Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Jesus Malverde

(10,274 posts)
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 06:43 PM Nov 2013

Hillary Clinton stresses unity in S.F. speech

Source: SFGate

Without taking partisan sides or naming names, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton excoriated national leaders Saturday for the federal government shutdown and Washington's gridlocked politics, saying stalemates are eroding America's standing internationally.

In a paid speech to an audience of a few thousand people at the National Association of Realtors convention in San Francisco, the Democrat - and potential 2016 presidential candidate - cut a centrist path before the politically mixed audience of Realtors from around the U.S. and dozens of countries.

Later, she and her daughter, Chelsea, headlined a fundraiser at the Regency Ballroom for the Clinton Foundation's Millennial Network, an event aimed at voters younger than 30. Clinton has made a series of paid speeches around the country in recent weeks. She reportedly was paid $200,000 for each of two speeches at Goldman Sachs events last month.

She was decidedly more political during an appearance earlier Saturday in Los Angeles, where she urged Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform. The effort has been stalled by House Republicans who do not support a pathway to citizenship for those living in the country illegally.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/politics/joegarofoli/article/Hillary-Clinton-stresses-unity-in-S-F-speech-4971710.php



Outside Moscone Center, about 150 supporters of the Ready for Hillary group that's trying to launch her candidacy rallied and waved signs. Kate Maeder, an organizer with the group, said it is important to elect a woman to the White House.

"She would be such a role model for generations of young girls to show that they could achieve whatever they want," Maeder said.


55 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary Clinton stresses unity in S.F. speech (Original Post) Jesus Malverde Nov 2013 OP
Advice to aspiring candidates frazzled Nov 2013 #1
No Thanks billhicks76 Nov 2013 #6
HRC: NEED. MORE. BIPARTISANSHIP. blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #8
Oh good, I'm glad she's not taking "partisan sides". Wouldn't want to do that, now. TwilightGardener Nov 2013 #2
Right? Well then, thanks, and Elizabeth Warren will make closeupready Nov 2013 #24
HRC: Kumbaya with the Tea Baggers. blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #3
aaaaarrgggggggghhhhhh pangaia Nov 2013 #4
TPP. Trans-Pacific Partnership. Trans-Pacific Partnership. Trans-Pacific Partnership. Hillary. NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #5
HRC: Can't we just all get along???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #7
"She reportedly was paid $200,000 for each of two speeches at Goldman Sachs events last month." n/t PoliticAverse Nov 2013 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author QuestForSense Nov 2013 #10
Sooooooo?????? Beacool Nov 2013 #12
Seriously? NoOneMan Nov 2013 #14
Did you get this upset when Obama received more money from Goldman Sachs than Hillary and McCain? Beacool Nov 2013 #16
Yes NoOneMan Nov 2013 #17
I don't see it as a deal braker. Beacool Nov 2013 #18
Hm. NoOneMan Nov 2013 #20
If that's G.S.'s intentions, I doubt that she will reciprocate. Beacool Nov 2013 #21
You notice how I am talking about all politicians, eh? Including the likes of Cheney and Delay. NoOneMan Nov 2013 #22
Bingo! Fearless Nov 2013 #41
Apples and Oranges karynnj Nov 2013 #51
The money still came from the hated Goldman Sachs. Beacool Nov 2013 #52
You live in NJ - I would have thought you could tell the difference karynnj Nov 2013 #55
This message was self-deleted by its author blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #32
Yes, she needs lots of money for her campaign Get it now...anywhere/anyway she can. Auntie Bush Nov 2013 #43
Reading comments here have become as predictable as reading them on a RW site. Beacool Nov 2013 #11
Gee, who's in your avatar?!?! blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #33
My candidate of choice. Beacool Nov 2013 #37
Just as hysterical cheer leading has become a bore. HappyMe Nov 2013 #46
Well, don't look at me. Beacool Nov 2013 #47
No, you don't post any OPs. HappyMe Nov 2013 #48
I know, but right now she's not running for anything. Beacool Nov 2013 #50
A lot of people here have HappyMe Nov 2013 #54
President Hillary Lamonte Nov 2013 #13
Doesn't sound like Mrs. DLC/Third Way has learned anything in the last 5 years, or the last 5 weeks. blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #34
I so agree. avaistheone1 Nov 2013 #38
You people and your third way crap. She's a CENTRIST! Auntie Bush Nov 2013 #44
Respectfully, I think the opposition will be just as bad RFKHumphreyObama Nov 2013 #42
There was RW opposition to white male Bill Clinton karynnj Nov 2013 #53
Ready for Hillary to Get Along with Everyone? NoOneMan Nov 2013 #15
NO THANKS blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #35
The PUMAs still scare me. ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 #19
Vote for our lousy DINO, or the big bad ol' Republican will WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #31
It's important to elect a liberal woman to the White House. closeupready Nov 2013 #23
I don't want another dummie in the White House. QuestForSense Nov 2013 #25
But Palin IS a woman - thus, affirming the logic closeupready Nov 2013 #26
"It's important to elect a LIBERAL woman to the White House." QuestForSense Nov 2013 #28
+1 Fearless Nov 2013 #40
I would vote for EW or TB Half-Century Man Nov 2013 #29
I'll be happy to support Dame Clinton as soon as the "right-lite" stops Half-Century Man Nov 2013 #27
Pablum BeyondGeography Nov 2013 #30
Foisting the "bi-partisan" flag for another 4-8 years of capitualtion to the crazies. blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #36
FUCK UNITY! Fearless Nov 2013 #39
Good lord, then let's have Hillary speak for free, donate the money to the Republican Party Charity libdem4life Nov 2013 #45
"...gridlocked politics" bobGandolf Nov 2013 #49

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
1. Advice to aspiring candidates
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 06:48 PM
Nov 2013

It seems to me the lesson learned is: should you become the next Democratic president, every day should be backwards day. Don't call for unity, because whatever you call for, the Republicans will oppose and prevent. So call for more division. It just could work.

 

billhicks76

(5,082 posts)
6. No Thanks
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:38 PM
Nov 2013

Warren/Grayson 2016. Hillary may be able to win but expect no change and more Imperialism as well as ramping up the war at home. No more Bushes or Clinton's please. This is not a monarchy.

 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
24. Right? Well then, thanks, and Elizabeth Warren will make
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:04 AM
Nov 2013

a terrific Democratic candidate, and I hope Hill can endorse her!

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
4. aaaaarrgggggggghhhhhh
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:30 PM
Nov 2013

"Without taking partisan sides or naming names..."
WHY NOT ??????

".... the Democrat - and potential 2016 presidential candidate - cut a centrist path before the politically mixed audience of Realtors..."

CENTRIST ---BS aaarrrggghhhhh...
She she's to the right of Ike.

Sorry, I want a progressive, as naive as that may sound.

Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #9)

 

NoOneMan

(4,795 posts)
14. Seriously?
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 09:27 PM
Nov 2013

You don't think its a problem for politicians (appointed or elected) to be paid insane speaking fees by private organizations that have lobbying efforts? Do you not understand how easily this type of thing can by used to bribe government officials?

And shit...200K. If we had a maximum yearly wage, damn, it should be right about there. People living in dirt and the elite class gets that for a few hours.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
16. Did you get this upset when Obama received more money from Goldman Sachs than Hillary and McCain?
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 09:30 PM
Nov 2013

Or does the outrage only apply to Hillary?

 

NoOneMan

(4,795 posts)
17. Yes
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 09:32 PM
Nov 2013

It applies to all politicians. I've been upset about that shit since I started paying attention during the Bush years.

So, you don't see a problem? Or is it just not a problem when its Hillary?

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
18. I don't see it as a deal braker.
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 10:27 PM
Nov 2013

If a company wants to pay her a lot of money for a speech, I say go for it and take all the money she can from the weasels.

 

NoOneMan

(4,795 posts)
20. Hm.
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 10:58 PM
Nov 2013

So if a politician is making a vote or policy that could influence the likelihood of getting a $200K a pop speech opportunity, do you see how such a potential opportunity could in fact influence their vote. Its often been said those speeches are merely payback for good behavior, and if thats the case, it certainly encourages certain behaviors. But alas, that's just my opinion.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
21. If that's G.S.'s intentions, I doubt that she will reciprocate.
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 11:04 PM
Nov 2013

She has been in politics far too long to be swayed by a paid speech. As it is, she gives plenty of free speeches to groups that she supports.

 

NoOneMan

(4,795 posts)
22. You notice how I am talking about all politicians, eh? Including the likes of Cheney and Delay.
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 11:08 PM
Nov 2013

Yes, I understand you seem to trust her. But speaking of public servants in general, do you not understand how such paid arrangements could possibly influence future or reward past behavior?

karynnj

(59,501 posts)
51. Apples and Oranges
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:20 AM
Nov 2013

What you are referring to is the aggregate amount that was given in individual donations from people who work for Goodman and Sachs. All donations were limited to the amount that could be spent in each election. It would include a $50 donation from a receptionist as well as $3500 from a very rich trader.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
52. The money still came from the hated Goldman Sachs.
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:24 AM
Nov 2013

I know that most of the money came from employees.

karynnj

(59,501 posts)
55. You live in NJ - I would have thought you could tell the difference
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:32 PM
Nov 2013

between the COMPANY giving money and the employees of the company INDEPENDENTLY contributing. (I do have a problem when the amounts are contributed via a bundler who is high in the company - there is no way from the campaign finance sites to discriminate between them.)

This is an issue that goes beyond Obama and Hillary. Both of them and anyone who has ever run for Senate or the Presidency is in a system where they need to raise huge amounts of money. This leads to distortions in our democracy. Even if there is just a perception that money could buy favor or even just access there is a problem.

Response to Beacool (Reply #12)

Auntie Bush

(17,528 posts)
43. Yes, she needs lots of money for her campaign Get it now...anywhere/anyway she can.
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 08:59 PM
Nov 2013

Plenty of time to decide on a platform and a coalition.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
11. Reading comments here have become as predictable as reading them on a RW site.
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 08:27 PM
Nov 2013

Get a grip people!! The hysteria of the Left is becoming tiresome. You all don't have to go on a tear at any little bit of Clinton news that someone posts. In case you have forgotten, this is a Democratic site and the Clintons are Democrats whether some of you like it or not. You can start tearing at your vestments if she ever does decide to run again. These reflexive attacks are a bore.

Gee..............


HappyMe

(20,277 posts)
46. Just as hysterical cheer leading has become a bore.
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 09:12 AM
Nov 2013
The election is a long ways off. Stifling any criticism of Clinton is bullshit.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
47. Well, don't look at me.
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 10:23 AM
Nov 2013

I haven't posted any of these threads. Although, I still think that she would be a great president and hope that she runs, but I also think that the media should back off and let her have a year of peace.

As for the criticism on this site, meh, same old from the same people repeated over and over.



HappyMe

(20,277 posts)
48. No, you don't post any OPs.
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 10:28 AM
Nov 2013

You just post cheerleader replies.

If she's going to run for president, she isn't going to get any time off.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
50. I know, but right now she's not running for anything.
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:05 AM
Nov 2013

She's still a private citizen. It's the media who keeps pushing these 2016 stories. They abhor a vacuum and started speculating about another Hillary run the minute the 2012 elections were over. Now the Left leaning media types are pushing Elizabeth Warren. Frankly, she's not really a politician, I take her at her word when she keeps saying that she's not interested in running for president. She barely got into her first elected job in January. Not everyone feels the need to be president. It's mostly a tremendous amount of work and it can be a thankless job. I think that Warren could be the new Ted Kennedy of the Senate and make a tremendous difference from that perch.

HappyMe

(20,277 posts)
54. A lot of people here have
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:46 AM
Nov 2013

Clinton already in the damn WH. I am not blaming this shoving Clinton at us solely on the media. The Inevitable One has done nothing to shut them up. She enjoys the attention.

Frankly, the fact that hillary is a politician makes her unappealing to me, not everyone needs to be president.

Lamonte

(85 posts)
13. President Hillary
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 08:44 PM
Nov 2013

She may experience less opposition. Obama's being black is what scared the white racist republican base. I also think she has learned from Obama's attempt to be willing to compromise with few wins.

 

blkmusclmachine

(16,149 posts)
34. Doesn't sound like Mrs. DLC/Third Way has learned anything in the last 5 years, or the last 5 weeks.
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 01:52 AM
Nov 2013

Auntie Bush

(17,528 posts)
44. You people and your third way crap. She's a CENTRIST!
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 09:05 PM
Nov 2013

I find calling her the third way a derogatory slap in the face.
By the way...What hasn't she learned?

RFKHumphreyObama

(15,164 posts)
42. Respectfully, I think the opposition will be just as bad
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 05:58 AM
Nov 2013

Race may be the genuine pretext that they use to hate and oppose President Obama and I have no doubt that the racist element is out there in full force and more among the rabid Republican base but, ultimately, it won't make much difference in terms of who the next Democratic President is

You only have to look back to the Clinton years and the rabid right-wing opposition to Bill Clinton based on his lack of national service, his marital infidelity and so on and so on. Ultimately, they will hate any Democratic President because he or she is a Democratic President and their race, gender, religion is secondary to that underlying fact

If Mrs. Clinton becomes President, the pretext for the hate will change but it will still be there as large as it was with President Obama or indeed with her husband. A leopard doesn't change its spots just because there is a change of season

karynnj

(59,501 posts)
53. There was RW opposition to white male Bill Clinton
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:29 AM
Nov 2013

The fact is that Obama TRIED to compromise with the Republicans, but it didn't really work.

The reason may be that the two sides have become too polarized - each with strong views of how they thing the country should change that are mutually incompatible. Use any major issue (other than maybe immigration where there is some common ground) - and you will see why it is unlikely for any President to accomplish anything really important to their side while having the other side happy with them.

This is not to knock Obama or Hillary - it is pointing out that we really have hit the point where the two parties have opposite goals.

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,868 posts)
19. The PUMAs still scare me.
Sun Nov 10, 2013, 10:31 PM
Nov 2013

I'll vote for Hillary, but I fear that if she doesn't get the nomination they'll take their balls and go home (to Christie).

 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
23. It's important to elect a liberal woman to the White House.
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:02 AM
Nov 2013

That would be Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin, Kirsten Gillibrand, any number of really smart, talented women.

You could elect Sarah Palin - she's a woman.

QuestForSense

(653 posts)
25. I don't want another dummie in the White House.
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:16 AM
Nov 2013

The world still hasn't recovered from Dubya and it's been almost 5 years!

 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
26. But Palin IS a woman - thus, affirming the logic
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:25 AM
Nov 2013

in the OP, 'it's important to elect a woman to the White House.'

In other words, women should be equally considered Presidential material, but not on the basis of gender alone.

QuestForSense

(653 posts)
28. "It's important to elect a LIBERAL woman to the White House."
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:42 AM
Nov 2013

Palin is not a liberal woman, but she IS a dummie.

Half-Century Man

(5,279 posts)
29. I would vote for EW or TB
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:44 AM
Nov 2013

And SP being whatever...There is plenty of anecdotal or circumstantial evidence, but.......I just don't care one way of the other.

Fearless

(18,421 posts)
39. FUCK UNITY!
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 04:45 AM
Nov 2013

I want goddamned progressive liberal values. Not someone being paid 400k for speeches at Goldman Sachs events.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
45. Good lord, then let's have Hillary speak for free, donate the money to the Republican Party Charity
Mon Nov 11, 2013, 09:31 PM
Nov 2013

to be Fair and Balanced. Or, maybe just split it with Jeb. He'll take it gladly. And laugh all the way to the Republican bank and there goes health care, women's health, LGBT et al. Glad we settled that.

So where's the website for these individual $10 donations? Oh, that's right. No one can afford a website or staffers to even prepare the deposit slip for these millions that will magically flow in from all the wealthy Hillary deniers.

Wonder why it is Progressives can't field a national candidate or do much of anything but bitch about Hillary, yet again? Wonder why real Democrat national candidates find it difficult to lurch to the left...who see, hear, and speak pure, political poverty?

Face it. The only Senator willing to put his name on the Progressive Caucus is ... Bernie Sanders, an Independent. The Republicans have a number of Senators on the Tea Party Caucus.



bobGandolf

(871 posts)
49. "...gridlocked politics"
Tue Nov 12, 2013, 10:42 AM
Nov 2013

She hit the nail on the head. I just wonder if it will ever change. It certainly won't unless there are drastic changes in campaign financing.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Hillary Clinton stresses ...