Goldman Sachs Chair Blankfein Edorses Clinton

[saracat]

Enough Said!
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aMG30qP_Jkk8&refer=home


- Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Chairman Lloyd Blankfein endorsed Democratic New York Senator Hillary Clinton's presidential bid, a day after her opponents sought to portray her business support as more of a burden than a blessing.

ADVERTISEMENT

Blankfein's backing follows an endorsement in April from Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack, who was one of President George W. Bush's biggest fund-raisers. Clinton has increased her donations from Wall Street constituents during her time in the Senate, and took in at least $424,545 from the top 10 investment banks in the second quarter for her presidential campaign.

Democratic rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards are trying to portray Clinton as an ally of big business as they court the more liberal voters who cast ballots in primaries. That strategy might backfire, said Julian Zelizer, a history and public affairs professor at Princeton University in New Jersey.

[ccpup]

1. what do you mean, saracat?

I guess "enough said" really isn't. :shrug:

[saracat]

2. As it said in the article, look who big business is supporting!

And who really wants to see Hillary elected!

[ccpup]

7. that's just stupid, saracat,

and really not what I'd expect from you. Big Business throws their money behind ALL of the so-called Front Runners -- Republican, Democrat, even a chicken, if it did well in the Polls --, especially those who look as if they could go the distance. Is what you're trying to infer about Hillary and Big Business as true with Obama and Edwards and any of the other candidates who get a nod from Big Business as well?

Besides, there are people (like my father) who won't really trust a candidate until Big Business throws their support behind them. Kind of like those Union folk who see who the Union backs before moving closer to their own decision.

So, really, I don't think this subtle maligning you're attempting to do really flies. But there's always next time, right? :-)

[saracat]

9. Oh, Really? But this is an endorsement not just a contribution.

And this coming right after she tried to portray herself as "union friendly".It follows wonderfully with the Edwards comment about Fortune Magazine.And I am particularly disgusted when I read about all the filth Goldman Sachs has been up to.Google is your friend. This is not an endorsement Hillary should be proud of! But then again.

[ccpup]

11. it really just gets back to

how much do people want to hate Hillary and what are they gonna pull out of their collective arses in order to have something -- ANYTHING -- to complain about. We get it, saracat. You don't like her. Fine.

I can't stand that irritating little gnome Kucinich, but you don't see my starting threads bashing him, do you? I just let people like who they like for their own reasons. Seems fair.

Believe it or not, Big Business endorsing Hillary -- thank you for that clarification, by the way -- will bring A LOT of conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans to her table. Not bad for her at all to expand her voting base.

Ah, the clouds begin to part. :-)

[saracat]

13. Ah! Yes, and all the polls still say Hillary has the highest negatives and both

Edwards and Obama do way better among the Indies and the GOP.I do not believe you are correct.

[rinsd]

16. Now you're touting your candidate's support from Republicans?

[saracat]

20. Only because you stated these endorsements will bring moderate Dems and Gop voters to the table!

So far, as far as the GOP goes, it isn't working.

[ccpup]

25. and how early is this race again?

or does everything have to happen right away for you? Oh yeah, DU is the place where people stomp their feet, cry, fold their arms across their chest and threaten to hold their breath 'till they turn blue until they get what they want, when they want it and they usually want it RIGHT NOW!

Still early in this race and no one knows how it's going to turn out at the end of the day. So, really, all this discussion and threads intending only to bash someone else's candidate just tweaks already trigger-sharp tempers and makes people not like other people so much. Some get off on it; I don't.

[ccpup]

21. well, DUH

we need every vote we can get! If a republican is willing to jump the fence, atone for their Bush sins and vote for a Democrat, why the hell shouldn't they? Or are you only going to allow Dems to vote for the Democratic Candidate. Gee, that should get us about 50% of the vote ... and not much else. Don't you want YOUR candidate to draw as many votes from as many segments of society as possible? Of course! But you're gonna bash Hillary for doing the same? Get real.

Again, ... DUH!

[saracat]

28. Because she will sell us out to get those votes.Of course we need GOP

votes to win but I would rather we get them without prostituting our values!

[ccpup]

32. so, now she's a prostitute?

oh, saracat, you're digging really deep for that one.

I give up.

[saracat]

38. Didn't have to dig deep.Prostituting is a verb!

[ccpup]

18. I guess only time will tell.

No need making an enemy over it this early, right?

[saracat]

23. I suppose not. But I truly am revolted by the endorsements of such people being greeted with

alacrity by Dems.I am actually far more disturbed by the association with Murdoch.I would be speaking out against the acceptance of these kind of endorsements by ANY Democratic candidate.

[rinsd]

27. "endorsements of such people being greeted with alacrity" When did that happen?

[ccpup]

31. perhaps I'm as dumb as a post

but I don't get too riled up over anyone endorsing anyone. We tend to assign people labels based on what we "know" of them without really knowing them. I try not to do that. So, Rupert endorsed Hillary. Big deal. I met him at a party when he and his new wife first moved to SoHo and he was actually very funny. Not that I support what he does with the media and the lies he endorses about people, but he was not the pitchfork-wielding ogre with 5 heads eating babies I expected him to be.

Despite my conciliatory tone, I'm sure someone's going to rip into me because of this Post. Oh well. I hope not, but this IS DemocraticUnderground.

[saracat]

35. And I know Roger Ailes.Seriously.I am sure that Murdoch "appears' genial.Why shouldn't he?

Ailes gives the impression of being "reasonable' too.But think of the damage Fox News and Murdoch and Ailes have done to this nation.Think of the informationthat the average American believes is true and how it effects theit voting.This is an "evil" that cannot be overlooked.Goebbels was charming too.I wouldn't have wabnted a Democratic endorsement from him.

[ccpup]

36. fair enough

but just think. even without Murdoch, you'd still find SOOOO much more to slam Hillary with! Knock yourself out. It won't change many minds, though, and your energy could be much better spent working for and supporting the candidate you've chosen. Unless, of course, slamming Hillary is part of your candidate's plan. If it is, oh well.

Have a good night.

[ccpup]

34. you're both revolted and disturbed?

perhaps you should take a break and go and have a lie down. Some time-out time or something? It's much too early in the race to be both revolted AND disturbed.

[rinsd]

8. "look who big business is supporting" Democrats be nearly a 2 to 1 margin.

The top 3 Democrats have raised more money from Wall Street than the GOP by a large margin.

[saracat]

10. But the "endorsements "go to Hillary! This is just like her Rupert Murdoch support.

[rinsd]

15. True in that it will be used by some Edwards and Obama supporters as a smear by assocation.

And I like how you conflated endorsements with money while claiming endorsements are a bigger deal.

[goodgd_yall]

3. According to opensecrets.org Goldman Sachs is Obama's top contributor

so...wtf? GS contributes to Clinton, Edwards, and Obama.

[angstlessk]

5. Those contributions are called hedging your bet..this is an endorsement!

BIG DIFFERENCE!

[goodgd_yall]

40. Help me understand how it is different

I know companies hedge their bets, contributing to the democrats and the republicans both. But, practically, what difference is it to have dollars to help a candidate run a campaign versus announcing an endorsement. Is it that people decide to support or not support based on an announced endorsement? Or is it that an endorsement comes from the highest level of the company so that getting its endorsement signals that that candidate is thought as the one who will most benefit that company?

[rinsd]

4. Your link is broken

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aMG30qP_Jkk8&refer=home

[saracat]

6. Thanks.Fixed it!

[SaveElmer]

12. Excellent...Hillary gets a range of support from Delores Huerta to John Mack...

The only candidate who seems to be able to bridge the gap between different sectors of society...

I know you meant this post as a slam...but I'm gonna Rec this one...

[saracat]

14. Odd, the polls don't indicate she is doing that at all! Why don't the Indies and the GOP like her ?

Why has she still got the highest negatives? Hmmm?

[rinsd]

19. The GOP took out your candidate with a haircut story. He is not ready to take on the machine.

[saracat]

26. Hmm.Odd.He still seems to be in the race.But the GOP doesn't like him

because the polls indicate he could win.He does not have the Hillary negatives! But whatever.Agree to diasgree!

[TeamJordan23]

39. According to latest Rasmussen: Hillary is losing to GOP frontrunners, Edwards wins easily. nm

[SaveElmer]

22. They are moving down steadily...

According to two recent polls indies and even some Republicans are beginning to move her way...as the real Hillary is presented to them instead of the caricature presented by the far right, far left and media...

"Sen. Clinton is inching ahead. Not only does she lead by a nose in two of the most important swing states in the Electoral College, but she is turning around independent and Republican voters who previously viewed her negatively," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

At the same time Obama's is moving up...according to Ress he has a 30% disapproval among Democrats...significantly higher that Hillary...

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/8/6/173439/9532#commenttop

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1089

[wyldwolf]

24. did you read post 22? hmmm?

[killbotfactory]

17. No surprise there

Clinton is probably the most corporate friendly candidate.

[Broke Dad]

30. Jon Stewart says . . .

Hillary has stated that she is not be swayed by contributions from lobbyists. So money and endorsements from Goldman Sachs or any other entity will have NO effect on Hillary's campaign or how she might govern if elected President?

Really? So what are they buying with their millions? Except for the three vicious defenders of Hillary in this post, the rest of us have a pretty good idea about what they are buying. Protection. Protection of the status quo. Protection for their profits, protection for their tax breaks, protection from scrutiny/prosecution, protection of their offshore investments, protection of business as usual.

2008 is the year to rock the boat, not to buy/bribe your way to business as usual.

[rinsd]

37. Hypocritical much? Wanna know how much your guy is getting from Wall Street?

In fact Edwards is probably more dependent on Wall Street than Hillary or Obama because Wall Street makes up a larger percentage of his total haul.

[provis99]

42. fyi, Edwards gets a big chunk of money from trial lawyers: the people that SUE Wall Street

[Double T]

29. wall street is lining up behind Hillary..........

interesting that THIS doesn't seem to trouble many more than it apparently does. What happened to change instead of MORE of the same??

[Totally Committed]

33. Jeez....... knock me over with a feather.

Who woulda thunk? :sarcasm:


TC

[IndianaGreen]

41. Wall Street knows that Hillary will protect the interests of the capitalist class

at the same time that she whispers seductive words into the ears of the working class to keep us confused and distracted.

[ShortnFiery]

43. Very telling: Our Corporate Masters support the DLC Candidate. nt