2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumRelease of Clinton’s Wall Street Speeches Could End Her Candidacy for President
Release of Clintons Wall Street Speeches Could End Her Candidacy for President04/15/2016 * by Seth Abrasion * HuffPo
The reason you and I will never see the transcripts of Hillary Clintons speeches to Wall Street fat-cats and the reason shes established a nonsensical condition for their release, that being an agreement by members of another party, involved in a separate primary, to do the same is that if she were ever to release those transcripts, it could end her candidacy for president.
Please dont take my word for it, though.
Nor even that of the many neutral observers in the media who are deeply troubled by Clintons lack of transparency as to these well-compensated closed-door events a lack of transparency that has actually been a hallmark of her career in politics.
Nor do we even need to take Clintons word for it as we could certainly argue that her insistence that none of these transcripts ever be seen by the public is itself a confession that her words would cause significant trauma to her presidential bid.
In fact, it appears theyd cause enough trauma that Clinton would rather publicly stonewall to the point of being conspicuously, uncomfortably evasive in public debate after public debate, to endure damning editorial after damning editorial, and to leave thousands and thousands of voters further doubting her honesty and integrity, all to ensure that no one outside Goldman Sachs, and certainly no voter who wasnt privy to those closed-door speeches, ever hears a word of what she said in them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/release-of-clintons-wall-street-speeches_b_9698632.html
dchill
(38,442 posts)Everyone knows it.
Too much baggage and unanswered questions from her past, present and future resulting in her terrible trustworthy poll numbers should be enough for the DNC to disqualify her.
But of course she has the DNC in her back pocket.
She doesn't have an ounce of integrity and her avarice to stuff her pockets at any cost is disgusting.
dchill
(38,442 posts)Egocentric, monomaniacal and narcissistic. What a trifecta of human failing. She cares not one whit for her country OR her party. Two kinds of voters I'll never understand - the ones who believe her, and the ones who don't, but will vote for her anyway.
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)Godhumor
(6,437 posts)Always fun when we get both SA and HA columns on the same day.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)First-hand experience. She's not dumb, but she reminds me of my freshman year roommate...he wasn't smart either, he just stayed up all night studying to break even. Some people are smart...others are hard-working to make up for not being smart.
Hillary's the second.
It's better than being GWB who is also not smart and doesn't give a fuck about his performance so makes no effort to make up for being a dunce.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)She's determined that not releasing the transcripts, and enduring uncomfortable questions about them, won't damage her as much as releasing them.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)In October when it can do the most damage.
QC
(26,371 posts)When Hillary Clinton spoke to Goldman Sachs executives and technology titans at a summit in Arizona in October of 2013, she spoke glowingly of the work the bank was doing raising capital and helping create jobs, according to people who saw her remarks.
Clinton, who received $225,000 for her appearance, praised the diversity of Goldmans workforce and the prominent roles played by women at the blue-chip investment bank and the tech firms present at the event. She spent no time criticizing Goldman or Wall Street more broadly for its role in the 2008 financial crisis.
It was pretty glowing about us, one person who watched the event said. Its so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/clinton-speeches-218969
tex-wyo-dem
(3,190 posts)Language in those speeches that would be very damaging to her in this climate of anti-wall st.
Think about it, she's not going to accept a massive payment and then give a speech criticizing GS for their role in the 2008 financial collapse.
QC
(26,371 posts)to come and rail at them and call down divine fire on them.
I'm sure the speeches are very chummy and flattering, and that's not good in the present climate.
cureautismnow
(1,676 posts)of a speech or two and would release them before Nov. I'm sure they're just itching for a little payback after the secret 47% Romney speech transmission.
elias7
(3,991 posts)I'm wondering why not a single person has spoken out, either either to support or refute the chief concerns here.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Too perfect for that dim-witted B-Bro, HA Goodman wannabe.
eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)If she wins big in NY, there is absolutely no reason to release them ever, since that should end Sander's hopes. Her campaign is looking at the big picture.
If Sanders comes close or wins in NY, then she might want to think about it, but not after some polling to see if it makes any difference to the average voter. I can tell you that no one in the lunch room at work today had ever heard of this issue. Being a politician is about more than just the obvious, it's about strategy.