To: interested Parties Fr: Mark When you strip away those voters who are voting on race or gender, this election is not about change, not about experience, but about leadership. Those who are voting for Obama are really saying he isthe kind of leader we need, the kind of inspirational force that can change things in the county. ‘Ang those who are voting for Hillary are saying we need the kind of leader who has strength, experience and wisdom to provide a better future for people like us. And so when you recall us at our zeniths, people say Hilary as a president offering big solutions like healthcare for all and saw Obama as a wonderful inspiration to us all, ut not ready for prime time. But things got clouded here as people said the presidential Hillary was too far removed from the people. ‘We were talking too much about Hillary, and we really needed to soften her and get warm and personal. And there was truth to that ~ we did need a second track of strong but personal media to show that hillary was also connected to both our culture and everyday life. NH was helped by a personal moment that tended to crystallize sentiment in our direction and was a wake up call to women. Exit polls showed that made a difference, but her strong leadership qualities ‘were evident (commander in chief was the leading attribute of those tested in the post-NH exit polls). But only a plurality was necessary to win NH. Once Edwards dropped out, we needed a majority ofall votes case to win~and that meant combining a strong women’s vote with a tie or better among white ‘men, who polls showed were eroding steadily, White men in Virginia defected in droves, a5 they did in NH. The very personal debate close was loved by our supporters, but not the kind of thing beer drinking men would warm up to, and as such that did not get us any new votes. White women have stayed with Hillary virtually everywhere; blacks have gone ‘neatly 90/10 against us; Latinos have held 2-1 outside of New Mexico, and so the white men became the pivotal post-Edwards vote. White men were cross-pressured, unhappy with either choice after Echwards ‘was gone. The settings in Ohio, Glenn, Strickland, the populist message ($55 billion), all helped block ‘Obama on the economy and refocus us on working families and to win back these voters. In Texas, the 3 am ad raised the stakes, brought back men and helped neutralize his Republican and independent vote which otherwise would have crushed us there. But while we continue to win big state after big state, we have had no effective campaign for the smaller red states who have few democrats but a lot of delegates. These are the states that have been a big problem for us. Generally few resources were put against them. The last minute rush into the states have been worth 5 points, but they have not been the garne changing elements we needed.(Our Argument 1n.1996, we had those who wanted to go with populist economics in a general election instead of a new ‘economy working to bring the 21” Century to all. And Gore did in fact use people vs. the powerful in 2000, so he went in that direction. In 2000, in the NY senate race, some wanted to make HRC's campaign about answering impeachment in the suburbs and we stuck instead to an upstate economic strategy. Now, some have wanted to make the campaign to be heavily about HRC being warm and personable, believe Its about strong leadership for change leadership that has passion and is compassionate. Strength has been the key at any time we have been ahead because it brings men as ‘well as women to our cause, and weakness has been our downfall, isolating us to smaller and smaller constituencies. | believe we have to set that basic direction and then tie that to people's Future and to an America that moves forward. ‘We win when the arguments are big and the choices clear. And our campaigning can be largely substantive without being imperial - we can and must strike the right balance. But simply going from ‘town hall to town hall with re-launching serious issuesis a lost cause. Whether 15 million are uncovered or not in Obama's plan will not generate a lot of votes. tis about @ Jent who can really turn the country around any Je us with a better future for our kids. Obama used the 90s to suggest that Hillary would not provide a better future, and successfully tangled President Clinton up in racism charges to neutralize him. People were starting to believe that HRC was the status quo andthe creature of the special interests. But, most importantly, after the string of losses, after Super Tuesday, they were coming to believe that Hillary was weak, that Obama would be the one to beat McCain, and the leadership mantle was passing to him. And that is why we struck a responsive chord going right at that basie notion with the commander in chief argument — it started to unravel the new parts of the Obama myth. ‘And at the same time some doubts arose about how real Obama is—are we falling for a pied piper? ‘These doubts are significant and they are growing and recent incidents with NAFTA reinforce the idea that you just can't trust this very self-centered Obama movement. So the idea that one-on-one this can be won all on smiles, emotions, and empathy is simply wrong. That appeals to what we have won, ‘This can be won on the basis of tial leadership tempered by showing the other| ide through counter-tv appearances, some home visits and events that keep this tethered to helping people, not ambition. This has the added benefit as it did originally of winning independent voters and taking back the national horseraces against McCain, The polls that show who will be stronger against ‘MeCain could well be what decides the votes of the super delegates and we need to be winning them at the end of this. Essentially people wanta leader who can keep us safe as commander in chief, can fix the economy ‘while reining in the special interests and rebuilding the middle class. And they want someone who willbeat John McCain. Itis that simple. Those are the key building blocks to a better future for them and their children. Leadership to take America forward is what they are seeking and we have to keep ‘turning them back from Obama to Hillary on this dimension. So of course “people” are important and pitching how your leadership has affected them and will affect them is crucial, but the decisions are being made on the basis of which leader they think will take ‘America Forward in this difficult and dangerous world. They have painted an image of a new Camelot ~ \we have to paint the image of a captain taking us through a storm and getting us back to the calm and ‘sunny days. And pethaps more importantly, we have begun, but must now in earnest, show that their f Obama Camel but campaign pitter: Caucuses are now officelly over with (except perhaps Guam) and all that remains with the change in Puerto Rico are primaries. And if Mil and Fl. get re-voted, lam assuming we will accept nothing less than ‘a process that approximates a primary ~such as mail in votes. ‘We now have the time and the resources to plan ahead in all the remaining states ~ and to calibrate the message in those states as we did with Texas and Ohio ~ emphasizing the key messages that will work there rather than running generic ads or campaign. | believe strongly that Obama does not have a single idea (other than $50 billion in foreign aid) that could possibly be considered more progressive than HRCs. We have higher cafe standards, a better energy plan, rein in the special interests more, end the Iraq war. We should not be losing progressive votes in these numbers. A small difference in healthcare plans is not the answer — the answer is to show for those few remaining states like Oregon that you ‘embody exactly the kind of progressive, environmentally sound change these voters are looking for. He may talk like a brie and cheese democrat ~ you will get thelr agenda done. with a revote in Florida end MI or getting Florida to stand in exchange for a revote in MI that is weighted against us, | believe we can close the unpledged delegate gap to zero and be the logical choice for superdelegates. Without a revote, we can sill | think close 20 votes here with a strong showing, and ‘argue to the superdelegates that we have the popular vote and with F and MI would be ahead, so pick the one who can beat John McCain ‘ut I think the argument that this primary Is too close to be decided without Fland Mi either being seated or revalidated isa strong argument we should press to delegitimize his pledged delegate lead. | think there is limited success in tearing down the caucus process ~ it has not been done and it won't change things anyway. There isa lotto be gained by saying he has no real lead without counting Fl and Mi because the polls show that the voters overwhelming agree that they count, should be seated, and that the rules make no earthly sense. So let me outline and explain the basic messaging framework:1. HRCis the commander in chief who can keep us safe in a dangerous world, the steward of the ‘economy who can rein in the special interests and rebuild our middle class, and the one to beat John McCain and move America forward again. 2. There is a flip-side to HRC ~ the compassionate HRC who has fought for kids all her life, the fighter, doer, champion you can count on to make a better life for you and your kids. She is in ‘touch with the concerns of everyday Americans, not above them. 3. There isa sharp contrast between HRC and Obama — he isjust words and she isa lifetime of action. (Speeches vs. Solutions). She is the one who is ready to fill the big shoes ofthis job, and he isan inspiring speaker who isn’t, and whose background you are beginning to wonder about. She has brought real results and even his words today are in doubt, invented for a campaign inst John MeCal This is simple, straight forward, and will win. it did win in the last 10 days in Texas and Ohio. We ‘managed to illustrate key parts of this - the $55 billion proposal in level field, the 3am ad, going after him on NAFTA. You were on SNL. All ofthis worked together. We did everything except the McCain ‘argument because we had to win some to make that argument again, But the framework is the easy part. The key difference is to take a broader approach to paying this framework off in the minds of the voters ~ tapping into what they know and the doubts that they have in big and creative ways. 3 am is a breakthrough because it was not a Senate advertisement with facts. ‘We have to do the same thing on tapping into their doubts about the reality of his campaign ~ It's not the specifics of making up Iraq and NAFTA plans for the campaign that you will not follow —itis the idea that someone you trust who says he is new and different might be doing that. That's what has to be brought home ina very significant way. He is just words and this is not a safe bridge for you and your family to cross. ‘We now have time to plan and compete in every state: 4, Leave no state without an early organization, message frame, and targeted coalition of voters. Some will focus more con cinc, others more on the economy. | believe we could sweep Puerto Rico for a major delegate win there, 2. Shift at least 50% if not more of all media to negative or implied negative like 3 am that ‘make big arguments on why you can’t trust just words with your future. Make a leadership anthem ad that is about the leadership that has changed people's lives and will change People’s ives. We will own leadership. But make negatives that build on what people know about him — he is just words. On iraq, on the economy and trade, on Afghanistan, Asan overall idea that people worry about with him 3. Target each state according to its type ~ we have several big working class and older states like PA and WV; we have southern states like KY and NC; Progressive states like Oregon and possibly the democrats in MONT and SD. Each of these has now a basic campaign type wecan buildin ~ Economics in PA, WV; stress commander in chief in southern states and ‘explain the kind of progressive she isin those states. 4. Don't be afraid of being presidential. Why else would anyone vote for Hilary? Strong and human, not strong or hurnan, Events like the Appalachia tour worked to show compassion and bigness the iea that both you care and that you could actually do something about thismational bight. Sut instead ofall oun halls, let's doa series of summits once every other week whece we bring lead 1 around the big problems and issues lke national security, our environment, technology, retirement, A combination of besic issu and modern issues that show you as a 21* Century leader. Your. -dule must have ideas not ust wandering around rally tora 5. The Latino team headed by Sergio has been working, Let it keep on working. They have been right so far. 6. Continue to draw the contrasts on the stump—don’t pull back or let up. And the comm, Shop must do the same but not go over the top. Shows these are just words. Shows he is not ready, Simple frames people relate easily to and are not hyperbolic. 7. He cannot win is critical, These frames of not ready, just words, all will accrue to one central fact that will swing men and superdelegates even further ~ he cannot win, you can. Once people again believe that, he is done and we are the nominee ~ the rest is a matter of time, Undoing Obama The frames are simple ~ not ready for president and it’s all just words, not actions. We now have a growing list of effective proof points we can use to prove this. 1. We will continue to drive the commander in chief argument — its powerful with men and security moms. 2. We will carry it over to the economy as the economy worsens and becomes more complex 3. We will take on his iraq vote. The NY Times today provided a clear roadmap. 4, And he is now open to the general attack that his campaign rhetoric does not match his record or what he reelly plans to do thatitis all ust words. We will do another game changing ad on why you can't rely just on words (imagine crossing a bridge of promises). 5. In the end, people will conclude you have the strength and leadership qualities to win and “just what we thinking” about Obama. 6. Finally we will look for opening in Rezko and other real time developments like PowersThe N¥ Times today ~ one year into this race ~ finally admitted that Barack Obama was no leader on Iraq in the Senate. It was an amazing story. It provides a roadmap for undoing Sen. Obama — They said: "He was running for president even as he was stil getting lost in the Capitol’s corridors.” He was cautious — even on the iraq war, which he had opposed as a Senate candidate. He voted against the withdrawal of troops and proposed legislation calling for a drawdown only after he was running for president and polls showed voters favoring it.” And they also say he basically voted on partisan lines, not practicing any of the bipartisanship he talks about on the stump and had a straight liberal voting record. And the story discusses an example of his folding on immigration reform—a potential killer for him in Puerto Rico, To say he said he would support immigration reform and then opposed it and helped kill it could just be devastating there, even though they are all US. citizens there, not necessarily the case with friends. and relatives. “He was running for president even as he was still getting lost in the Capitol’ corridors” is a devastating quote from the article. ‘And starting in the Philadelphia suburbs, we have to knock down his Iraq war stance — the linchpin of his campaign. Again the quotes in this article are clear that forall the talk he was “cautious” when he got to the senate and opposed troop withdrawal. it makes the case that all we have been hearing from him is “Just words” on iraq and on Afghanistan. ‘Ang this will be very important in other places like Oregon where his lead would be built on his being a progressive. Super Delegates ‘The superdelegate team is |am sure way ahead of the motivations of superdelegates, but here are a few thoughts Super delegates will vote based on 1) personal connection 2) politcal reality 2) public opinion 4) Identity polities 3) Personal connection. This is about getting to those people who know the super delegates on a ‘one-to-one basis, and also playing on people they don’t lke. Thisis outside the scope of this memo. Past history with the Clintons could also make a difference. 2) Political reality. Key politcal determinations that go into the decision: a) they desperately want to be with the winner, not the loser ~ there is 2 pack mentality that can set in at a crucial moment; bj they want to win their own races; c] they have personal ambitions ~ do they seethemselves as part of the new administration or having influence over it; d) they want to avoid primaries; and, e) they have constituencies and unions or donors or who are important to them. 3) Women, Of the uncommitted super delegates, fifty-nine are women. We need to convince them that they should be supporting the first woman presidential candidate. 4) The key is who con beat John McCain. If voters indicated Hillary could beat McCain but Obama ‘would lose, that fact would drive a lot of super delegates. The reverse isa tough battle for us. ‘Our goal in national message is to drive point 4~ the others are really driven by the superdelegate team and | am sure they have reasons as well. “Houston, we have a problem” In this case, the problem is that the Obama campaign has amassed enough delegates in the small Red state caucuses to have a lead in pledged delegates that is, at best, difficult to overcome. Without Florida and Michigan, the task is essentially quite hard. With victories in at least Florida, we could move the delegate count close enough to win with super delegates if they became convinced that Barack Obama could not win the presidency. Here is how Guy has calculated the rest of the states. We need to start calculating what we callin business “stretch goals.” Guy has calculated the remaining states as: 511508 | West Virgin 5/2008 | Ore si2008 | Kemuck 6308 | Moniera 63/08 | South Dako 16708 | Pues Rico ‘This would have us losing a net 9 in the rest of the primaries. But we believe the goal of the campaign should be to be more aggressive than this and to win Oregon, win Indiana, expand margin in PA, and try to expand the lead in Puerto Rico. The goals to turn -9 into plus 20.0 that we make headway. Guy and Lisa will ook at how far we can getin PR and vat districts we can more aggressively target.