George Soros Backs Hillary Clinton For President In 2016
Source: Reuters
WASHINGTON, Oct 24 (Reuters) - Billionaire financier George Soros, a major Democratic donor, is backing an effort to persuade former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to run for president in 2016, a spokesman said on Thursday.
Soros, 83, has pledged $25,000 to political action committee Ready For Hillary, the largest and best-funded independent group backing a potential Clinton candidacy. The wife of former President Bill Clinton would be widely viewed as the favorite for the Democratic presidential nomination if she decides to run.
"His support for Ready for Hillary is an extension of his long-held belief in the power of grassroots organizing," said Soros spokesman Michael Vachon.
Soros' pledge puts him on the PAC's National Finance Council, along with several other major Democratic donors and officials, the group said.
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/24/george-soros-hillary-clinton_n_4157242.html
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Soros is a financial criminal. Just because he uses his ill-gotten gains to support supposed Democrats doesn't make him any less a criminal.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)Soros supported him too.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)And since I would NEVER not vote, or ever vote Republican, there was obviously no choice but to vote for Obama in 2012.
And if we end up stuck with Hillary Clinton as the Dem candidate in 2016, I'll vote for her, too. Because I have always voted Dem for my entire voting life - which began in 1970. But I don't have to be happy about it, and I don't have to not fight like hell against her in the primaries. Which I will do.
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)And who was it in 2000 and 2004?
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Because, you know, that's who I chose to fuck.
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)And that means EVERY election - "off-year" elections, local elections, primary elections - any elections that ever took place since I was 20 years old. I have voted in all of them, and I have always voted Democratic.
No matter where I lived, the first thing I did was register to vote. And I've always voted for Democrats. So take your snark elsewhere.
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)BodieTown
(147 posts)...but your supposedly perfect snark is little more than tiresome.
It's not even a gotcha, but you seem to think it was.
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)Its not too complicated try to follow....someone is talking about past support voting in a thread about Presidential candidates and don't want to name them. I will just hazard a guess they supported total losers like Nader and other Green Party candidates. They really aren't a democrat despite their claims.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)BootinUp
(47,209 posts)Psephos
(8,032 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)and you can jam your loyalty oaths up there as well.
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)so I wont alert on this. Any more assinine posts you want to defend?
frylock
(34,825 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)BootinUp
(47,209 posts)you have some choices, one of which is you can block/ignore them.
7962
(11,841 posts)Sometimes DU is like a 10th grade bathroom
moriah
(8,311 posts)Though if her choice was John Edwards, "fucking" had a great deal to do with why his presidential aspirations are likely shattered.
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)political events and all. So sorry the language offended you.
moriah
(8,311 posts)I know most people on here remember the primary battles between Hillary and Obama more specifically, but when Edwards was in the race, he had a sizable following here as well. And there were others.
It would have been ironic if her "fucking first choice" had, in fact, been out fucking. (Edit to add, doubt I'm actually using that word properly.)
juajen
(8,515 posts)that you can use it anywhere for anything and it reverberates. The most useful word in the world, and the religious right appears to hate it. Can't figure out why, as it does not denigrate God or Jesus in the slightest. Aw well, go figure! When I'm mad, it is my first choice, and I let it fly. It is very easy to tell when I am mad.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)BootinUp
(47,209 posts)But his political stances in the last 10 years have been correct from my point of view, he supported Dems during all that time. No good reason to reject his support now except if you are too stupid to want to win.
coldmountain
(802 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)... you make a good point. It would be more efficient, I suppose, to not engage in a long and costly primary.
-Laelth
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Congress is where all the power is and we need to give Democrats healthy majorities in both.
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)BethMomDem
(70 posts)Whodathunk?
coldmountain
(802 posts)Hardly one of the worst capitalists
BethMomDem
(70 posts)Many people, particularly lower income families, suffered because of his actions.
coldmountain
(802 posts)BethMomDem
(70 posts)Collapsing the currency helped NO ONE.
The currency collapse was not inevitable he didn't need to continually devalue the currency, fighting the Uk's effort to prop it up. However thatcher was not going to win the next election, NO MATTER WHAT!
The working families, many of which lost their jobs, also lost much of their savings.
But if you still think working families were helped, which isn't the reality at all, what about the effect globally? Charities that depended on England felt quite a pinch. A COLLAPSE OF THE POUND DID IN FACT LEAD TO DEATHS DUE TO HUNGER IN WHAT WERE THEN CALLED "THIRD WORLD NATIONS". It is no different than IF HE HAD SHORTED THE USD, imagine every food program worldwide that depends on the U.S. government for funds FOR MEDICINE, FOOD, CHILDCARE ETC!!!!!!!!!
But hey, since it's hunger linked to speculation IT ISN'T REALLY A CRIME, RIGHT? At least that seems to be the way bankers think today.
The Soros fund attempted on Oct. 9 to send out false or misleading signals about a securitys supply and demand or its share price and short sold OTP shares, the regulator, known as PSZAF, said in a statement late yesterday. The short selling caused the shares to drop 14 percent in the final 30 minutes of trade, the regulator said.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=allAm0oQIOlI
France didnt violate Soross rights in punishing him criminally for trading on inside information about Societe Generale SA in spite of the market regulators conclusion that its rules were unclear, the Strasbourg, France-based court said.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-06/soros-loses-human-rights-appeal-against-insider-trading-case.html
The British pound was devalued, launching a tsunami of financial turmoil from Tokyo to Rome. When it was over, millions of hardworking Britons confronted their diminished savings, while Soros counted his gains. He had personally made nearly $2 billion on the catastrophe.
http://www.keywiki.org/index.php/George_Soros
In 2006 Soros purchased 2 million shares of Halliburton.
Soros' hedge fund bought $312.6 worth of shares in MONSANTO in 2010
Nihil
(13,508 posts)There again, from your other posts, you do ...
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)if the teabaggers win so be it!
BethMomDem
(70 posts)she will continue to take lobbyists money because ya know lobbyists represent unions and teachers. Meanwhile one of her biggest contributors has been Goldman Sachs.
BootinUp
(47,209 posts)Dem that can win, period.
BethMomDem
(70 posts)Strengthen social safety programs
End invasions of sovereign nations, bring troops home from 80% of bases globally
Stop doing business with countries with egregious human rights violations(Saudi Arabia, Pakistan etc until democratic reforms free from foreign influence are enacted)
Legalization and decriminalization of drugs
End the racial disparity within the Justice system
End subsidization of private education
End corporate subsidies
End Nafta, rework WTO prioritizing labor rights over corporate rights
Enact a Liveable wage
I've voted, and watched America become a laughing stock. I watched a Nobel winner destroy Libya, Drone kids in Pakistan etc. I'm done.
You want to vote for whoever you think can win, you have that right.
I have the right to vote for the person best suited to run the nation. I'm done voting for the lesser of two evils.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)Most important thing to me when voting in national elections is getting a Dem elected. I never want to waste my primary vote and end up with a Republican in the White House.
I guess I'm of the mind, that we need to hold our own president and congress members feet to the fire after they are elected.
BethMomDem
(70 posts)and support the MIC and Banks.
No, I just can't do that anymore. When the U.S. is taken to the world court I want to know my conscience is clean.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)BethMomDem
(70 posts)I'm actually put off by the conclusion that somehow not voting for a candidate I don't like is "enabling" a republican victory. That line of thinking......................it's a form of pressure and.......well I feel like an attempt is being made to manipulate my constitutional right to vote for whoever I believe is best suited to represent our interests. Of course I'm not saying you have an agenda, or are purposely attempting to manipulate or guilt trip me, nonetheless no one should have to feel that way.
I'm going to write in Bernie Sanders, and I refuse to feel guilty about that. I will feel proud when I write his name in. I guess that is what matters to me. When my children are grown I would hope they follow my example and vote according to their conscience. I don't want to tell my children that I voted for a guy who did business with Saudi Arabia or who murdered civilians in Iran or Pakistan simply because I didn't want a republican to win.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)They gave him far more money thaN they gave Hillary and McCain. Also, do you realize that there are quite a few former G.S. employees who work in the administration?
I'm tired of this constant labeling of Hillary as some corporate shill as if Obama is somehow the epitome of liberalism. Give me a break!!!
BethMomDem
(70 posts)Please do, then reword your response accordingly.
End invasions of sovereign nations, bring troops home from 80% of bases globally
Stop doing business with countries with egregious human rights violations(Saudi Arabia, Pakistan etc until democratic reforms free from foreign influence are enacted)
Legalization and decriminalization of drugs
End the racial disparity within the Justice system
End subsidization of private education
End corporate subsidies
End Nafta, rework WTO prioritizing labor rights over corporate rights
Enact a Liveable wage
I've voted, and watched America become a laughing stock. I watched a Nobel winner destroy Libya, Drone kids in Pakistan etc. I'm done.
You want to vote for whoever you think can win, you have that right.
I have the right to vote for the person best suited to run the nation. I'm done voting for the lesser of two evils.
TBF
(32,118 posts)we've all liked Hillary for a long time but we thought Obama had a better chance to win. I think her popularity has gone up though with the Secretary of State position.
It'll be interesting to see if she really wants to do it though. I know she did in 2008, but that was 5 years ago.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)Furthermore, I think that any Democrat would have won that year. We'll see how things turn out in 2106.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)BootinUp
(47,209 posts)in your opinion?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)coldmountain
(802 posts)coldmountain
(802 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)It could be her campaign slogan.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)the only people who can make it in office are those backed by billionaires.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)See Jerry Brown vs. Meg Whitman. There are others.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)Beacool
(30,253 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Hillary resembles a DLCer, too. That being said, if she wins the primaries I will vote for her.
frylock
(34,825 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)No matter how corporate they may seem, they are better than Republicans. This country is not going to elect to the Presidency anyone who would fit your description. I might like to see such a President too, but knowing it's unrealistic, I'd rather deal in reality.
I don't want the Republicans to have the WH in 2017. Or Congress, etc.
djean111
(14,255 posts)Or a reason to like Hillary for the job if one does not.
PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)Sheldon Adelson gave $100 million out last year. A hundred fucking million.
Soros is a creep and I'm not a Hillary fan but this is cheap.
Cha
(297,935 posts)PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)My point is that their guys are really dedicated.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)i guess it was inevitable. hillary is the anointed one.
TekGryphon
(430 posts)That was in 2012 alone.
And you're calling $25,000 "big money".
I feel like they should print out your post and paste it in philosophy classrooms as a lesson in false equivalency.
avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)She is corporatist. She is DLC.
No thanks.
brooklynite
(94,916 posts)Certainly more fun than actually finding a candidate to meet their exacting specifications who WANTS to run.
I had dinner last night with a DNC member. He agreed with me that 1) Hillary is very likely to run and 2) if she does, everyone else (including Biden) will get out of the way.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)I've noticed a desire for her to run in 2016 that's greater than in 2008. The leadership of the party wants her to run mainly for two reasons:
1) They want to win in 2016 and they think that Hillary has the popularity and gravitas to go the whole way. In other words, she's a political rock star. The party has only 3 larger than life stars: Obama and the Clintons. Out of those three, only Hillary can run in 2016.
2) Many have expressed a wish that our nominee should be a woman. That it's about time that over half of the population be represented.
bread_and_roses
(6,335 posts)Since this woman finds the prospect of a cluster-bomb defender who is both a woman - and a mother, for goddess' sake - to be about as far from representing me as is possible.
leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)Last edited Fri Oct 25, 2013, 11:30 AM - Edit history (1)
navarth
(5,927 posts)It would be difficult to hold my nose firmly enough to ignore the smell. That being said...if the choice is between her and Ted Cruz or some other such Repig creature....meh. I'm so sick of the lesser of two evils. We'll see.
Rebellious Republican
(5,029 posts)"is backing an effort to persuade" Title is very misleading.
flamingdem
(39,335 posts)joe_sixpack
(721 posts)Both on the right and left , this fatalistic notion that she will be the next President. Should the Democratic Party just save money and cancel the primaries? Might help avoiding the inevitable mudslinging as well.
NBachers
(17,170 posts)and sends their blood pressure into the danger zone. I'm all for that.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)And NO again.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Whether it be Soros, or Pelosi, etc. Guess we can cancel those primaries.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)How soon will Carville and other surrogates be sent out to knife other potential Democratic candidates in the back in return for another shot at The Big Time?
That entire bunch likes the idea of power more than anything else, including what is best for the country.
Funny how the 'Inevitability' meme failed once before, yet they dead set on trying it yet again. Sounds to me like a total lack of new ideas.
I suppose when you can't run your candidate on the issues and win, you have to tell everyone else to shut up and accept it as a done deal.
brooklynite
(94,916 posts)...because those fresh faces are showing no signs of getting organized.
coldmountain
(802 posts)Better to have influence over a Democratic woman POTUS than have Tea Party cavemen running things and be on the outside looking in and have no power at all.
LongTomH
(8,636 posts).....having a Democratic-controlled Congress with a strong progressive element trumps concern over the Presidential race.
I would like to see a strong Progressive in the debates to articulate some really traditional Democratic, pro-worker, pro-environment issues.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)It just goes to show how arrogant some people are.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Yet people can still give their opinions.
ourfuneral
(150 posts)Gee, George, don't bankrupt yourself!
Thucydides
(212 posts)Never to soon to start speculating!
TBF
(32,118 posts)and I plan to be working on his campaign. By that time, god willing, Texas will be blue.
Thucydides
(212 posts)Last edited Sat Oct 26, 2013, 09:32 PM - Edit history (1)
Florida is purple right now, however if I have anything to do with it, it will be blue by then. I am hoping for a Skye, Star, Sage, Storm or Stone Grayson in the far reaching future of Florida. Lets start campaigning now for both, never to early.
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)And, assuming he wants it, I would have no problem supporting him if either Hillary decides to not run, or after her second term is up.
Thucydides
(212 posts)2014 should be the most important calling at this point. We have a real chance to slay the GOP in 2014, rather than be concerned about a distraction that has not materialized yet.
Aldo Leopold
(685 posts)And Warren an historically great VP, followed by an even better president herself!
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Though that is marginally less newsworthy.
Pterodactyl
(1,687 posts)I think I'll put my support elsewhere.
Nihil
(13,508 posts)Just look at the crap on this thread.
On one side you have the "Hilary is a saint" people and on the other there are
the "Anyone else who isn't an obscenely rich candidate ... oh ... who's left?".
As the man said: "The best democracy money can buy" ...