EMAIL DETAILS

Kind of Ezra Klein’s point in the article I just sent you both.


Eric D. Schwerin
Rosemont Seneca Advisors, LLC
1010 Wisconsin Ave., NW
Suite 705
Washington, DC 20007
(202) 333-1880
eschwerin@rosemontseneca.com <x-msg://59/eschwerin@obblaw.com>
P Consider the environment before printing this email.


> On Oct 8, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Alexander S. Mackler <smacklera@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It would kill her team to say something like
>
> "One thing our party, our leadership, does better than the other side is recognize that complex issues are rarely black and white--particularly when you need compromise. That's the case here. Is TPP perfect? No. Would it be the way I'd draw it up if I had unilateral power? No. But we were negotiating with republicans and xx other countries. What is true is that it leaves America, and American workers, in a better place because xyz. I've been an advocate for labor my entire life; I know they know where I stand when it comes to working families, and they won't use one complicated issue--pushed hard by our president--to blow up decades of history."
>
> Or something. Act like an adult, for once. And pretend you don't think voters are stupid.
>
> ASM
>
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 10:15 AM, Eric Schwerin <eschwerin@rosemontseneca.com <mailto:eschwerin@rosemontseneca.com>> wrote:
>
>> HILLARY CLINTON ON TPP THEN - While at State, Hillary Clinton called TPP the "gold standard in trade agreements." In "Hard Choices," which Clinton sent to all the GOP candidates, she said TPP "would link markets throughout Asia and the Americas, lowering trade barriers while raising standards on labor, the environment, and intellectual property." She said it was "important for American workers, who would benefit from competing on a more level playing field." And she lauded it as "a strategic initiative that would strengthen the position of the United States in Asia."
>>
>> HILLARY CLINTON ON TPP NOW - Statement from Wednesday: "I'm continuing to learn about the details of [TPP], including looking hard at what's in there to crack down on currency manipulation, which kills American jobs, and to make sure we're not putting the interests of drug companies ahead of patients and consumers. But based on what I know so far, I can't support this agreement.
>>
>> "I don't believe we can afford to keep giving new agreements the benefit of the doubt. he risks are too high that, despite our best efforts, they will end up doing more harm than good for hard-working American families whose paychecks have barely budged in years. ... Republicans have blocked the investments that we need. ... They've refused to raise the minimum wage or defend workers' rights or adequately fund job training."
>>
>> WHERE TO EVEN BEGIN? - Of course the entire statement is a purely political flip-flop to pacify a liberal base that has rejected Clinton in favor of Bernie Sanders. Going through it on the merits seems almost pointless. But still ... On currency, the final agreement, which Clinton can't possibly have seen yet, will likely include slightly stronger provisions than existed when she viewed it as the "gold standard" and promoted while at State. Same holds true for the drug company provisions that will be less favorable to industry than they were before.
>>
>> And she's opposed to it because Republicans won't lift the minimum wage? OK ... The left embraced Clinton's change of heart, which was the point. But coming after Keystone XL, it also furthers the argument that Clinton actually has no core beliefs or positions on anything.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Eric D. Schwerin
>> Rosemont Seneca Advisors, LLC
>> 1010 Wisconsin Ave., NW
>> Suite 705
>> Washington, DC 20007
>> (202) 333-1880
>> eschwerin@rosemontseneca.com <x-msg://59/eschwerin@obblaw.com>
>> P Consider the environment before printing this email.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>