Clinton Becomes a Progressive?

[JackLuis]

Clinton proposes breaking up too-big banks, monitoring shadow-banking system

S. Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton on Thursday introduced a plan to curb what she called Wall Street abuses, including a “risk fee” on the largest financial institutions and breaking up banks considered “too big to fail.”

Under the proposal, Clinton would charge a yearly “risk fee” on a sliding scale on the liabilities of banks with more than $50 billion in assets along with other institutions overseen by financial regulators, her campaign said.

The proposals also called for raising the fines that regulators could impose on corporations and their executives, and imposing a new tax on high-frequency trading (HFT).

“These sound like much more meaningful reforms than some of the things she has suggested earlier,” said former Federal Deposit Insurance Corp Chair Sheila Bair, currently president of Washington College, in Chestertown, Maryland.

See Bernie and Biden forced her to take on Wall Street. However...

Unless the Democrats win a majority in the Senate and retake the House of Representatives in the 2016 elections, the chances of the proposals being enacted are low, Keefe, Bruyette & Woods said in a note to clients.

 

[werwolf]

Rather, I think she was always significantly more to the left of her husband on most social/cultural issues, and in terms of bringing human rights into certain aspects of foreign policy that Bill was more pragmatic on-like China. She's just in a more fertile environment to express it now.

Though economically, she's definitely responding to Sanders and to a lesser extent, Biden. Which really kind of insults our intelligence as voters, but if it gets results, it get results.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Yay more bank fees for customers!!

Though i do like the idea of breaking up anything too big to fail...that's just pure wholesome goodness right there.

 

[JackLuis]

Hillary Clinton says would reaffirm ties with Israel if elected

Serial pandering with bagles!

Hillary Clinton assured American Jews that she would reaffirm the United States’ “unbreakable bonds” with Israel and promptly invite Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Washington should she win the White House.

President Barack Obama has had a rocky, at times testy relationship with the Israeli leader, while Republican critics accuse Obama of not doing enough to support the Jewish state and of making too may concessions to Iran in a recently concluded nuclear accord.

Clinton, eager to avoid being tarred by Republicans as an unreliable ally of Israel, made her remarks in an opinion column Wednesday in the American Jewish publication The Forward, ahead of Netanyahu’s Monday visit to Washington.

Odds of a Hillz-Bennie photo op on Monday=99.99%.

 

[Wrong Element]

For all the hysteria she creates in wingnut males, liberals are well aware that Clinton isn't going to make them all that happy as President.

And given that she's going to be facing a Republican House for at least the first 6 years of a potential 8-year run, she's not going to be able to do much that's positive other than making sure the Supreme Court doesn't nail the coffin lid shut on American democracy once and for all.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Clinton proposes breaking up too-big banks, monitoring shadow-banking system



See Bernie and Biden forced her to take on Wall Street. However...

It sounds like she's throwing the election before she even gets nominated.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

No centrist party exists today. In 1960 Democrats and Republicans were moderate centrists. The communists, Nazis, Birchers, and others all had fringe parties. But Democrats and Republicans shared many positions.

What we have today are two confederations of special interests. Hillary must serve her constituents. But she wont die a Yankee fan or a Cubs fan. When the general election comes she's likely to switch allegiences.

 

[gwenrider]

I guess it's true

 

[NeverEndingMe]

clinton(s) are whores. just show up with enough cash and you can have them

one...or the other...the complete package

 

[Aglaopheme]

Well, I think the Supreme Court is one of the most important things for the next President. I heard the other day someone say there could be 4 appointments up for grabs.

 

[Sean Renaud]

We could always just look and make reasonable guesses.

 

[JackLuis]

Warren’s Social Security COLA Bill Poses a Question for Clinton

When it became clear that Social Security recipients would not receive a cost-of-living adjustment in 2016, Sen. Elizabeth Warren came up with an ingenious remedy, which she introduced in the Senate last week: End the taxpayer subsidy for CEO bonuses and use the proceeds to give seniors and veterans a one-time boost in their benefits.

What we do not know yet is whether frontrunner Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton supports that idea. Where she stands on this bill would say a lot about where she stands on the larger question of expanding instead of cutting Social Security.

We do know where her chief competitor, Sen. Bernie Sanders, stands. He is one of 18 original co-sponsors of a bill that would give seniors, veterans and people with disabilities a one-time benefit adjustment of 3.9 percent, which would amount to a $581 payment to the average beneficiary.

Go Liz GO!

Will Wall Street lose it grip on Hillary or will she equivocate, again.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Well, I think the Supreme Court is one of the most important things for the next President. I heard the other day someone say there could be 4 appointments up for grabs.

4 or so. So Hillary will lose. America cant afford a liberal court.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Hillary has been a "Progressive" for as long as I have heard about her. You can tell by the way she lies most of the time and by her thirst for power. When her husband was pres., she acted as something of a "co-president," which was highly unusual at the time,

http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/hillary-rodham-clinton/13/

 

[Boxlicker101]

4 or so. So Hillary will lose. America cant afford a liberal court.

Some of those who will be replaced are already Liberals, such as Ginsberg.

 

[JackLuis]

I’m a Bernie Sanders voter who will not support Hillary Clinton: Here are 10 reasons why

According to CBS News, an alarming percentage of Democrats either won’t vote for Hillary Clinton or would only support her nomination to prevent a Republican from winning:

Just under half of Democratic primary voters nationwide say they would enthusiastically support Clinton if she became the party’s nominee. Twenty-seven percent would support her with some reservations and another 11 percent would only back her because she is the nominee. Fourteen percent would not support her in a general election.

When under half of Democrats would “enthusiastically support” Clinton and 27% would only do so “because she is the nominee,” even Democrats planning to vote for the former Secretary of State hold reservations.

Then, there are 14% who will not support her in a general election; this figure could easily increase. Also, not only will a sizable percentage of Democrats refuse to vote for Clinton, but 57% of Americans find Clinton “not honest and trustworthy.”

 

[Sean Renaud]

Hillary has been a "Progressive" for as long as I have heard about her. You can tell by the way she lies most of the time and by her thirst for power. When her husband was pres., she acted as something of a "co-president," which was highly unusual at the time,

http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/hillary-rodham-clinton/13/

Except she's not progressive at all. Bernie is progressive. Hillary is, just like Obama, a thrice damned centrist. She doesn't lie any more than any other politician and of couse she wants power. All things that breathe do.

 

[JackLuis]

Tech moguls shun Clinton super PAC

SAN FRANCISCO — The main super PAC supporting Hillary Clinton’s White House bid is struggling to persuade Silicon Valley’s megadonors to cut the $1 million-plus checks it says it needs to lay the groundwork for what’s expected to be the most expensive general-election fight in history.

The challenges facing Priorities USA Action, according to a dozen people closely involved in the PAC’s California efforts, are manifold: Some of these liberal Democratic tech moguls are more interested in their own self-funded political groups; others cite ideologically fueled distaste for super PACs; and more still point to residual bad blood after a messy Silicon Valley congressional race in 2014.

No matter the reason, it all adds up to one thing: Priorities is simply not a priority for the Bay Area’s wealthy few who Democrats believe are necessary to fund a winning presidential effort.

Perhaps the reason is simple.

But a handful of big ticket Democratic contributors who have yet to chip in for Priorities gave to the campaign’s fund in its opening days, including San Francisco’s Susie Tompkins Buell, a co-founder of Esprit and a close personal friend of Clinton’s. Even more donors have written the campaign’s committee six-figure checks since then.

“Tech folks will only give so much,” explained a Bay Area fundraiser who works directly with many of the region’s wealthiest Democrats. “And a lot of folks are saying, ‘If the Hillary campaign directly is asking for this money, I’ll give it to them. That way I’ll [hand] it to her, I can see her when I give it to her. I can sit next to her at the dinner party.'"

It's all ego.

 

[Setanta84]

Anybody who takes Hillary's current rhetoric about the banks seriously is a fucking moron. Hint: The banks don't. Proof: They remain her biggest campaign contributors. (You don't give a person a ton of money for political office when you don't know what you're getting. And people who aren't bought and sold by a particular interest don't invoke 9/11 when pressed on taking money from said interests and then concern troll about higher taxes.)

Clinton, like Obama, is simply saying whatever it takes to get elected. Unlike Obama, Clinton actually has a public policy record that goes back 40 years. Whereas Obama was smart enough to avoid leaving that kind of trail, so it wasn't clear he never intended to do anything he said he was going to do when he ran until he got into office, it's clear Clinton is lying.

The only way Clinton is not lying is if, somehow, the Hillary Clinton running for office this cycle is a pod person that replaced the Hillary Clinton who ran in 2008.

 

[JackLuis]

Anybody who takes Hillary's current rhetoric about the banks seriously is a fucking moron.- it's clear Clinton is lying.

The only way Clinton is not lying is if, somehow, the Hillary Clinton running for office this cycle is a pod person that replaced the Hillary Clinton who ran in 2008.

Now you're just being sensible!

How did you get in here?