday radio show on New York AM 970. Trump underscored how Americans are suffering economically, saying “the real unemployment rate is 20%. It’s not 5.3% or 5.8%. It’s 20%. That’s the real rate. The people that are most suffering are the ones that don't have much money to start off with." Weighing in on the Paris terrorist attack this week that killed 12 people, Trump called it an "absolutely terrible situation that looks like it will get worse." Militant Islamist brothers, who were later killed by police, killed 10 journalists and two police officers – in an attack on Charlie Hebdo, a satirical newspaper known for its controversial cartoons that caricatured the Prophet Muhammad. *New York Post: “Clinton won’t be fixing rift between de Blasio and NYPD” <http://nypost.com/2015/01/09/bill-clinton-wont-be-fixing-rift-between-de-blasio-and-nypd/>* By Kirstan Conley and Lia Eustachewich January 9, 2015, 2:15 a.m. EST Former President Bill Clinton is not interested in solving tensions between the NYPD and Mayor de Blasio, Clinton’s spokesman said Thursday — a day after his name was floated at a peace summit. “President Clinton will not be getting involved,” said spokesman Matt McKenna. That’s fine with Police Commissioner Bill Bratton, who said Clinton’s help wasn’t necessary. “I don’t know if the situation at this junction requires a mediator,” Bratton said in a segment that will air Saturday on 77 WABC radio, according to the New York ­Observer. *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>)