What's going to be weird is if Hillary succeeds to forcing Sanders off his Wall Street attacks because of her allegations of "smears." What really are those smears? Is she claiming he's attacking her ties to the Israel Lobby? Now that's innuendo.
At the New York Times, "Hillary Clinton Is Again Put on the Defensive Over Perceived Ties to Wall Street":
MANCHESTER, N.H. — Hillary Clinton appeared frustrated.More.
Dozens of prominent economists and academic experts have endorsed her plans to regulate the financial sector. Her policies would “try to prevent the problems of the future,” she explained in Thursday’s debate, in addition to reining in “the excesses of Wall Street.”
So why do so many voters not believe it?
“I have a broader view,” Mrs. Clinton said, contrasting her plan to that of Mr. Sanders, whose anti-Wall Street message has turned him from a long-shot candidate to a serious contender for the Democratic nomination.
“If all we are going to talk about is one part of our economy, and indeed one street in our economy, we’re missing the big oil companies, we’re missing the other big energy companies,” Mrs. Clinton said. “We’re missing the big picture.”
The response provided a perfect opening for her populist opponent. “Madam Secretary, it is not one street,” Mr. Sanders said. “Wall Street is an entity of unbelievable economic and political power.”
In an election year fueled by the anger over the growing gap between rich and poor, Mrs. Clinton, who is widely viewed as too close to the financial sector, seems an imperfect messenger for change. She has developed sophisticated policy proposals that many economists agree would aggressively regulate the financial sector, but they have collided with the image that Sanders supporters and other political rivals have painted of her: Wall Street’s friend and defender...
0 comments:
Post a Comment