2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary isn't owned by anyone.
She is a person with her own mind and has full control over her own being.
Please stop saying it. It's insulting as all hell.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)Her opposition to gay marriage, support of the Iraq War, the TPP, and Keystone all up until they were politically damaging?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)That was just a small list of "substantive" arguments.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)If you're against people changing their minds over time, then the first place to look is Bernie, who used to think that the government should own the means of production. But you probably don't want to go there.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)People change over time, that is acceptable, but it's pretty easy to spot when someone changes because it's politically expedient. Bernie changed his position on guns for that reason, but Hillary changed almost her entire platform and continues to do so by the minute.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)As for the "owned by banks" thing, I think "owned" is a strong word, but I am certainly concerned about the money she took from them.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)But a quick Google search will reveal that not only did Hillary receive millions of dollars in speaking fees from large banks and Wall St. firms, but she has and continues to receive thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from banking employees.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)would have been invited to any of Hillary's 300,000 dollar speeches nor been able to afford a 2700 dollar donation.
They maybe could have sent a few buck at most.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)You don't change that quickly. Actions speak louder than words. And the gun thing is shallow. Hype. She supports weapons manufacturers and bombing entire families abroad. Get real.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)Old Crow
(2,212 posts)Because when human beings receive hundreds of thousands of dollars, or millions of dollars, they never experience a sense of obligation.
I suppose that's true on some planet, DanTex. Just not this one.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)And Hillary just postponed a fundraiser with Bain Capital.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511134307
Old Crow
(2,212 posts)SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)I wonder where you pulled banks from
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)The people who want her because she is hillary, who accept the self-evident wisdom of supporting hillary because she is the most hillaryesque hillary and in fact nobody can hillary better than the one and only hillary, those folks are ALREADY in her corner.
But most of her campaign is about "vote for me because im me". Not substantive policy or issue proposals.
So kettle, meet pot.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)people who do.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)It is based directly upon the presentation she has made to the voters, or lack thereof.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)Punkingal
(9,522 posts)They own the entire Congress and Senate, too.
Most politicians are owned. Bernie is one of the few not.
Thinking HRC will act in the best interests of ordinary Americans over the predatory banks that keep her afloat is delusional
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)with the NRA which is a lobby for gun manufactures, in other words corporations.
LuvLoogie
(7,021 posts)That's okay. Hillary's campaign is quietly, but concretely working to build the party infrastructure and help down-ticket candidates in state and local elections.
The Revolution can have it's scatfest.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Occur with out help in Congress. Doesn't look like Sanders is willing to help down ticket candidates elected.
Punkingal
(9,522 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)He was elected to congress. He voted five times against the Brady Bill, these votes are recorded and a part of history. These are facts and if you notice Sanders does nit deny these votes. There have been other votes also.
Punkingal
(9,522 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)donated $18,000 to help defeat his opponent. He did vote against the Brady Bill, it is on record. I did not post a lie and to be accused of such is nto needed.
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)I predict crickets, because I am confident they don't give him money. Why? Because he doesn't want their filthy money because he can't be bought like most politicians.
I dare you. I DOUBLE DARE YOU.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)and he has a voting record of voting over and over to continue funding the F-35 program, over a trillion dollars. Which way is it, to cut the defense spending or to continue the defense spending. Does he get any donations from Lockheed Martin employees?
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)So is it true that Bernie supports the F-35?
Yes and no. The idea that Bernie supports the F-35 program stems from his positive reception to part of the F-35 fleet being stationed in Vermont.
Nonetheless, Bernie is highly concerned about cost overruns on the plane. In June 2014, Bernie called the F-35 program incredibly wasteful. Ultimately, however, Bernie realizes that the plane is going to be a reality, and concluded that as long as the F-35 is deployed anywhere, I believe we should strive to protect the Vermont Air National Guards mission and maintain hundreds of jobs here in Vermont.
While members of Congress have received over $8 million collectively from the F-35s manufacturer since 2001, Bernie has not accepted any Lockheed Martin contributions.
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-military-and-veterans/
Hillary never met a donor she didn't like. Bernie doesn't take that filthy money. It's very simple. Do you want a politician who takes legalized bribes (everybody else) or doesn't (Bernie)? Please name another politician who doesn't take bribes (i.e. corporate contributions) in Congress.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)smh :bandhead: if Wall Street breathed a sigh of relieve Tuesday morning thats sorta telling O_O
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Lots of Moneyed People invested in her. Waiting for the big pay off.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)Congress passes the laws, POTUS doesn't.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Lucinda
(31,170 posts)I've read a lot here lately that she wouldn't be able to get anything done. And if that is true, then I don't see how she could influence anything.
frylock
(34,825 posts)How well has Congress worked with him?
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)wouldn't get anything done because the Republicans hate her.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Policies that benefit corporations and the 1% to the detriment of the rest of us.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)away from their party?
Not seeing it.
I thank you for the conversation!
I've got to get a few things done before the debate.
Hope you have a great night, and that Bernie, who I do like a lot, and Hillary have a great debate tonight!
frylock
(34,825 posts)This your first dance?
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Show us your dance moves.
BREAKING: HILLARY POSTPONES FUNDRAISER WITH BAIN CAPITAL
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)if he is our nominee.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Bernie is now pulling in more cash than Hillary. He's got this shit covered. No need to solicit donations from these shitbags over at RMoney's old stomping grounds.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)in ad buys, 80% of which is from the Republican side. And that is just for a small state primary.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-02-03/new-hampshire-flooded-by-100-million-in-political-ads
frylock
(34,825 posts)Bernie is now pulling in more cash than Hillary. Full stop. Hillary has maxed out the card, while Bernie is sitting on a ton of money. This talking point is dead.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)Bernie's donations are amazing, but it wont be enough on it's own.
frylock
(34,825 posts)how Hillary is going to be more viable than Bernie when HE IS PULLING MORE MONEY THAN HER.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)Last edited Thu Feb 4, 2016, 04:03 AM - Edit history (1)
he has raised IN TOTAL $74,369,254 - which is over 25 million LESS - than the ad buy totals for just the primary in New Hampshire.
And if you count just the Republican 80% spent, they still spent more than he has raised in total so far.
He currently does not have the financial support to run a GE campaign. They will have to raise money, tons of it, to be competitive in the GE.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/candidate.php?cycle=2016&id=N00000528&type=f
Hillary has raised more in total, but not nearly enough to bankroll a GE run yet. The advantage she has over Bernie financially, is the SuperPAC money. I want the big money out of politics as much as anyone does, but as long as the Republicans are making use of it, I am glad she is too.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/candidate.php?id=N00000019
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)And there's executive orders. Btw, you've seen how quickly the Democratic Party fell in line behind Clinton. You think they'll oppose anything she wants to pass through Congress?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Lucinda
(31,170 posts)shawn703
(2,702 posts)And corporations are pretty happy with the status quo, don't you think?
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)to pass something she may or may not veto. Dems want restrictions on financial industries, Reps want little to none. Not sure what would even be getting passed.
RichVRichV
(885 posts)even do nothing congresses tend to get pro-business legislation through, usually buried in "must pass" omnibus bills. All they need is a president to rubber stamp it.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)her obligations, even after she robbed them of the Presidency? I don't see it.
RichVRichV
(885 posts)And yet they voted to grant him fast track trade authority in order to pass the pro-corporate TPP. Why would they do that for someone they hate?
It's not about Hillary. It's not about the Republicans. It's not about the Democrats. It's about what the corporations want. Most politicians owe their allegiance to the wealthy that got them there, regardless of party affiliation.
awake
(3,226 posts)CaliforniaPeggy
(149,681 posts)Until a higher bidder comes along. It's a perpetual auction, but all that money's on the same side, so we'll never see a difference there.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Jarqui
(10,130 posts)KansDem
(28,498 posts)Corporations are people!
oregonjen
(3,339 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Top Contributors
Senator Hillary Clinton
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=Career
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)From mostly individuals.
I do not think that link means what you think it means.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)musiclawyer
(2,335 posts)Over the assertion made by the original post
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)special interests to some extent.
Carolina
(6,960 posts)Yeah right. The mind that changes with the wind, with whatever is politically expedient, with whatever Lloyd Blankfein tells her...
retrowire
(10,345 posts)But let's use Bernie's vocab about it.
When you receive great amounts of money from special interests, you are beholden to them. They aren't making that investment for nothing.
And that's why Bernie takes donations from only the people. Because that is who he is beholden to.
Hillary is beholden to special interests and corporations.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)dflprincess
(28,082 posts)Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)when the quid and pro quo are balanced then she will move on to the next gig, perhaps some speeches or books.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)I prefer the real deal.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)They expect something in return.
With Hillary, they get it.
modestybl
(458 posts)Kinda like Jimmy Stewart's line in "It's A Wonderful Life" ...
"He's not selling, he's buying!!"
AzDar
(14,023 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)it is legalized bribery
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)Deny and Shred
(1,061 posts)They intend for her to argue their case beginning next January.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)No one anywhere.
They wouldn't make the donations without expecting obedience.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)There is SUBSTANTIAL evidence that she is completely bought and paid for.
It's been posted on DU over and over and even many non-Bernie supporters acknowledge that it looks extremely bad.
Add to that the fact that she chose the owner of a huge lobbying firm as her campaign chairman, and his brother, a power broker and super lobbyist is one of her main bundlers.
Add to that the propenderance of evidence that she favorably approved weapons sales at State, based on donations and speaking fees, to countries the State Department itself considers to be authoritarian...
And on and on...
If Ted Cruz did all of this ^^^ you wouldnt be justifying it. If W did it you'd assume he was a crook... But Hillary does it and it's all some complicated conspiracy against her.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)jkbRN
(850 posts)It's no different for Hillary, moreover, her voting record and campaign contributions line up perfectly.
Disingenuous denial is pitiful.
JPnoodleman
(454 posts)She is the thing,
She is not owned by Wall-Street or the Billionaire parasites, she is them. Made by them, forged by them, molded by them, and undone by them.
sammythecat
(3,568 posts)She's far too wealthy to be "owned". She's is now in that club George Carlin told us about. The one that we ain't in.
I'll say no more. You said it better than I could have. I think you're right on the money.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Only the slimiest politicians are "owned" by special interests. But it's perfectly routine for politicians to grant extra access and special favors to special interests represented by big donors. I think Clinton is one of those.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)They are paying her for services rendered.
She tells them what they want to hear and they give her money.
I think there is a word for that.
Locrian
(4,522 posts)She **IS** the establishment.
Make no mistakes - she sides with wallstreet / corporations at every opportunity. But she's a true believer that it's the way things are done, and the "right" thing to do.
It's much more insidious - a give and take between two birds of a feather.
earthside
(6,960 posts)I can't recall a major Democratic Party candidate for the nomination in recent history so beholden to corporate and special interests.
Those of us who care about our country will never stop talking about it ... as long as Hillary is still in the race anyway.
41 years. $3 billion. Inside the Clinton donor network
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/clinton-money/
More CEOs donate to Clinton than to any GOP candidate
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/20/more-ceos-donate-to-hillary-clinton-than-to-gop.html
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)and not my fault if you don't understand context and slang
Response to boston bean (Original post)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
Broward
(1,976 posts)Response to boston bean (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Some less than others, some more.
That's the reality of our political system.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)They are wasting some serious jack on speeches.
Nanjeanne
(4,974 posts)[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
mcar
(42,372 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Same difference.
GoneOffShore
(17,340 posts)Mrs Weathervane, bought and paid for by Goldman-Sachs and Monsanto.
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)the fat-cat donors and power-brokers.
She lets her nose take her to Power and Money.
I don't believe anyone in the Beltway thinks John Podesta has a coupon box on his kitchen counter.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,018 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)Come on, if she gets millions from the financial sector in campaign contributions, and she favors them, how can you tell me that?
DUbeornot2be
(367 posts)...one look at her list of speaking fees seems to suggest she's not owned by any one of her corporate backers...
...but that she is owned by every one of them.
Listening to hear speeches confirms it!
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)applies them both. although this issue that she is her own mind sounds stuck up, I like teamwork. Not a one person army
mother earth
(6,002 posts)DrBulldog
(841 posts)Because it implies you can't see the obvious.
DVRacer
(707 posts)Made me look up from my tv to make sure that it wasn't Rudy.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)and if you say otherwise you're a RACIST SEXIST REPUBLICAN STOOGE
the people will stand up to the political class one way or another, and their online hall monitors are the first in line
hoosierlib
(710 posts)litlbilly
(2,227 posts)saltpoint
(50,986 posts)He calls bullshit on the OP's assertion.
I could hear the whir of his Rolodex in the background.
Schema Thing
(10,283 posts)Roland99
(53,342 posts)She's owned by multiple anyones.
DOMA, TPP, Goldman Sachs, private insurance industry
Loudestlib
(980 posts)BREAKING: HILLARY POSTPONES FUNDRAISER WITH BAIN CAPITAL
I wonder if Romney will write her a check? She desperately needs it after spending 90% of her budget in Iowa.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-postpones-fundraiser-financial-services-218708#ixzz3zAA1rv16
Hillary Romney Clinton?
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)And if you really don't think she's actually owned by other people or that she serves somebody then you have no concept of reality and how the world works. Please refrain from spreading that naivite. Hillary has more hallmarks of a compromised politician than any democratic candidate in a long time. Do you expect people to deny that people are blackmailed with embarrassing information or that criminal conspiracies don't exist just because it doesn't fit a smiley-faced perception of the world? Hillary is a lot like Rahm Emmanuel and Joe Lieberman...we all want a female president but not at the expense of truth and justice. Remember Condaleeza Rice? Thank God she couldn't run due to her lying to the 911 Committee. And Bill Clinton back in the White House? They are going to bring up those recent plane rides with that pedophile hedge fund manager.
mgmaggiemg
(869 posts)agree
bowens43
(16,064 posts)hillary thinking that she is ethically fit to hold public office is an insult to the American people
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nc4bo
(17,651 posts)Of course we'll be the ones propping their butts up as we drown.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)a G-damn 45 minute speech! When they ask for more Hillary tells em, "to cut it out!"
uponit7771
(90,359 posts)mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)This is very much like saying, "That's a low blow." The purpose is to cast the comment as a morally or ethical affront, when actually the original behavior - Clinton being owned by the finance industry, or changing her positions every day depending on who she needs to pander to - is unethical and immoral.
Basicaly, this post is whining about people being mean to Hillary. If one has to resort to this kind of bullshit to defend their chosen candidate, maybe they should take a hard look at their candidate's behaviour.
Tommymac
(7,263 posts)And she's buying the stairway to heaven
Flying Phoenix
(114 posts)and maxed out donors have supported the theory that she is owned by very hoity toity assholes who wants more of the same.
Good job, for bringing up an issue that Clinton is so weak at.
How's that fundraising going? I heard her numbers were flat again after Iowa. She'll be fundraising more than meeting with the voters for the next few contests because when she's blown out in NH, NV and SC, the spigot will dry up.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)If there's any insulting going on, she's insulting every one of her supporters intelligence.
"I am not a crook".
Hillary Clinton.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)Fearless
(18,421 posts)scottie55
(1,400 posts)They have a golden goose?
Named Sachs?
mckara
(1,708 posts)californiabernin
(421 posts)She's a fighter, that's for sure. And she has done good things.
I will no longer vote for any candidate, however, who takes in millions form Walmart, Golmann, etc., etc.
Yesterday's gone.
ellennelle
(614 posts)i so wish the fact that she has taken so much wall street money were not true.
but it is simply a fact.
it may be insulting, but what do you think, she'll give them the finger? do any of those photos with blankfein look like she is dissing hem?
now, if you honestly believe she is not beholden to the hands that feed her, then i have a bridge over a swamp to sell you, both package deal, very cheap.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)but I don't visit the HRC group or the bernie hate site, so I might be incorrect. Plus it's only february.
If she has full control over her own mind and being, why does she say conflicting things so often? Do you think the bump on the head made her schizophrenic? Are you a doctor? I think that's a pretty rash diagnosis. I think She's just amoral from being a DC schmoozer for 25 years, and planning to be president for 20. Occam's razor is on my side.
azmom
(5,208 posts)Red Oak
(697 posts)She seems to be owned by many.
Nyan
(1,192 posts)who take money from fossile fuel industry -that they may take money from Koch brothers, but they decide their policy platform entirely on their own. That it's just a matter of faith when they deny climate change, if you're gonna imply that her refusing to reinstate Glass-Steagall is just a matter of principle.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Hilarious.
Where are those charts showing which corporations she has taken all that money from?
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)she's a member of it and will do everything in her power to maintain it.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)betsuni
(25,598 posts)I read every comment in this thread and saw nothing to back up the claim. Surely there must be a great deal of evidence for so many people to be so adamant on this topic. Or is it just a feeling? Getting contributions and bribes mixed up? Corporations contribute to politicians all the time, both parties. It's a gamble that sometimes pays off and sometimes doesn't. What, do people think that if Olympic athletes sponsored by corporations don't come back with medals they send around a guy with a baseball bat to teach them a lesson for wasting the corporation's money?
I have a little theory. Perhaps the people who donated money to Obama's campaign for president subconsciously expected him to do exactly what they wanted, that they "owned" him. That's why their disappointment and anger was so strong, why they came to hate him.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)betsuni
(25,598 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)betsuni
(25,598 posts)LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)betsuni
(25,598 posts)I'd take anybody's money and do what I want. They are the suckers, not me. A good politician or business person would do the same thing.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)islandmkl
(5,275 posts)she's like the 'Club Pro' at the Wall Street Country Club...
4dsc
(5,787 posts)oh damn that's funny.
cali
(114,904 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)to decry..those perversion/inversion deals she spoke of last night, she takes money
from those who benefited from those same deals. Who forces her to do that?
Why anyone would support such a candidate is beyond my understanding.
alarimer
(16,245 posts)Wall Street, corporate wholly-owned subsidiary.
Keep denying reality and when or if she's elected, expect more corporate shilling.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)LOL
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)She's beholden. Owned.