Democrat Hillary Clinton, at the first official event of her presidential campaign, spelled out the ideas that she said will be at the heart of her campaign.
"I want to be the champion who goes to bat for Americans in four big areas," she told four students and three educators at a roundtable staged in an automotive technology classroom at a community college.
It was the first time Clinton had laid out specific campaign themes since she announced on Sunday in a short video that she's in the 2016 race for the Oval Office.
"We need to build the economy of tomorrow, not yesterday," she said, as a handpicked audience of 20 and about 60 reporters looked on. "We need to strengthen families and communities because that's where it all starts.
"And we need to fix the dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if that takes a constitutional amendment," she said. "And we need to protect our country from threats that we see and the ones that are on the horizon. So I'm here in Iowa to begin a conversation about how we do that."
Clinton also added:
"There's something wrong when American workers keep getting more productive, as they have, and as I just saw a few minutes ago is very possible because of education and skills training, but that productivity is not matched in their paychecks," said Clinton who took a tour of the college.
"And there's something wrong when hedge fund managers pay lower tax rates than nurses or the truckers I saw on I-80 as I was driving here over the last two days," she said. "There's something wrong when students and their families have to go deeply into debt to be able to get the education and skills they need in order to make the best of their own lives."
Yesterday some pundits were suggesting that Hillary was channeling Elizabeth Warren while others were suggesting that this is who she has been all along.
In my opinion channeling Warren is not a bad idea, because I think that ultimately she really needs to win Warren, and those who support her, over in order to really have a shot at decisively winning this election.
And remember she has to win it decisively or the Republicans will try to steal it from her like they did back in 2000.
I'm already gloating over how Sally Quinn will sulk over the next administration... if, heaven forbid, the GOP gets it, just too tacky for words, darling.
ReplyDeleteBut if Hillary--who unaccountably failed to kiss Sally's ring immediately on arrival as FLOTUS in '92 and remained on Mrs. Bradlee's sh*t list for the next eight years--wins this thing, well, oooh! Oooh! Maybe Sally can take a leaf from the Palin play book and start throwing cans?
I'm becoming more impressed with Hillary as I'm learning about history. Her campaign framework is consistent with issues she's been fighting for since her days in Arkansas. This isn't a new Hillary.
ReplyDeleteabout *her* history
DeleteHilary has spent her entire career in politics. Hiring her is stepping backwards. It does not matter red blue rep dem. I personally want some strong men and women ready to get it done. And done means EVERYTHING off balance, unjust, unfair, unethical and un-American out. Start with zit united. income inequality, tax percent, ed, health, and move on to cures, science, exploration and discovery. We are now about 100 yrs behind. The do nothing congress must be replace with the BOOM BOOM BOOMERS CONGRESS shake it up and get it done. No to Hilary. No more wasted years.
ReplyDeleteWhat a load.
DeleteThe nominee you want does not exist. Your choice is between the Democratic nominee and the Republican nominee. Most likely Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. She is no great shakes, true. But she has some pluses in her past, and has future possibilities. The Republican field, however, to a man (or to a person if you take Carly Fiorina seriously - I don't), promotes the polar opposite of the positions you favor. If you don't understand that then you really have some self-education to perform.
DeleteNo to Hilary, Yes to Hillary.
DeleteI totally agree. I live for the day that Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders announce their candidacies, but I'm MUCH more for Warren than Sanders.
Delete10:45AM - you are for neither Sarah.
DeleteEven if it is, putting a woman, any woman, in the White House is progress.
DeleteLet Hillary shatter than ceiling so the Oval Office doors are open to future women.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous12:44 PM
Hilary has spent her entire career in politics. Hiring her is stepping backwards
****
Hiring WHO then? Fuckabee, Frothy, Eddie munster?
GIVE her a FLIPPIN' chance.
You are prob a anti-Hillary troll anyway what you say means no-Thing!
Go Hillary Go! Let's face it, a politician who is as inspiring, game-changing & all-around great as President Obama comes around once in a lifetime. I'll take competent, caring & decent, and Hillary fits. Who else could (almost certainly) beat whatever Bozo the Republican clown car barfs up?
ReplyDeleteDon't say Elizabeth Warren - she's NOT RUNNING. And we need more like her in the Senate, not fewer. I don't have to love everything about HRC to know that she is several orders of magnitude better than the Republican. She's got my vote & any time I can find to work on her campaign.
The alternative is unthinkable.
Thank you, cckids. I, too, value competent, caring & decent. I'd add brilliant, hard-working and dedicated to public service.
DeleteIf not Warren, then Sanders will do. I'm not excited about Hillary. I don't think she's competent, she's certainly not decent and the only people she cares about are herself, Chelsea, Charlotte and a few others.
Delete10:47
DeleteRubbish.
Someone who claims to be a champion is usually someone who is a demonstrated winner. In all her political career she won only one office and many, myself included, believe that her senate seat was given to her. "Champion" is hardly the word that comes to mind. I would be more convinced if she wanted to be the nation's granny.
ReplyDeleteSo who gifted a senate seat to Hillary in 2000 and 2006? How did that work? If she isn't a "demonstrated winner," then which "demonstrated winner" would you like to see run?
DeleteWhat an utterly sexist comment.
DeleteChampioning a cause has nothing to do with being a winner. Champion = winner, but championing (verb) is entirely different.
DeleteWhen I look at the history of the causes she has championed, as First Lady, senator, and SoS, along with her voting record which led to her rating as the 11th most liberal Senator, and the causes she is championing as a presidential candidate, then yes, I would choose to vote for her over any republican, and over any unelectable Democrat.
PS New York voters voted her into the Senate not once, but twice. Who are you suggesting "gave" her the senate seat?
2:11 PM
DeleteRWinger pretending to be on the left in an attempt to diminish Clinton. They never offer up an electable alternative on the left. It's one of their favorite tactics. There is another one at 12:44 PM.
Hillary Clinton: Supreme Court Should Rule In Favor Of Same-Sex Marriage
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/15/hillary-clinton-gay-marriage-supreme-court_n_7072086.html
Check this out! And I'll bet he's not alone.
ReplyDeletehttp://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/james-webb-tea-partier-obamacare-hillary
http://wonkette.com/582913/even-this-cuddly-teabagger-dude-might-vote-for-hillary-so-he-can-keep-his-beloved-obamacare
Seems for real. The commenters are pretty supportive too.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNfo0o7ay7A
It would be a great big (HUGE) boost to Hillary's campaign if it became known that Hillary and Elizabeth Warren have been sitting down and putting their heads together - and that Elizabeth Warren wholeheartedly endorses Hillary Clinton for President.
ReplyDeleteThere will be no doubt that Warren will endorse Clinton. And, it's too early.
DeleteThere were also articles about their lengthy meeting, were there not?
She's ALREADY getting caught with her pure AstroTurf campaign lies. 'Ordinary' people in casual campaign stops are really professionals pre-vetted by her staff for an hour and half before being allowed to 'speak frankly' for the cameras.
ReplyDelete...Clinton's nascent campaign has carefully coordinated her image as a spontaneous, handshaking populist in her first days as a candidate, posing with Pennsylvanians at a gas station and venturing into an Ohio Chipotle restaurant for lunch.
When no one recognized the former first lady – she was wearing sunglasses – the campaign leaked information to The New York Times so its reporters could get security-camera footage to prove she had tried to mingle with voters.
Scripting supposedly off-the-cuff appearances is common in presidential politics but could hurt Clinton especially hard since her gonzo road-trip journey to America's broad midwest is designed to counter her image as cold, calculating and politically venomous.
And planting party insiders in place of typical Iowans won't go over well in the Hawkeye State, where pressing the flesh and collecting caucus votes is a quadrennial full-contact sport.
Clinton's campaign has already taken heat for depicting at least three people in her campaign launch video as 'everyday' Americans who were actually partisans with political connections
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3040482/Campaign-staff-DROVE-ordinary-Iowans-Hillary-s-campaign-stop-including-health-care-lobbyist-training-Obama-campaign-intern-Biden-chauffeur.html
Dammit! WHY is she DOING THIS? Why can't she just be genuine and real and honest and straightforward? She is just shooting herself in the foot with this kind of nonsense. Makes me mad and sad that she has to resort to this kind of thing. She is not starting out well at all. It's a GOP angle to 'bus in' people and stage shit like this, WHY IS SHE DOING THIS?????
DeleteGee, ya think?
DeleteI'm personally waiting for S'error's "unconventional" attempt. It will bring back the days of my youth watching Hee Haw.
4:08 PM, they ALL do it. Genuine, real, and straightforward?! I'm pushing 60 and those days have long passed. Rather sad that the Daily Mail has to do the honest journalism that this country refuses to.
DeleteIf only the pee puddle would wake up to how they're being taken in. They describe Queen Heifer in those same three words.
The Daily Mail is the UK version of Fox News. If anything it's even less interested in accuracy than Fox. It's like a combination of Fox News and the National Examiner. I've read many lies in its uncritically reported right-wing "news" that it lifts from a variety of right-wing sites that make shit up, so I take anything it says with a huge grain of salt.
DeleteThe bottom line is not, 'who is at the truck-stop with Hillary?' The bottom line is, 'what has Hillary done in the past (a lot, helping a lot of people, not just in America but around the world), and what will Hillary do in the future (even more)?' People focusing on who was at the truck-stop/taco joint are playing blemish (read Eric Bern's book, Games People Play), NIGYYSOB, and involving themselves in other neurotic past-times.
DeleteThe last sentence is one of the most important - they WILL try to steal it unless it is SO lopsided that they can't. Koch suckers
ReplyDeleteShe better be well over 10% in every place a Diebold machine is used for voting.
DeleteEveryplace else better have very vigilant observers.
I think she's doing a great job. What made me ill was some jackass toppled her dad's gravestone in Scranton. I don't give a dam how someone feels about a candidate, but screwing around with a dead relative's resting place isn't cool nor funny in any way.
ReplyDeleteHillary's dad was a very conservative republican, perhaps even a Bircher. The idiots that toppled his headstone have no clue about who he was. Hillary started out as a conservative republican: a Goldwater Girl delegate to the republican convention in 1964.
DeleteI read about that.
DeleteHow truly juvenile.
Shrillary is a loser candidate, but all the blind love is so very amusing.
ReplyDeleteYou really do live in topsy-turvy world. It would be so very amusing if it wasn't so sad. For your information, the shrill one is the vacuous airhead from Wasilla Sarah Palin. Palin has the gravitas of a helium balloon.
DeleteWhat I find is the saddest aspect we are already seeing, is the ugly shit coming out of the mouths of WOMEN about Ms. Clinton.
ReplyDeleteThis could well be the first and ONLY time a woman has a shot at the U.S. Presidency--so for a woman to allow herself to be manipulated by a MALE into rooting against her sister, is absolutely terrible.
It would be one thing, if the other party had a candidate with an ounce of credibility--but everyone KNOWS they are all complete buffoons, likely to start World War Three as their first act in office.
This election is important, for a number of reasons. No man can watch which lever you pull in the voting booth!
My Mother (who has been a registered Republican since Eisenhower) says she's not voting for Hillary because she "doesn't like her".
DeleteThat's a great reason.
I asked which of the Republican clown car would get her vote? Rand Paul? Ted Cruz? Marco Rubio? Donald Trump? You know Cruz and Rubio are hispanic, right? (She doesn't like the Mexicans either.) She's going to shit kittens if she's forced to vote for Cruz or Rubio, which she is.
Yeah, I think she voted McCain/Palin. My Dad is an independent that leans right. But even he voted for Obama. He wanted to vote for Hillary. So this time he will. So he'll cancel her out and I'll vote Hillary. That's 2 to 1.
Hillary's husband Bill supported NAFTA and the draining of American jobs it created. I haven't heard her come out against Trans Pacific which will be worse. She is also a war hawk and voted for the invasion of Iraq. If she's that stupid, she has no place as President. And if she isn't that stupid, she's the lap dog of the same people Bush was and she doesn't deserve to be President.
ReplyDeleteGet your heads on straight.
And an electable alternative you would vote for would be?
DeleteHillary is not Bill. Liberal Democrats, including Hillary, opposed NAFTA primarily because it could take jobs away from American workers. 70% of Congress voted to authorize the Iraq war based on the information provided by the Bush administration (you remember WMD's don't you?). Your 'argument' is disingenuous.
DeleteBill isn't running.
DeleteBill isn't even campaigning.
Vote for Bernie Sanders. I believe he was one of two congressmen that didn't vote for the war.