2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWall Street Won't Let Elizabeth Warren Be Hillary Clinton's Vice President (They want Kaine)
by Michal Addady - JUNE 20, 2016, 1:13 PM EDT
Warren and Wall Street don’t get along.
Democratic Wall Street donors are reportedly warning Hillary Clinton not to choose Elizabeth Warren as her running mate.
The Massachusetts senator has been one of the most outspoken figures against the banking industry since the 2008 financial crisis, and donors tell Politico that if Warren is the pick for vice president, it could really hurt Clinton’s donations. The presidential candidate is hoping to raise $1.5 billion for her campaign. So far she has raised $289 million, and she’s relying on Wall Street for more.
One Democratic donor said putting Warren on the ticket could drive Clinton’s entire Wall Street base away. Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, says that could be a huge problem for her. “Things are so volatile now with all of the outside groups that all it can take is pissing off one billionaire on Wall Street to make it difficult,” she told Politico. “And you don’t run national campaigns for as many years as Clinton has without some serious support from Wall Street.”
~Snip~
Numerous Wall Street donors identified Virginia Senator Tim Kaine as their preferred vice presidential nominee....
Read more:
http://fortune.com/2016/06/20/wall-street-elizabeth-warren/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)and chooses someone else.
think
(11,641 posts)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)is silly, merely more conservative pushback against the idea. It is not in Wall Street's power to stop her if that's what she wants to do. It is in Wall Street's power to pound its chest and promise she could be looking at 8 years of extreme business-government opposition, instead of cooperation, if she determined on a strong reform course instead of a "kinder and gentler" one.
think
(11,641 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)president siccs on others, and likability is not actually a requirement. Tom Perez, though, is highly respected in Washington by those who know him and he has a great record from his work in the Justice Department, and he was on Obama's short list for Holder's replacement. A quick search doesn't show anyone speculating about Black for anything at all.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)Warren won't be VP because she brings little to the table and isn't ready to be president. End of story.
think
(11,641 posts)
Squinch
(50,941 posts)
think
(11,641 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)think
(11,641 posts)Hillary isn't going to piss them off and lose those donations.
It's pretty obvious what's going on. That's why the article was written. That's why Wall Street insiders are on record as saying this is the case.
think
(11,641 posts)Her Sister
(6,444 posts)You are the news! You and your concern. Let's talk about that. Where is that coming from? Am sure you have very legitimate reasons! Me thinks you wanna convince people of something..... Let me think what that could be? Curious. Curiouser....
Obvious.... Obviouser......
But I up your thread once again, lol! 
think
(11,641 posts)and yes that bothers me.
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Am sure! am sure!
think
(11,641 posts)OR you just refuse to believe that?
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)I trust my candidate and nominee to choose the best running mate for her! Period! VP is important and not important. VP makes a package but ultimately the VP has not much power in government. They're there in case they're needed. So they ought to be ready.
You want to spread mistrust for some reason!
think
(11,641 posts)I do.
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Really I do.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)she's picking her preferred successor. That's why I don't trust her on this...she's not picking someone "in case they're needed", she's picking someone on the expectation that in 2024, they will be the nominee and hopefully the next President.
It's an effort to steer the future of the party...and as the party is trending away from Clintonism, if she picks someone to her right or even roughly approximate to her, that's a disaster.
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)This is your opinion. I think she is in the same boat as every Presidential candidate in the past when it comes to choosing her VP.
You want reasons to distrust her that's your agenda. No, thank you
Nice and underhanded way to try to smear her, this is what it boils down to.
The more interesting thing for me is this. People choosing to be concerned
and trying, trying, trying to spread that "concern" like a sticky icky virus!
Ooooops! you guys and gals your agenda is showing!!! Blush
Blush!LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)More accuratyely, 'alleging' rather than 'stating' the same thing.
think
(11,641 posts)
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)She has already gotten under Trump's skin and she brings little to the table?
She has a national profile and has little to the table?
And Tim "I hate abortion" Kaine IS READY to be president?
LAUGHABLE.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)"Don't throw me in that briar patch!"
Wall Street would love her stuck in a ceremonial position and out of the Senate.
reflection
(6,286 posts)think
(11,641 posts)The hand writing is on the wall..
Bleacher Creature
(11,256 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)As VP, Senator Warren will have far less power to regulate wall street. As a senator in a democratic majority state, she is far more dangerous to wall street.
Having dealt with a lot of investment bankers, one thing they are not is stupid. They would rather have democrats in power because it helps their business. Bill Clinton's boom made a lot of them a lot of money.
Regulations don't scare industries - they are just an annoyance but not scary. What is scary is an uncontrolled economic downturn and they all lose.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)This is just a hyperbolic political hit piece that is FOS. But anything to keep bashing our nominee, I see.
think
(11,641 posts)Her Sister
(6,444 posts)You, never mind: You bumped my post. Haha! I am bumping the thread too. Guess the thread/article is winning!!!
kudos to you and the bogus article's bogus point of view!
think
(11,641 posts)understand what is happening in this regards.
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Way to try to quiet people! eyeroll chuckle chuckle
stonecutter357
(12,695 posts)
randome
(34,845 posts)No. They don't.
MynameisBlarney
(2,979 posts)Now I'm confussed.
think
(11,641 posts)Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Because wall Street does not always give more money to the GOP in every elecion... Stop the bogus concern! This is akin to concern trolling. Stop it.
Ooooops! Your agenda is showing!
stonecutter357
(12,695 posts)who are the donors?
merrily
(45,251 posts)that was her idea. That was the last I heard about Warren and Wall Street.
MynameisBlarney
(2,979 posts)I'll see if I can find a link.
*edit*
I remember now, it was just someones post on RS. They were speculating.
It kinda made sense at the time. Wall St. might be better off with Warren as VP instead of where she's at now.
merrily
(45,251 posts)
Sancho
(9,067 posts)That's the only "source" in the article - and there's no name.
Wall Street is complex, and Hillary's support will not likely be determined by a VP choice.
merrily
(45,251 posts)
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)think
(11,641 posts)
nest
(23 posts)because they are ideologically opposed to one another on many issues (Similar to Bernie) and that will cause problems with ther relationship and their ability to accomplish things together
think
(11,641 posts)whatthehey
(3,660 posts)Much of DU will say the following:
If Kaine is chosen, it will be because Wall Street called the shots because they don't like Warren, and HRC obeyed as this article implies.
If Warren is chosen it will be because this was a Brer Rabbit double cross and Wall Street really wanted Warren moved to an impotent sinecure away from the Senate, and Hillary did their bidding.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)If Clinton bends to their wishes, it would be a mistake.
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)
Everyone keep sowing mistrust in our nominee! Agenda showing.......
longship
(40,416 posts)Why take her out of her increasingly powerful Senate Seat to put her in what can only be termed a strictly ceremonial position?
Why? Just why?
The argument I get is that she would become the President of the US Senate.
Oh dear! Where to start.
And just what powers does the VEEP have in the US Senate?
That's right. They get to vote when there's a tie vote.
How in the Sam Hell is that a good use of Elizabeth Warren's prodigious talents and intellect?
I staunchly oppose Elizabeth Warren as VEEP!
bklyncowgirl
(7,960 posts)Mind you, I'd love it to be Warren but I really doubt it will happen. I don't think it will be Sherrod Brown either for the same reasons--big donors will veto the choice AND the Democrats will not want to lose that Senate seat.
Tim Kaine however would be a hard sell to liberal diehards. He may have been a fine governor or senator but many of us remember him as DNC chair do not care for him. He would be another reason some Sanders supporters decide to stay home on Election Day or vote third party.
While Hillary may decide that she doesn't need to appease the former Sanders supporters with a left-populist vice presidential pick--a mistake in my opinion--she may decide to go with someone who, unlike Warren, won't ruffle the feathers of big donors and most important, knows his or her place. Exciting a key demographic would be good also. Castro, the former mayor of San Antonio is a dynamic speaker, good looking and smart but he doesn't help in the demographic race--Hispanics are already itching to vote against Trump. Cory Booker could garner some more enthusiasm from African-American and younger voters and is also a good speaker but he is also a Democrat from New Jersey--a state where political corruption is a way of life. Admittedly he IS the first mayor of Newark in many years to avoid indictment, but there could be potential problems there.
A good compromise candidate would be someone who is charismatic, a good speaker, who is also a good attack dog and who could appeal to those white voters who may not be fond of Hillary but who do not much care for Trump either. He or she would have to be reassuring and ready to step into the job.
Hey, I wonder if Joe Biden would be up for another round as VEEP?
Lance Bass esquire
(671 posts)
I think Warren's focus has been against abusive payday lending, harsh bankruptcy laws and unregulated, risky banking. She's never come out and said that the business model for Wall Street is corruption.
Native
(5,939 posts)Elizabeth would have less power over Wall Street were she to actually become the V.P. - that's why so many people want her to stay in the Senate. Because of this, I'm wondering if it is just bullshit that was intentionally thrown out there so if Hillary actually chooses Warren, her campaign can use it as proof that she's willing to go against Wall Street and is therefor NOT in their pocket.
I do not think that Hillary is beholden to Wall Street. But I do see the wisdom of crafting the message so the uninformed masses can easily be convinced that what the Republicans are saying is not true.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)they kick off another woman so that a NOTED ANTI ABORTION politico gets in, then those who support her should know it is business as usual.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)and we don't need any of those 500 or so votes to carry any state except maybe Florida, where there aren't more than 10 billionaires, none of whom were going to vote for Clinton anyway.