2016 Postmortem

NWCorona

(8,541 posts) Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:27 PM Mar 2016

HILLARY CLINTON PLEDGES TO GET RID OF FRACKING, THEN ATTENDS FUNDRAISER FROM INVESTMENT FIRM SUPPORT

"But critics aren’t buying the about face Hillary Clinton seems to have done on fracking. Bruce Bullock, director of the Maguire Energy Institute at Southern Methodist University, said her stance against fracking is seen as empty rhetoric.
“Secretary Clinton’s answer is essentially campaign hyperbole, and meant to appease her environmental constituency,” he told the Dallas Morning News (via Fortune). “In reality, it has little substance to it.” "

And the best part.

"Clinton is also having a difficult time backing up her tough stance on fracking. This week, just days after taking what seemed to be a hard-line stance against fracking, she attended a $575-a-plate fundraising lunch from an investment firm that invests heavily in fracking."

http://www.inquisitr.com/2868980/hillary-clinton-pledges-to-get-rid-of-fracking-then-attends-fundraiser-from-investment-firm-supporting-fracking/

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

HILLARY CLINTON PLEDGES TO GET RID OF FRACKING, THEN ATTENDS FUNDRAISER FROM INVESTMENT FIRM SUPPORT (Original Post) NWCorona Mar 2016 OP

Fracking is not going anywhere. Buzz Clik Mar 2016 #1

Of course it isn't. unfortunately NWCorona Mar 2016 #2

Well whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #4

you're responding to a different argument ibegurpard Mar 2016 #9

Those who donated takes their chances. Nitram Mar 2016 #14

Those who believe industry money will have no influence whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #15

She already confirmed that donations don't affect her scscholar Mar 2016 #16

For frack's sake Mufaddal Mar 2016 #3

Hillary probably thinks that because the Republicans are for it NWCorona Mar 2016 #5

And the same will be true for most of her flipflops: Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #12

Can we ever trust her again? Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #6

I did back in '08 - sure 840high Mar 2016 #13

Same here. n/t Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #18

Honesty... tk2kewl Mar 2016 #7

this is why she loses ibegurpard Mar 2016 #8

that's how Rahm won--tell the South Side the North Side has it out for them, MisterP Mar 2016 #11

Recommended. H2O Man Mar 2016 #10

K&R felix_numinous Mar 2016 #17

F#ck fracking and the lobbyists it rides in on. AtomicKitten Mar 2016 #19

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)

1. Fracking is not going anywhere.

Reply to NWCorona (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:37 PM

Mar 2016

NWCorona

(8,541 posts)

2. Of course it isn't. unfortunately

Reply to Buzz Clik (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:40 PM

Mar 2016

But during this lull in prices is the time to regulate as much as you can to protect the environment. Hillary IMHO isn't the one who'll do that tho.

whatchamacallit

(15,558 posts)

4. Well

Reply to Buzz Clik (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:53 PM

Mar 2016

that was instructive.

It might be around for a while but it's not sustainable. Hillary doesn't mind selling the future for gain in the present.

ibegurpard

(16,685 posts)

9. you're responding to a different argument

Reply to Buzz Clik (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:09 PM

Mar 2016

She SAYS she will do away with fracking. Then takes money from frackers. Casting doubt upon what she SAYS she will do.

Nitram

(22,791 posts)

14. Those who donated takes their chances.

Reply to ibegurpard (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:22 PM

Mar 2016

whatchamacallit

(15,558 posts)

15. Those who believe industry money will have no influence

Reply to Nitram (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:25 PM

Mar 2016

take their chances.

scscholar

(2,902 posts)

16. She already confirmed that donations don't affect her

Reply to ibegurpard (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:25 PM

Mar 2016

She confirmed it.

Mufaddal

(1,021 posts)

3. For frack's sake

Reply to NWCorona (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:46 PM

Mar 2016

The Intercept has this as well:

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/09/hillary-clinton-wants-to-regulate-fracking-but-still-accepts-a-lot-of-fracking-money/

Many of Clinton’s largest fundraisers are lobbyists for oil and gas corporations. Some of her largest contribution bundlers are lobbyists representing Chevron, Cheniere Energy, and TransCanada — all companies that use fracking.

Prior to announcing her candidacy, Clinton also received $990,000 for speeches she made to the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce — a heavy investor in TransCanada and the Keystone XL pipeline.

After a rally in Iowa last December, Clinton claimed to be unaware she ever received donations from fossil fuel companies. “Well, I don’t know that I ever have. I’m not exactly one of their favorites,” she said. “Have I? OK, well, I’ll check on that. They certainly haven’t made that much of an impression on me if I don’t even know it.”

An investigation by Mother Jones found that Hillary Clinton personally lobbied for U.S. fracking rights overseas as secretary of state. Speaking at a 2010 conference of foreign ministers, Clinton said, “I know that in some places [it] is controversial, but [shale] gas is the cleanest fossil fuel available for power today.”

It's not that complicated. Just stop hurting yourself. Also, does she think this wouldn't be raised against her in the general election?

NWCorona

(8,541 posts)

5. Hillary probably thinks that because the Republicans are for it

Reply to Mufaddal (Reply #3)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:56 PM

Mar 2016

It wouldn't be brought up but she'd be wrong.

Ferd Berfel

(3,687 posts)

12. And the same will be true for most of her flipflops:

Reply to Mufaddal (Reply #3)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:19 PM

Mar 2016

- Protecting Social Security and Medicare

- Against NAFTA AND TPP

- etc, etc etc;

The elite know she's just barking at the moon to get elected. None of them are worried about her.

They are very worried about Bernie!

Betty Karlson

(7,231 posts)

6. Can we ever trust her again?

Reply to NWCorona (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:56 PM

Mar 2016

Did we ever trust her? If so, we did it by ill-informed assumption.

840high

(17,196 posts)

13. I did back in '08 - sure

Reply to Betty Karlson (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:20 PM

Mar 2016

don't trust her now.

Betty Karlson

(7,231 posts)

18. Same here. n/t

Reply to 840high (Reply #13)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 02:52 AM

Mar 2016

tk2kewl

(18,133 posts)

7. Honesty...

Reply to NWCorona (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:02 PM

Mar 2016

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511453394

ibegurpard

(16,685 posts)

8. this is why she loses

Reply to NWCorona (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:07 PM

Mar 2016

And other Democrats who take money from constituencies in direct opposition to the politicians' supposed policy positions. The shrinking numbers of Democratic faithful don't care but everyone else does.