SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Hillary Clinton during her first presidential election bid in 2008. A leaked memo from one of her most outspoken backers and financial bundlers reveals a strategy that would rather focus on the dangers of the Koch brothers than the divide that exists between leading Democratic nominee and more progressive members of the party.
(Photo: Penn State/flickr/cc)
How Do Big Backers of Clinton Convince Rich Liberals to Give Them Money? Read the Memo
"It is no secret that Sec. Clinton is fair-left and not far-left," says internal memo. But what do her centrist supporters really want to talk about?
Jun 02, 2015
Would you like to know the kind of strategic thinking that's going on inside the mind of one of Hillary Clinton's top campaign operatives?
According to a document obtained by Politico and published on Tuesday, David Brock--a top Democratic strategist and described by the newspaper as a "Clinton enforcer"--created a Q&A-style memo designed to convince "unenthusiastic" but wealthy progressives why they should write sizeable checks to outside groups backing candidacy of the former U.S. senator and secretary of state.
The document, it appears, was prepared ahead of a meeting of left-leaning wealthy donors, known as the Democracy Alliance, that took place in San Francisco earlier this year. In form, the memo sees Brock anticipating the kind of questions these wealthy donors might ask and then provides his planned response. Overall, the guiding light of Brock's strategy is to argue that that wealthy liberals should back Clinton not because they love her overall policy agenda, but because she is simply the candidate most capable of tackling the regressive forces of the right-wing billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch.
As Politico reports, "The memo suggests that Brock, who has built a fleet of deep-pocketed groups aligned with Clinton, is taking a conciliatory approach to assuage donors' concerns - conceding she's not as liberal as some donors wish, but emphasizing her progressiveness in public service and minimizing the prospects of a vigorous Democratic primary."
For example, he imagines a skeptical donor asking, "Aren't we going to have a hard time going after the Kochs' big money when some could argue that Sec. Clinton is bankrolled by Wall Street and therefore there is a pox on both their houses?"
The answer: "It is no secret that Sec. Clinton is fair-left and not far-left. I think it is safe to say that there will be a dramatic difference between Sec. Clinton and whoever is the Republican opponent. She has spent a lifetime advocating for women and children and fighting for the middle class and there is not one GOP candidate who has that record."
Though placed in a section titled "less likely" to be asked, Brock addressed the question about whether or not the Democratic Party needs to have a "vigorous debate" during the primary season--specifically concerning the gap between candidates like Clinton and much more progressive members of the party like Sen. Elizabeth Warren--by coming up with a dodge for the question. "Our job is to focus on the Koch brothers, exposing their self-serving agenda and making their spending a liability for Republicans."
Or in other words: No.
The document is embedded below and can be read in full:
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Would you like to know the kind of strategic thinking that's going on inside the mind of one of Hillary Clinton's top campaign operatives?
According to a document obtained by Politico and published on Tuesday, David Brock--a top Democratic strategist and described by the newspaper as a "Clinton enforcer"--created a Q&A-style memo designed to convince "unenthusiastic" but wealthy progressives why they should write sizeable checks to outside groups backing candidacy of the former U.S. senator and secretary of state.
The document, it appears, was prepared ahead of a meeting of left-leaning wealthy donors, known as the Democracy Alliance, that took place in San Francisco earlier this year. In form, the memo sees Brock anticipating the kind of questions these wealthy donors might ask and then provides his planned response. Overall, the guiding light of Brock's strategy is to argue that that wealthy liberals should back Clinton not because they love her overall policy agenda, but because she is simply the candidate most capable of tackling the regressive forces of the right-wing billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch.
As Politico reports, "The memo suggests that Brock, who has built a fleet of deep-pocketed groups aligned with Clinton, is taking a conciliatory approach to assuage donors' concerns - conceding she's not as liberal as some donors wish, but emphasizing her progressiveness in public service and minimizing the prospects of a vigorous Democratic primary."
For example, he imagines a skeptical donor asking, "Aren't we going to have a hard time going after the Kochs' big money when some could argue that Sec. Clinton is bankrolled by Wall Street and therefore there is a pox on both their houses?"
The answer: "It is no secret that Sec. Clinton is fair-left and not far-left. I think it is safe to say that there will be a dramatic difference between Sec. Clinton and whoever is the Republican opponent. She has spent a lifetime advocating for women and children and fighting for the middle class and there is not one GOP candidate who has that record."
Though placed in a section titled "less likely" to be asked, Brock addressed the question about whether or not the Democratic Party needs to have a "vigorous debate" during the primary season--specifically concerning the gap between candidates like Clinton and much more progressive members of the party like Sen. Elizabeth Warren--by coming up with a dodge for the question. "Our job is to focus on the Koch brothers, exposing their self-serving agenda and making their spending a liability for Republicans."
Or in other words: No.
The document is embedded below and can be read in full:
Would you like to know the kind of strategic thinking that's going on inside the mind of one of Hillary Clinton's top campaign operatives?
According to a document obtained by Politico and published on Tuesday, David Brock--a top Democratic strategist and described by the newspaper as a "Clinton enforcer"--created a Q&A-style memo designed to convince "unenthusiastic" but wealthy progressives why they should write sizeable checks to outside groups backing candidacy of the former U.S. senator and secretary of state.
The document, it appears, was prepared ahead of a meeting of left-leaning wealthy donors, known as the Democracy Alliance, that took place in San Francisco earlier this year. In form, the memo sees Brock anticipating the kind of questions these wealthy donors might ask and then provides his planned response. Overall, the guiding light of Brock's strategy is to argue that that wealthy liberals should back Clinton not because they love her overall policy agenda, but because she is simply the candidate most capable of tackling the regressive forces of the right-wing billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch.
As Politico reports, "The memo suggests that Brock, who has built a fleet of deep-pocketed groups aligned with Clinton, is taking a conciliatory approach to assuage donors' concerns - conceding she's not as liberal as some donors wish, but emphasizing her progressiveness in public service and minimizing the prospects of a vigorous Democratic primary."
For example, he imagines a skeptical donor asking, "Aren't we going to have a hard time going after the Kochs' big money when some could argue that Sec. Clinton is bankrolled by Wall Street and therefore there is a pox on both their houses?"
The answer: "It is no secret that Sec. Clinton is fair-left and not far-left. I think it is safe to say that there will be a dramatic difference between Sec. Clinton and whoever is the Republican opponent. She has spent a lifetime advocating for women and children and fighting for the middle class and there is not one GOP candidate who has that record."
Though placed in a section titled "less likely" to be asked, Brock addressed the question about whether or not the Democratic Party needs to have a "vigorous debate" during the primary season--specifically concerning the gap between candidates like Clinton and much more progressive members of the party like Sen. Elizabeth Warren--by coming up with a dodge for the question. "Our job is to focus on the Koch brothers, exposing their self-serving agenda and making their spending a liability for Republicans."
Or in other words: No.
The document is embedded below and can be read in full:
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.