Wooing Wall Street, Hillary dares Warren to run in ‘16

[KoKo]

(Interesting Column from Wall Street Commentator)

Darrell Delamaide's Political Capital

Politico even quotes “a well-place Democrat” as saying, “Wall Street folks are so happy about having Clinton run that they won’t care what she says.”

So the gauntlet has been thrown down, and the only real question is why Warren, who insists she won’t run for president, would fail to pick it up and rise to the challenge.

Because she’s afraid of losing? Because she’s tired of snarky remarks about her undocumented American Indian heritage? Because she’s too much like Barack Obama as a first-term senator with little political or administrative experience? Because Clinton would beat her at the funding game?

As another potential candidate for the Democratic nomination, Vice President Joe Biden, might say, that’s a “bunch of stuff.”

Someone has got to free the Democratic Party from the albatross of Clintonite centrism, and it’s not likely to be Hillary Clinton.

Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, argued in his typically lucid fashion in a recent blog post that having so many top figures in the party who earned their chops in the Clinton administration perpetuates a radical misreading of the economic boom in that era.

“They want to preserve the fiction that the prosperity of the late 1990s was due to deficit reduction rather than an unsustainable stock bubble,” Baker writes.

This misreading of the Clinton legacy is why, Baker concludes, so many Democrats join Republicans in harping about the deficit as a problem, when in fact the biggest challenge facing this country is unemployment.

“Politicians love to repeat the canard that families have to eventually balance their budgets, therefore governments must also,” Baker writes. “This assertion makes about as much sense as claiming that the earth is flat because we can see the ground in front of us is level.”

Warren, whose progressive politics go well beyond bank-bashing, could be the one to free Democrats from what Baker calls this “flat-earth economics.”



More of article at:http://www.marketwatch.com/story/wooing-wall-street-hillary-dares-warren-to-run-in-16-2013-12-18?pagenumber=1

[L0oniX]

1. Hillary will save us from the corporate rich.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. I don't think so.

She is, after all, one of them.

[L0oniX]

8. She is a progressive. She will get us jobs and punish Wallstreet

...fishing for people who need a sarc tag with my posts ...you didn't think I was hmmm ...OMG no! I thought you knew me better than that.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

9. I did rather wonder!

Thank you for the clarification!

[rhett o rick]

42. For sarcasm to work, there must be a ring of truth. Outlandish statements dont fool

anyone. But I appreciate the sentiment.

[tazkcmo]

37. lol

You kill me!

[Vincardog]

3. I am also begging Warren to run in ‘16. I predict that running as a real liberal she would Win it

by at least a mile.

[Neoma]

30. I'd work hard for her to be in office, and that'd be the first time I'd be that actively involved...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

51. Win it easily.

[Skidmore]

4. I will not caucus for Hillary.

[liberal_at_heart]

5. me neither.

[Phlem]

6. It's always been about the jobs.

The active middle class is what keeps this country moving. Take that out of the frame work and splain to me how it all still works. Yes I understand serfdom, but doesn't even that end up in an uprising? Are the one percent going to leave this planet and take everything with them?

It's always been about the jobs. 16 plus years of harping on this even before DU it's always about the jobs.



-p

[tazkcmo]

39. I really wish they would.

Take their money, entitelment and better than thou attitude and shove off. We'll be fine without you as we fill the void with new and fresh ideas and sense of community. What's good for you is good for me and is good for her/him.

sigh

[sendero]

7. I really like Warren..

... but I think the chances she runs for president are ..... 0.00000000001%.

Its a money game and she is clearly never going to be a favorite of the monied. HRC is going to be the nominee and the only questions are:

1) will she win

and

2) will it really matter

[hedgehog]

11. Isn't that what people were saying , oh, about 6 years ago?

[progressoid]

13. Yup. n/t

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

52. Well then someone else will fill the vacuum created by Hillary's right-wing coporatist policies.

[madrchsod]

10. Politico!...proud dispensers of bullshit......

[KoKo]

14. OOPSIE... I think you need to read Dean Baker who is the quote of mention

on the Article.

[grantcart]

36. I didn't get that far I stopped at this

Politico even quotes “a well-place Democrat” as saying, “Wall Street folks are so happy about having Clinton run that they won’t care what she says.”

This is the equivalent, journalistically, of "a guy on the football team told me that all of the cheerleaders give bjs".

Politico, already a suspicious source, names an unnamed source who suggests that everyone in Wall Street shares exactly the same particular opinion.

[winter is coming]

12. And we know we can trust Politico for agendaless factual reporting.

I'm not a Hillary supporter, but this sounds like shit-stirring. Given the problems the GOP is having with the Tea Party, they'd love to fuel a schism in the Democratic Party, but this isn't a smart way to do it. People who reject Hillary for being too corporatist are going to reject Republicans as well, and there's a danger that Warren's message will raise expectations in the GOP base that the Republican Party can't cater to.

[KoKo]

15. You didn't even bother to read. The article is not linked to "Politico" but to

"Market Watch." It's a quote from Politico that loves them some Hillary that you object to but, I repeat, Politico is not the link to this article.

Just so you know. I hope you will take the time to go to the proper link and read the article "In Full" so that you can be credible in what you are saying.

Thanks!

[winter is coming]

16. It's the quote from Politico about Wall Street being so happy that I was referring to. n/t

[KoKo]

17. I read Financial News...so this is not NEW from "Politico."

I could give you the speeches that Hilliary gave to Goldman Sachs and how much she pulled in Fees for such ...which is addressed in the article about how "tight Hillary is with Wall Street."

You don't want to know that or can't do a Google, Bing or Duck, Duck to find out?

Hillary is spending lots of time talking to the Wall Street Bankers who brought down our Economy and she's RAKING IN THE CASH.

Yet...you don't want to know this. Everyone who has any kind of "poor investments" these days is reading "Financial News," because Wall Street FUNDS our Presidential Candidates these days. Surely you know that...and ... You think this isn't important?

It's an interesting article. You should go to THE LINK and read THE WHOLE THING rather than spending time trashing me.

[winter is coming]

18. I already know those things are true. That doesn't mean Politico's not trying to stir up shit. n/t

[KoKo]

19. Here from that RW SITE "ALTERNET"

Hillary Clinton Rakes in Big Money from Two Goldman Sachs Speeches in One Week
Presumed presidential candidate is pretty cozy with big bankers.

October 31, 2013 |

Former Secretary of State, and presumed 2016 presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton spoke at two separate Goldman Sachs events in the past week (on October 24, and then again on October 29), for a cool $200,000 per speech, her normal fee according to Politico and the New York Times. $400,000—not a bad payday for the former First Lady.

Alec Torres of the National Review Online reports that, on the 24th, Clinton spoke for the AIMS Alternate Investment Conference, a closed event held exclusively for Goldman clients. AIMS is an annual conference that explores strategic models and new products available to financial advisers. Pretty exclusive stuff.

This Tuesday, Clinton spoke to the Builders and Innovators Summit, about entrepreneurship, and how best to help investors expand their own personal business models. According to Politico, which covered the event, Clinton conducted a question-and-answer session with Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein. The investment giant declined to comment on the subject of Clinton’s talk, or why she in particular was invited to the events.

The two speaking engagements follow Clinton’s visits to private-equity firms KKR this past July, and the Carlyle Group just last month. At KKR’s annual investor meeting in California, Clinton was on hand to answers questions from Harry Kravis, the film’s co-founder, on the subjects of the Middle East, Washington, and politics. At the Carlyle Group, Clinton is said to have made a speech to shareholders that was moderated by the group’s founder David Rubenstein.

Details about those talks have been kept similarly under wraps, but the $200,000 engagement price means it's been payday with pretty easy hours for Clinton since the summer.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-rakes-big-money-two-goldman-sachs-speeches-one-week

[bvar22]

22. Hillary KNOWS who her BASE is, and it ain't people who Work for a Living.

If you Work for a Living,
this ONE video is all you need to know about Hillary.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center] [center] [/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[Segami]

50. +1....I would like to add...

that the 'CLINTONS' KNOW who THEIR BASE is, and it AIN'T people who Work for a Living.

Why do we keep going to the trough by electing re-treds to solve our ever-evolving problems? We have no one to blame but ourselves for creating these corporate family dynasties.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

55. Good question. Let Hillary run in the Republican primary. We need a candidate for the people, not the corporations.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

53. Hillary and Wall Street having a mutual love affair. Surely we can do better.

[Phlem]

20. "they'd love to fuel a schism in the Democratic Party, but this isn't a smart way to do it."

So what's the worry then if it isn't a smart way to do. I hate break this to you but the schism has been here for a while. We're just trying to get along. What do you expect when the Third way is on the pockets banks and corporations?



-p

[winter is coming]

21. Whoosh. n/t

[Phlem]

23. Well pardon me, I'm sure you can explain for this child?

Unless all you've got is "Wooosh"



-p

[winter is coming]

25. "So what's the worry then if it isn't a smart way to do."

I didn't say there was a worry if this isn't a smart way to fuel a schism, because I'm not worried about it. I was merely pointing out that this strategy could easily backfire on the GOP, because their own base might finally realize how rigged the game is and start demanding change.

[Phlem]

27. Right, cause they're that smart.

But thanks for that little nugget and here I thought you might have something important to say.

Oh and next time check the attitude at the door, there are plenty on this board vying for the "all knowing, all powerful" position.



-p

[Phlem]

24. Crickets.

Yep another poser.



-p

[winter is coming]

26. I'll bet you say that to everyone who doesn't respond to your posts in less than 10 minutes.

[Phlem]

28. yep, yep I do since the initial response was condescending.

-p

[winter is coming]

32. Why yes, you were. n/t

[Phlem]

34. Nice but I was talking about this

" And we know we can trust Politico for agendaless factual reporting."

Good on you though I guess you got me.

I will go hide in shame now.



-p

[Historic NY]

29. It sure sounds like some one wants to just be...

[link:

[winter is coming]

33. I love the "Hillary dares Warren" phrasing. Sounds like a taunt at recess.

[mike_c]

31. ABH....

Seriously. Or maybe just ALMOST ABH. The disenfranchisement of the 99% will be pretty much complete if Hillary Clinton is the democratic party alternative to whatever borg the republicans run.

[Phlem]

35. Uh Oh you had better stop it or you'll be shown the spoon!

-p

[JoePhilly]

38. Trying to get Democrats to fight each other, and not the GOP.

ok.

[Historic NY]

41. +1

[Phlem]

40. Yeay Thirdway!

Last edited Wed Dec 18, 2013, 11:56 PM - Edit history (1)

Can't have enough of a stupid thing?





-p

[rhett o rick]

43. This is more significant than at first look. The Powers To Be are becoming bolder.

CBS is becoming more and more like Faux News and Clinton isnt even pretending she represents the 99%. She knows the game is rigged. Americans think they live in a Democracy because they get to vote. Yeah, between Wall Street Clinton and Wall Street Christie. Now dont get me wrong. Clinton and Christie are not the same. That's the mistake Nader made. No Clinton is female, Christie is male, Clinton is blond and Christie is heavy. Clinton likes bagels and Christie likes donuts. They are definitely not the same.

Some say the hell with the slow boiling of the frog via Conservative Clinton, go with Christie and the heat gets turned up and maybe the frog will figure it out and jump the hell out of the pot. Wishful thinking. The Powers To Be will just put the lid on the pot.

Bottom line is that Clinton and Christie are not the same, but the frog dies either way.

The corporatocratists have their foot on our throat. If anyone can envision a way out, please enlighten me.

[Phlem]

44. A way out I do not have but

promoting another 3rd wayer? Which Republican would you prefer?

That DOES NOT HELP.
and this is not directed at you.
If you follow the thread you know what I mean.

-p

[rhett o rick]

46. Sorry but I dont understand. I certainly am not promoting another Third Way'er.

I am saying we wont have a choice except Clinton and Christie. The system is rigged. It's bad cop or badder cop.

[Phlem]

47. That's not what I was saying.

I was contrasting the choice between a democratic third way candidate and a Republican, which seems to be what's being crammed down our throat.

Your spot on, sorry for the confusion.

-p

[rhett o rick]

48. I reread your post and understand. I am easily confused. nm

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. Hopefully, Bernie Sanders will step in if Warren refuses to run.

[KoKo]

49. Both of their Views are needed! Agree about Bernie. eom.

[jwirr]

54. Hillary had better look around at the Democratic Party - we do not want a war between these two

women. We would like Hillary to indicate she is listening to one of the only voices we have on the actions of Wall Street. I for one already wonder if Hillary will just be another Bill and leave us facing the mistakes he made (NAFTA, welfare reform, etc.) or if she is going to turn us back from the concessions to the right that have taken a stand in our party. NO THIRD WAY.

[rhett o rick]

58. The Powers To Be have bought the Democratic Party machine. They

arent worried about the left. Because the Republican Party has gone so far right, the conservatives have moved to the Democratic Party. The Powers To Be have encouraged the Republican Party to go to the crazy right because it drives the conservatives into the Democratic Party where they can compromise the Democratic principles. Penny Pritzker calls herself a Democrat but she holds the same principles as Mit Romney. There are really three parties, The Democratic Left, The Reagan (Third Way) Democrats calling themselves "centrists", and the extreme Right.

Clinton can thumb her nose at the left as Obama did in 2012. They dont need the left. They have the backing of the New-Dems (Old Republicans), or Reagan Dems or The Third Way.

The only way we will survive is to drive the damn conservatives out of our Party.

[jwirr]

59. Or they will learn the hard way that they are wrong.

[rhett o rick]

60. Please elaborate as to what "the hard way" means. nm

[jwirr]

61. Things get bad enough that they start feeling the pinch and lose their jobs in Congress. I am not

hoping for this though as all of us would be in an even worse position.

[rhett o rick]

62. Ah yes, the real capitalism end game. When they start eating each other.

And you are right of course, we will be in worse shape.

[fadedrose]

56. Hillary scares me . . .

There are a lot of good Democrats, Warren and Biden are two, but there are others. A good break in some news story that hasn't happened yet may shine light on the Dem that we need.....

[WillyT]

57. K & R !!! - I Don't Want To Wait Another 3, 7, or 11 Years... For A REAL Progressive