This isn't particularly surprising for anybody who follows either of these remarkable ladies in the news, but both the New York Times and CNN are reporting that former Secretary of State and potential presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton has been actively soliciting the input of senior Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren.
From the New York Times:
Hillary Rodham Clinton held a private, one-on-one meeting with Senator Elizabeth Warren in December at Mrs. Clinton’s Washington home, a move by the Democrats’ leading contender in 2016 to cultivate the increasingly influential senator and leader of the party’s economic populist movement.
The two met at Whitehaven, the Clintons’ Northwest Washington home, without aides and at Mrs. Clinton’s invitation.
Mrs. Clinton solicited policy ideas and suggestions from Ms. Warren, according to a Democrat briefed on the meeting, who called it “cordial and productive.” Mrs. Clinton, who has been seeking advice from a range of scholars, advocates and officials, did not ask Ms. Warren to consider endorsing her likely presidential candidacy.
More below the fold...
Saw this via Melissa McEwan and had to share.
From the Twitter account of Phillip Rucker, promoter of rape culture:
A Dem source just summed it up neatly: “Elizabeth Warren’s mouth says no, but her eyes say yes, yes, yes.”
Let me be clear.
I'm a staunch supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton and she will have my vote and extensive support if she decides to run.
I'm also a staunch supporter of Elizabeth Warren, and while she would not get my primary vote if Clinton runs, she would likely get it if Clinton does not run.
I would be thrilled to see a contested primary between these two remarkable women, and can think of nothing better for the democratic process to see the national conversation be dominated by these strong, intelligent women who share a deep mutual respect and understanding of the challenges that were unique to women of their generation, and the challenges that are facing all women (and men) today.
But the language of coercion must stop. Just as there are some ways of presenting things when speaking about a black president that are inappropriate, even if they would be fine when talking about a white one, there are some ways of framing things that have a very different connotation when it comes to women.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton spoke to the Center for American Progress yesterday about the connection between expanding economic opportunity for minimum wage/tipped workers and stimulating the economy.
The video can be viewed in the link above.
And as it is my fervent belief that unfiltered Clinton is the best Clinton, I've typed up a full transcript below:
An excellent interview with Secretary Clinton, once it gets past the 2016 "Are You Running?" nonsense and turns toward an in-depth discussion on the biggest challenges facing America today. Clinton identifies these as the disappearance of upward mobility, which she defines as our biggest challenge and a national crisis, and she diagnoses the problem as being because of the failures of our current economic system and political system. (Her actual words are that it's a crisis of democracy.)
She touches as well on the need for comprehensive immigration reform, for engaging with grassroots ("down up") rather than just leaders talking to each other, and for America to do a better job both articulating and emulating our values - at home first, but also abroad.
It's good stuff. I haven't seen anything on it yet here, so I figured I'd put it up as a diary!
I doubt this will get much coverage, but I think it shows how the Democratic presidencies of the last quarter century resonate with voters, and is an encouraging sign for our 2016 prospects:
Bill Clinton is by far the most admired president of the past quarter century, a new poll shows, underscoring how much he has done to burnish his profile since leaving the White House in 2000.
From the Wall Street Journal/NBC News Poll:
Asked which president of the past 25 years they admired most, some 42% of respondents named Mr. Clinton in the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News/Annenberg Survey. That was more than twice the share that named any other president.
The other three presidents of the quarter century all polled about the same: 18% said they most admired President Barack Obama; 17% named George W. Bush; and 16% named his father, George H. W. Bush.
That's 42% for President Clinton, who remains one of the most popular national Democrats we have, and 18% for President Obama, who still outpolls both Bushes in spite of the never-ending barrage of negative news stories pushed by the mainstream media.
A newly released poll from Washington Post/ABC provides interesting, detailed information regarding a potential Hillary Clinton presidential bid. Perhaps surprising to some, her strongest support for making another run at the presidency is among Younger voters and Liberal Democrats, and the South outpaces all regions but the Northeast in hoping she'll run.
Voters are also apparently offended by attacks on her health and age.
Details after the jump:
Shakesville founder Melissa McEwan has two great posts up today about Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, and how the narratives around their potential presidential runs parallels the war on women's agency. Both are must reads.
Not sure that this warrants a diary, but I need to say it anyway.
I've been a reluctant supporter of Obama ever since the 2008 primaries ended. I loved his speeches and agreed with most of his positions, but the post-partisan unity that he made so central to his philosophy and his rhetoric seemed so woefully naive to me.
I didn't think he understood the nature of his opposition, that they would be against him because of who he was and that any attempts at compromise would be rebuffed.
Like many working stiffs, I get paid on the 15th and the 30th. This site has made me more active in donating to Democrats across the country, and in the past, I've made recurring donations to Paul Hackett, Ned Lamont and John Kerry. Lamont actually won! I am so energized by that victory that I want to redouble and expand my efforts.
Here's the deal: I'm a Catholic school teacher with a limited income, so I am working with a fixed budget. I can only afford about $100 per paycheck to contribute, and that's already going to stretch me thin. I wish I could open up a checkbook and give the max to every House and Senate candidate in the country, but it's not gonna happen.
I'm counting on the educated and informed members here to give me advice on who to donate to and why. Should I split the $100 ten ways, or give it all to one candidate? I have a strong inclination to send some dollars Webb's way, but after that, I'm pulled in many directions. Please help!
Rodney Crowell is one of the most successful songwriters in the history of country music, with his most recent credits including the Keith Urban smash "Making Memories of Us" , Lee Ann Womack's "Ashes By Now" and Tim McGraw's "Please Remember Me." He's written hit singles for everyone from Emmylou Harris, Waylon Jennings, Rosanne Cash and Crystal Gayle to Alan Jackson, The Oak Ridge Boys and Highway 101. But he's also been an accomplished artist as well, his most recent album scoring Grammy and Americana nominations. That acknowledgement was gratifying, as Crowell had ventured fully into the realm of politics for the first time with his most recent release.
I write a weekly feature at Liberal Country Fan
on a liberal country artist every week. I thought I'd cross-post this here to make Kossacks more aware how many country artists are actually on our side. Don't buy into the press that all country artists and fans are conservative. It's not true!