2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumClinton - "To be honest I wasn't -- I wasn't committed to running" in 2013.
In the CNN town forum this week, Clinton had the following exchange with Anderson Cooper:
"You were paid $675,000 for three speeches. Was that a mistake? I mean was that a bad error in judgment?" Cooper asked.
"Look. I made speeches to lots of groups. I told them what I thought. I answered questions," Clinton said Wednesday night at a Democratic forum moderated by CNN.
"But did you have to be paid $675,000?" Cooper pressed the Democratic presidential hopeful.
"Well, I don't know. That's what they offered," Clinton responded.
Attempting to explain away the Wall Street speeches, Clinton said she didn't know whether she was running for president again.
"To be honest I wasn't -- I wasn't committed to running," Clinton said about the circumstances and timing of the speeches. "I didn't know whether I would or not."
"You didn't think you were going to run for president again?" Cooper asked.
"I didn't," Clinton said. "You know when I was secretary of State several times I said you know I think I'm done. And you know, so many people came to me, started talking to me."
The quote underlined above has received so much negative attention that is drawn focus away from the whopper in bold, which I am curious about.
Is there even one single person on the planet who believes that Hillary didn't anticipate running for president in 2013? Really? Anyone?
6chars
(3,967 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)But if Hillary hadn't run, we all would have been in a state of shock.
Come on, be honest. We all knew she was counting the days to when would be the right time to declare.
No shame in that, at all. Ambition is not bad. Pretending is not that admirable, though.
And she did everything correctly, if she were running in 2000. But we have had 15 years of effing hard in this country and the people are tired of being ground down.
Uncle Joe
(58,349 posts)First of all, its important to point out that the Hillary Clinton political fundraising machine started a full two years before she declared she was running for president. (At least, the one actually associated with her name did.)
On Jan. 25, 2013, Ready for Hillary formally organized by filing paperwork with the FEC. Clinton was directly involved with the super PAC at that point you may remember the Ready for Hillary bus? Clinton was promoting her new book Hard Choices at that time (much like Ben Carson is promoting his book "Gifted Hands" now) and doing speaking events around the country.
Between January 2013 and when Clinton announced her intention to run for president in April 2015, Ready for Hillary raised about $12.9 million and spent $12.1 million. It ended the year in 2014 with $748,469 cash on hand.
(snip)
On its website, 270 Strategies documents its involvement in Ready for Hillary and offers it as case study in tapping into organic grassroots energy around a potential Hillary Clinton presidential run. It notes various steps taken during the 2014 campaign to get out the vote and to recruit volunteers to create a movement nearly 4 million strong.
https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/12/01/super-pacs-dark-money-and-the-hillary-clinton-campaign-part-1/
tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)Sometimes comedy can cut right through the matter
kath
(10,565 posts)She has been running for president for at least 16 years, some think much longer than that.
yourout
(7,527 posts)ejbr
(5,856 posts)and even I was daydreaming about casting my vote for her in 2013! Still, one cannot pretend to read her mind, but if I were to bet....
Nanjeanne
(4,950 posts)laruemtt
(3,992 posts)is the giveaway
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)are all complete idiots.
Iggy Knorr
(247 posts)To be honest, If I'm being honest , truth be told etc.
840high
(17,196 posts)it's not what they offered. She has an agent that negotiates fees.
ancianita
(36,023 posts)As for the speech fees, it is just as easy for me to believe that she wanted a comfortable retirement.
I don't believe that she's a crook or a liar, either.
I'm a Bernie supporter but -- yep, the "but" -- the breathless attack dog anger of the Bernie people here really disappoints me.
Y'all need to chill and take this primary with more perspective. As long as a Democrat wins, the country isn't going to hell.
cali
(114,904 posts)ancianita
(36,023 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)On Jan. 25, 2013, Ready for Hillary formally organized by filing paperwork with the FEC. Clinton was directly involved with the super PAC at that point you may remember the Ready for Hillary bus? Clinton was promoting her new book Hard Choices at that time (much like Ben Carson is promoting his book "Gifted Hands" now) and doing speaking events around the country.
<snip>
https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/12/01/super-pacs-dark-money-and-the-hillary-clinton-campaign-part-1/
ancianita
(36,023 posts)basselope
(2,565 posts)She didn't need those speaking fees to ensure a comfortable retirement.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)So what should we do when Sanders is accused of being corrupt because he was one of a number of hosts for a Democratic fund raiser?
Or that he's a kibbutz Kommie?
Or that he just doesn't get black people....and doesn't care about them.
or he's from VT...a state that is apparently not in the US or represents it in any way shape or form...
or there are only Berniebro's .... and the young dumb chicks who adore them?
Pointing out her record and when she talks out of both sides of her mouth is not an angry dog attack. Saying so is playing into the "he's so angry" lie.
ancianita
(36,023 posts)You can latch on and scoff at her language of "pragmatism" or distrust her all you like. But I believe that she's been privy to knowledge about geopolitics that leads her to take the positions she does.
Actually, given the breadth of her name recognition and work domestically and internationally -- which I think is important for this country's credibility before the international community -- and given the less time she'll need for "on the job" training as president, I won't have much trouble voting for her.
My reading of DU since the Iowa debate is that the passion has turned not just for Bernie but against her. I think it's beneath our heft and dignity as a party to run this primary using the rhetoric and lack of respect and perspective one hears from Republicans. I'm not buying it, and you'll not win me over with any justifications for it.
I'm with Mineral Man here, even as a Bernie supporter.
DU Bernie people just have to dial it down.
Let's resolve to make this party more domestically hard working in the FDR sense.
Let's just build our case for the next level of party debate without the rancor.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)be running for President now. You can't have it all, as Sen. Sanders often says.
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)what she was thinking on January 1st 2013 laying in at the hospital.
Many of her 'lies' are artful depictions of real events.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)What you are about to hear is an artful depiction of real events.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)On Jan. 25, 2013, Ready for Hillary formally organized by filing paperwork with the FEC. Clinton was directly involved with the super PAC at that point you may remember the Ready for Hillary bus? Clinton was promoting her new book Hard Choices at that time (much like Ben Carson is promoting his book "Gifted Hands" now) and doing speaking events around the country.
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/12/01/super-pacs-dark-money-and-the-hillary-clinton-campaign-part-1/
artislife
(9,497 posts)Like we were coaxing her along with Warren to run.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
frylock
(34,825 posts)I think her appointment to SoS was a deal made as part of her concession in 2008.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)Don't think for a second that wasn't a carefully crafted response. It conveys what she wants to convey which was "I wasn't planning to run at the time", which was probably false. But by saying she wasn't "committed" to run (by formally entering the race or publicly announcing that intention) she is technically telling the truth. Of course Bill Clinton was also technically telling the truth when he said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman", given the specific definition of "sexual relations" used in that lawsuit. Didn't come across well for him either.
6chars
(3,967 posts)She, like Bill (and you?), is a lawyer and chooses words carefully.
frylock
(34,825 posts)ViseGrip
(3,133 posts)allowed. Of course she knew she was running.
frylock
(34,825 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)Tell a different story.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)Reading 75% of the posts here, I can see why. Who would want to volunteer for that?
Whereas Bernie will now be the favorite any day now, he too will learn that it can be a withering experience (being a Presidential candidate in the lead.)
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)AzDar
(14,023 posts)in hot from the LEFT.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)LOL
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)You reveal something fundamental about your worldview.
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)Vinca
(50,267 posts)Vote2016
(1,198 posts)I've got that backwards - maybe she tells a lie every time her Wall Street donor list grows).