Hillary Clinton Rocks The Kochs By Announcing Support For Overturning Citizens United
Source: Politicsusa.com
At a campaign event in Iowa today, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton came out in support of a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.
During a roundtable with students in Iowa, Clinton said:
I want to be the champion who goes to bat for Americans in four big areas, four big fights that I think we have to take on because there are those who dont agree with what I think we should be doing, and theyre pretty powerful forces.
We need build the economy of tomorrow, not yesterday. We need to strengthen families and communities because thats where it all starts. We need to fix our dysfunctional political system, and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if it takes a constitutional amendment, and we need to protect our country from the threats that we see and the ones that are on the horizon.
Read more: http://www.politicususa.com/2015/04/14/hillary-clinton-rocks-kochs-announcing-support-overturning-citizens-united.html
This is good. Very good.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)So I assume that means she'll be eschewing the loosened campaign fundraising laws unleashed by Citizens United and raising her estimated billion-dollar war chest the good ol' fashioned way?
No?
Words are wind.
"Rocks the Kochs" my chapped arse.
I hate election season.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)and she isn't stupid.
Until there is a level playing field between Republicans and Democrats no one is going to be that dumb.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)OKNancy
(41,832 posts)apples and oranges.
Most from individuals who work at those places, not their PACs
Looks like Bernie got his from PACs.
Either way... doesn't bother me.
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)the comment you responded to anyway.
duhneece
(4,118 posts)But I am glad at her friendly move toward the left wing of the Dem party
peacebird
(14,195 posts)I do not trust her.
duhneece
(4,118 posts)Parrot Warren over & over & more!
peacebird
(14,195 posts)That's what I believe.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)But the hyperbole will be thick here with every new HRC utterance. Remember how many times Obama's "kicked republican ass" over the last six years?
MisterP
(23,730 posts)they keep pretending the last candidate didn't run left and rule right, or that "if only we had the Congress" works if you don't
Enrique
(27,461 posts)where every utterance by a Democrat is either eviscerating or obliterating something or other.
joshcryer
(62,279 posts)Spend money on ads against super PACs that support her?
This is beyond the silliest thing I have ever read here.
Citizens United has shit all to do with corporate PACs, which by law have contribution limits. Super PACs are allowed to have UNLIMITED contributions.
There is a significant difference between an employ of JP Morgan donating to their PAC (up to the 2700 limit) and the Koch's dropping millions in a super PAC.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)Add:
Justice Reform
Reforming the Police State
Social Security Expansion
ghostsinthemachine
(3,569 posts)Cannabis legalization
tax breaks for alternative power and vehicles instead of oil subsidies
Chasing off shore tax cheats
fredamae
(4,458 posts)to "us" to help her form her positions that she Will stand up for After the election should she be the successful candidate.......
peacebird
(14,195 posts)into Social Security at about $115,000. Everything else is tax free. She is against raising that cap, calling it a tax on the middle class.
How many middle class families have a breadwinner bringing home over $115k a year? Raise the cap to $500k and we could ensure solvency of SS for decades more.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)by Popular Demand, then. People-even politicians can change their minds
PearliePoo2
(7,768 posts)LOVE IT...
K&R
calimary
(81,552 posts)And it rhymes!
bunnies
(15,859 posts)I dont see a single quote re: citizens united.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)But let's not rain facts on the first victory lap of the campaign
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Id hate to wreck the celebration of something she didnt say. Hold on... let me find my pompoms and blinders.
cstanleytech
(26,341 posts)Dont get me wrong, I believe citizens united was a complete BS ruling and I would support such an amendment that overturned it but I just tend to give a raised eyebrow of skepticism over any candidate who claims they supposedly support such an amendment over anything given that amendments to the constitution are rarely passed.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)give a combined $3,285,831.00 to Hillary's campaign if they thought she had any intention of preventing them from buying future elections?
calimary
(81,552 posts)what I suspect she's hearing, maybe this is one fight they can't win. They'd be smart to keep donating to her, though, because if they hedge their bets, they're at least going to want somebody on her team to pick up the phone if she get into the Oval Office. Not that she'd have their ear as much as she has in the past, perhaps.
That's what I'm hoping, anyway.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Corporatism, gay marriage, and reproductive rights. Stick to the truth, the backlash won't be as severe.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)But the Kool-Aid addicts prefer to believe campaign rhetoric over facts and statistics. Some of them still think Obama is going to insist on a public option and renegotiate NAFTA. Then in 2017 when it turns out that wall street is not part of any "reform", the PUMAs will tell us, "that was only campaign rhetoric, and the Repukes wouldn't let her anyway. You shoulda voted for JEB if you don't like it". Ahh, the deja vu
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)If this is not a ruse, then even I can have some hope.
If Wall Street can have turn this country against itself as they have, then they can enjoy a nice civil war of their own, and while Hillary is far from my first choice, I will glady and gleefully send her gasoline to power whatever war machinery she needs, and so that I can pour some onto the flames of the Koch's funeral pyres (I doubt she will mind).
LiberalArkie
(15,731 posts)laserhaas
(7,805 posts)and - with Romney's Clear Channel (now iHeart) - along with Fox - etc., it's an uphill battle for whomever the candidate is.
While I'm all in for Clinton II versus ANY rethug -
the WS mega dollars donations doesn't sit well with me.
BumRushDaShow
(129,773 posts)that I have noticed got lost in the discussions about the whole debacle, was that the "ad" that generated this landmark decision, was for promotion of the broadcast of a 90 minute hit piece about guess who?
Hillary Clinton.
joshcryer
(62,279 posts)People here don't like to admit it because it supports Clinton's claims against the right wing, and they can't believe Clinton is against the right. It's a self delusion.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)We don't have much of a chance at getting things done. She also has to deal with the corporate sponsored Supreme Court majority. Clinton will be the next President of the U.S. We shouldn't make it a cake walk for her. We have a long way to go.
applegrove
(118,865 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)a constitutional amendment now and if so which version?
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)You don't have to be president to go to bat for the middle class. You don't have to be president to stand up for the little guy. Having those things on your resume, however, would be a great help in someone's quest to *become* president.
riversedge
(70,372 posts)the link in the OP....
Clintons answer represents a strengthening of her position against Citizens United. Last year, she answered a question on Citizens United by saying, I would consider supporting an amendment among these lines that would prevent the abuse of our political system by excessive amounts of money if there is no other way to deal with the Citizens United decision.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)I would consider supporting an amendment among these lines that would prevent the abuse of our political system by excessive amounts of money if there is no other way to deal with the Citizens United decision.
vs....
"We need to fix our dysfunctional political system, and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if it takes a constitutional amendment"