56 Dems endorse Hillary for 2016

[onehandle]

Source: The Hill

Fifty-six Democratic lawmakers say they would endorse Hillary Clinton for president if she launches a 2016 White House bid, according to a survey conducted by The Hill. [SEE COMPLETE LIST]

Twenty-two congressional Democrats had already publicly endorsed Clinton. An additional 34 members told The Hill that if Clinton runs, they would back her in the Democratic primary.

The level of support is astounding, especially 2 1/2 years before the Democratic Party hosts its nominating convention. The total represents more than 20 percent of the 253 Democrats in the House and Senate. It is also more than half of the lawmaker endorsements Clinton received in 2008.

The list of 56 includes liberals and centrists who represent states from California to Ohio to New Hampshire.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/presidential-campaign/196586-dems-surging-toward-hillary

---

Senators who have endorsed Clinton (18)

Tammy Baldwin (Wis.)

Barbara Boxer (Calif.)

Maria Cantwell (Wash.)

Dianne Feinstein (Calif.)

Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.)

Kay Hagan (N.C.)

Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.)

Mazie Hirono (Hawaii)

Amy Klobuchar (Minn.)

Mary Landrieu (La.)

Claire McCaskill (Mo.)

Barbara Mikulski (Md.)

Patty Murray (Wash.)

Charles Schumer (N.Y.)

Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.)

Debbie Stabenow (Mich.)

Elizabeth Warren (Mass.)

Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.)


House members who back Clinton (38)

Robert Andrews (N.J.)

Tim Bishop (N.Y.)

David Cicilline (R.I.)

Joaquín Castro (Texas)

Danny Davis (Ill.)

John Delaney (Md.)

Lois Frankel (Fla.)

Gene Green (Texas)

Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.)

Luis Gutiérrez (Ill.)

Janice Hahn (Calif.)

Colleen Hanabusa (Hawaii)

Alcee Hastings (Fla.)

Brian Higgins (N.Y.)

Mike Honda (Calif.)

Steny Hoyer (Md.)

Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas)

Hank Johnson (Ga.)

Jim Langevin (R.I.)

Sandy Levin (Mich.)

John Lewis (Ga.)

Stephen Lynch (Mass.)

Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.)

Doris Matsui (Calif.)

Gregory Meeks (N.Y.)

Grace Meng (N.Y.)

Jim Moran (Va.)

Richard Neal (Mass.)

Chellie Pingree (Maine)

Cedric Richmond (La.)

Tim Ryan (Ohio)

Jan Schakowsky (Ill.)

Allyson Schwartz (Pa.)

David Scott (Ga.)

Terri Sewell (Ala.)

Louise Slaughter (N.Y.)

Dina Titus (Nev.)

Frederica Wilson (Fla.)

[Thespian2]

1. Corporate Owned

dems will surely back Clinton. She is the best chance for the Republicans to win the White House. She is a Republican in deed, if not in name.

[iandhr]

3. People like you are the reason Bush got in.

Not being able to tell the difference between Bush and Gore.

[Thespian2]

7. Do you think

stolen elections might have something to do with Americans suffering through the Bush years. Have Americans forgotten their own history?

[iandhr]

9. Nader got enough votes in FL...

…. to allow Bush to steal the election.


No Nader no stolen election.

[Dawgs]

13. So what does that have to do with your original point.

[iandhr]

16. The person with the Canadian flag logo...

… called Hillary a Republican. There was enough people who voted for Nader who saw no difference between Bush and Gore to allow Bush to get in.


We are still paying for the foolishness of those folks.

[thesquanderer]

21. not necessarily

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023091107

[frylock]

80. 300,000+ registered dems in FL voted for bush..

of course they had nothing to do with getting bush elected. nader did it single-handedly.

[otherone]

96. I disagree

Nader is not at fault.

[hrmjustin]

20. Theft and Nader.

[iandhr]

83. Exactly it was both

[Beacool]

23. Calling Hillary a Republican is as idiotic as calling Obama a Republican.

They may be to the Center of some of you here, but they are still Democrats. They are also and a damn better choice than Romney, McCain or any Bagger who may win their nomination in 2016.

[Thinkingabout]

28. K & R

I was ask by a RW why didn't I vote republican and I ask for who in the republican should I vote. They did have a decent candidate to vote. Would I vote for a republican, there has been times but in low positions. When I ask why they always vote republican and the answer is because they are against abortion. A one issue voter and republicans are against raising minimum wage, against raising taxes on their buddies, against food stamps, and anything which helps 90%.

I was for Hillary during the primaries, still have her campaign button, supported her then though I voted for Obama and support him as president. Maybe we can have two glass ceilings broken in a row. She did a good job for us as Senator and as Secretary of State. She is well traveled and has her position in the world. She would make a great president or any other path she may ever take.

[iandhr]

37. Ding Ding Ding

+1

[Doctor_J]

53. Obama called himself a Republican

I have too much respect for him to disagree.

[okaawhatever]

56. No, once again I have to correct your lies. I'm providing a link to video so you can see the words

come out of his mouth. He said, "if he were president 25 years ago, his economic policies would make him a moderate Republican."

First he was comparing the platform of the Republican party from 25 years ago to today. Second, he was referring only to his economic policies.

Stop spreading lies. You only seem interested trolling here, and aren't even honest when you do it.


http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13638564-obama-calls-himself-a-moderate-republican

[Doctor_J]

74. It also tells how far right MY party has moved over the last 25 years.

Having two Republican parties to choose from is very unhealthy for the country. I wouldn't have voted for a "moderate Republican" 25 years ago, and I don't care for it now.

Actually the people here who cheer and back far right policies just because they're proposed by a nominal Dem are the trolls. I know actual liberal Dems are the subject of ridicule here, and, while getting almost nothing from the party, are still blamed when they receive the inevitable trouncing at the polls that results from standing for nothing. Please enjoy TPP and KeystoneXL and corporate schools and Heritage Care. They're what comes from having no morals whatsoever.

[demwing]

72. But not enough respect to stop spreading bullshit

You know he didn't call himself a Republican. You know that, but you say it regardless...

[wyldwolf]

6. Warren?

[rtracey]

15. Who

ok if not Hillary, and knowing that Elizabeth Warren has already said she will NOT run for president, who then? I think her time has come. If you think a completely left leaning liberal is getting ANYWHERE in the White house and congress, you are sadly mistaking. I will NEVER support the right wing agenda, (war on women, seniors, gays, Latinos, Blacks, etc,) but getting NOTHING done as we see now and little done as we have seen over the past 5 years is not a solution neither. We need to get this country moving again.....tell me who if not Hillary?

[djean111]

33. Just how has Hillary said she would get this country moving again?

And in what direction?
What is her plan for job creation, strengthening Social Security, addressing health care costs?
I see a lot of Hillary is fabulous!!!! stuff, but have seen no real substance, besides her huge Wall Street backing.

What, exactly, is Hillary's agenda? If we don't know, why are we supposed to cheer and trust? Been there, did that, didn't even get a t shirt.

[okaawhatever]

57. What is this "huge Wall Street backing" you're talking about? That's a liberal meme that's as

dishonest as most of the right wing memes about her.

[hrmjustin]

19. She is not a republican!

[RC]

62. Hillary is DLC -

which is to the Right of where the Republicans were 40 years ago.
We need to go the other direction.

[hrmjustin]

63. That is what primaries are for.

[RC]

65. What? To elect DLC types?

The Liberals and Progressives are eliminated in the caucuses.

[hrmjustin]

67. I am in favor of getting rid of caucuses.

[frylock]

81. i'm in favor of primaries happening all on one day

[hrmjustin]

82. That is an interesting idea. When would you hold them?

Perhaps April or May?

[frylock]

87. march or april..

I think Super Tuesday was the first week of March in 2012.

[Coyotl]

41. That sounds like a quote from the RNC playbook.

Yep, found it on page one.

1.) Corporate-owned Dems (note proper spelling AND grammar) is a derogatory.
2.) She is the worst chance for the Republicans to win the White House given present polling.
3.) She is a leading liberal globally and the leading Dem contender.

So, basically, everything you said is a lie. That is right out of the same playbook.

[okaawhatever]

58. Yeah, a lot of trolls are on here trying to slam Hillary. The Republicans can't attack her creds

because they appeal to too many independents so they're trying to take away the far left.

[Agnosticsherbet]

51. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) is Corporate owned? Which big bank financed that transaction?

[RedstDem]

2. better than another bush

not by much, but one click higher.

be nice to get a old school democrat in there instead of one of the third way sellouts.

[iandhr]

4. In case you didn't notice there a quite a few progressives on this list.

[RedstDem]

35. I heard the tea in china is pretty cheap

but never been there, cant say for sure if that's the case...

[loudsue]

5. More of a set up. Screw what anybody else wants: the corporatist government has spoken

I DON'T WANT HILLARY. Cramming her down everyone's throat is not the answer.

[djean111]

8. I feel that all the excitement about Hillary has reached its peak.

Ya got yer fans, ya got yer dutiful Party go-alongs.
Personally, I could never ever be the tiniest bit enthusiastic about a Third Way Corporate candidate, doesn't matter one iota to me who endorses her.

thought we were supposed to wait until after 2014 for this sort of thing.
Or is that directive just for those who do not love Hillary.

[Titonwan]

12. This.

"Or is that directive just for those who do not love Hillary."
Of course it is. And to think I joined this blog because I thought we had radical thinkers here. Apparently not so much...

Second edit: RIP Pete Seeger (I wonder who he'd support? Answer: not $hillary)

[pscot]

26. There is definitely an Amen choir

Which just makes the need for independent thinkers more urgent, lest the Believers have the stage all to themselves.

[brooklynite]

61. I'm sure we have many radical thinkers here. I'm also sure that DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND...

...has many Democrats who think Hillary Clinton would be an excellent candidate and an effective President.

[treestar]

89. He was a comedian

But how whiny is that? That's not a good way to make any point. Taking his jokes seriously makes one sound childish.

And note the hopelessness it tries to invoke.

[brooklynite]

17. So is Elizabeth Warren a fan or a dutiful Party go-along?

FWIW I would say the 2014 directive is coming FROM those who do not love Hillary. It seems to rise up whenever Hillary supporters do something.

I'd compare that to what happens whenever the "Anybody but Hillary" people do something....but they don't.

[djean111]

18. Dutiful Party go-along. Sad.

And, no, the wait until after 2014 directive, as I have seen it, is always slapped at people who conjecture about non-Hillary candidates.

I'd compare that to what happens whenever the "Anybody but Hillary" people do something....but they don't.
As an fervent ABH, I am trying to keep tabs on possible non-Third way candidates. I quite understand that Hillary already has huge corporate Wall Street backing. I don't think that backing bodes well for the 99%, except for some inadvertent or perhaps deliberate crumbs, here and there.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

11. Of course they did. They're all part of a club...

of which you and I are not members.

[closeupready]

77. Interestingly, they are all Democrats AND multi-millionaires, so yes,

they all belong to several exclusive clubs.

[hobbit709]

14. I don't care how many endorse her. I will vote for her only as a last resort.

It's getting hard to vote while carrying a barf bag in one hand and holding your nose with the other.

[Beacool]

22. Impressive list, but I wish they had waited until she made her decision.

As times passes the pressure for Hillary to run has become quite intense. Does she get to have a say in this or has the train already left the station? What would happen if she decides that she doesn't want the headache of running for president or the worse headache of running the country if elected?

It's as if she's not given a choice of what to do with her own life.



BTW, I noticed one name in particular: Elizabeth Warren (Mass.)

[former9thward]

24. Warren has not endorsed Clinton.

All the women Democrats in the Senate signed a private letter, meant to be secret, encouraging Clinton to run. That is far different than an outright public endorsement.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/10/in-secret-letter-senate-democratic-women-rally-behind-hillary-clinton/

[Beacool]

25. Yes, but she wouldn't have signed the letter if she didn't want Hillary to run.

Warren is nobody's patsy. I believe her when she repeatedly says that she won't run for president. Not everyone wants to be president. She is not a career politician, she might be perfectly content to remain a senator. Doesn't she too have a right to make her own life decisions or does she have to do something she doesn't want to do just to please the Left?

[former9thward]

27. I don't believe Warren wants to run either.

Actually I don't believe Clinton really wants to run. She is at an age where most people want to kick back and enjoy life and family. But I think she may feel that it is her "duty" to be the first woman major party nominee and President.

[Beacool]

31. I agree.

I think that Warren is telling the truth when she says that she doesn't want to run for president. It's a thankless job.

I also believe Hillary when she keeps repeating that she hasn't made up her mind yet. She is one of the few people who really knows what it takes to be president. Those who have occupied the WH are in a small club.

I'm getting the feeling that the pressure has become so intense that she may have to run even if her heart were not fully in it. They may appeal to her sense of duty and party unity. When Obama offered her the SOS post, at first she didn't want it. It took some convincing to get her to accept it. She liked being a senator. How did they convince her? They appealed to her sense of patriotism. Biden basically told her that if she had won the election and she had asked Obama to serve in the cabinet, wouldn't she have wanted him to accept the job? Obama told her that he would be very busy with the domestic issues and needed her help with the international front. Well, she accepted.

I think that a similar thing is going on now. The party wants her to run. The leadership thinks that she's the best bet to keep the WH in Democratic hands. I feel that they are pushing her into a corner.

[hughee99]

30. If she thought it was going to be kept secret, she was naive.

I don't think that she really believed it would be kept secret, though. There's no point in actually signing a letter unless SOMEONE is planning to leak it or use it as leverage against others.

[cosmicone]

55. Go Hillary!! n/t

[brooklynite]

59. I'd say, yes she has...

This article is not a rehash of the Senate Womens' letter, its an independent survey by The Hill.

But keep dreaming...

[former9thward]

69. Fail

From the article:

Early last year, all 16 female Democratic senators signed a then-private letter addressed to Clinton, urging her to run.

http://thehill.com/homenews/presidential-campaign/196586-dems-surging-toward-hillary#ixzz2rj5JmKEO

It was not an "independent survey."

[joshcryer]

79. same thing that happened work Gore

he had similar endorsements and people rallying for him to run

[Beacool]

90. Gore was the vice president and wanted to run.

Hillary has yet to make up her mind.

[L0oniX]

29. Well isn't that special.

[William769]

32. Kick & recommended for Hillary!

[Steerpike]

34. I've always supported Hillary!

I will vote for her if she is the candidate...

[jeff47]

36. Remember how 2008 was Hillary vs. Giuliani?

Boy, those early predictions are always so accurate.

[BrainDrain]

38. HRC is a

corporate tool. How much proof do you need other than her and Bill's empire of the "You owe us, so pay up"? Do you seriously think that CEO's would be donating to her campaign if she were "still thinking about it"? NFL----not fuckin likely.
Do you think that unions would be donating to her campaign if she were "still thinking about it"? NFL
It's all a bullshit game to them, and we are the pieces to be moved or sacrificed at just the right time, because we all know, well it is her turn is it not??

I would not vote for her if my life depended on it. And before anyone starts with the "you better vote for her or the repugs will win..." blah blah blah....or the "your not a real democrat" whine whine whine.

There comes a point where it DOES NOT MATTER who you vote for, they literally are all the same. Bought and paid for.

[onehandle]

39. Bush And Gore Are Exactly The Same. Bush And Gore Are Exactly The Same.

Bush And Gore Are Exactly The Same.

[IMG][/IMG]

[Beacool]

44. But, but, but,........they are not progressive enough.......wuahhhhh!!!!

BTW, the Democrat who just won a Senate seat in VA won it by a whopping 11 votes.

Democrat wins Virginia Senate recount, giving Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s agenda a crucial boost


VIRGINIA BEACH — Democrats prepared to seize control of the Virginia Senate on Monday after winning a recount by just 11 votes in a razor-thin special election, giving Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s first-year agenda a crucial boost.

The win energizes a party that in recent years has had to depend on moderate GOP allies in the Senate to flex any legislative muscle in Richmond — even as Democrats have won every statewide election since 2012.

Although Republicans still overwhelmingly control the House of Delegates, Monday’s victory gives McAuliffe and his party new leverage as they try to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, grant new rights to same-sex couples and increase public school funding.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/monday-recount-will-decide-control-of-the-va-senate--and-fate-of-mcauliffe-agenda/2014/01/27/e93a2846-8756-11e3-833c-33098f9e5267_story.html

So people need to get their head out of their backsides and look at the long shot. There have been quite a few Democrats who I voted for while holding my nose, but I recognized that they were the better choice. Voting matters!!!

[Coyotl]

42. Agreed, HRC is a great liberal leader supported by unions and many others too.

And, in the voting booth, we are all forced to make choices personally not found to be the most ideal in order to function best as a society.

[Maedhros]

47. Hillary is many things, both positive and negative, but she is NOT "liberal."

Liberals don't sit on the board for WalMart and not insist that working conditions be improved for employees.

[Coyotl]

48. The Largest Liberal Super PAC Just Formally Aligned Itself With Hillary Clinton

Depends on who is defining liberal. I'm of the view that the decision is not to be based of personal reality viewpoints, rather is a social construct we arrive at a public consensus about.

Here is a simple algorithm to guide those who have trouble detecting the public viewpoint:

Democrat = liberal
Republican = conservative

The Largest Liberal Super PAC Just Formally Aligned Itself With Hillary Clinton
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/01/23/hillary_2016_priorities_usa_action_the_largest_liberal_super_pac_is_backing.html

[Maedhros]

50. Yes - Super PACs are the essence of Liberalism.

Labels are unimportant - policies and actions are. By the latter measure, Hillary is no liberal.

It does us no good to elect so-labeled "Liberals" if the policies they enact are pro-corporate, pro-MIC, pro-surveillance state, anti-education.

[brooklynite]

60. So you believe Liberals should unilaterally disengage?

Super PACs are part of our political structure, for better or worse. Liberals have money to give to Super PACs. Where's the problem?

[Maedhros]

68. Super PACs are part of our political PROBLEM.

It's not that I don't think Liberals should give to political campaigns, it's that I don't believe that the Super PAC in question is "liberal" to any degree beyond partisan branding and marketing purposes.

For example, the Super PAC in question gives a ton of money to Hillary, who emphatically supports the TPP. Liberal label, corporate policy.

[brooklynite]

73. So, it's not liberal by your standards...

...I'm guessing there are other points of view in the Democratic Party, like those of the 17 million Democrats who voted for her in 2008.

[Maedhros]

91. I generally don't consider the Democratic Party to be liberal.

More like Moderate Conservative.

To say that the Democrats are Liberal is to engage in circular reasoning - because the Democrats oppose the Republicans, who are Reactionary, then the Democrats must be Liberal.

They may have been in the past, but after Carter...not really. Tip O'Neill was the great enabler of Reagan's agenda, and ever since we've seen more and more capitulation to Republican ideology (case in point: invasion of Iraq).

[Coyotl]

43. What would you say if he said he wanted to be V-P again?

Wow, would that enhance the ticket or what?
I really like the idea of a veteran V-P on the ticket.

However, the primary process has its function, and I look forward to the process more than a particular outcome at this point.

[davidpdx]

46. I don't think Biden will run

His long tenure as a senator and then eight years as a vice-president will be enough for him.

[davidpdx]

45. I find it disturbing that these people decide to endorse a candidate

a) before she even states whether she will run; and b) two years before a primary.

At this rate I guess since most of the Democrats are already backing Clinton we can cancel the primaries.

[Maedhros]

49. The Democratic Party is evolving into an oligarchic model,

in which the power rests with a relatively small number of people, and these power brokers want to decide which candidates we will vote for.

Great example: in 2010, the rank-and-file in Arkansas wanted Bill Halter to take on John Boozman for the open Senate position. The White House wanted Blanche Lincoln, and pulled strings (and money!) to make it happen.

The oligarchs in the Party want Hillary, hence the PR blitz to make her seem inevitable.

[RC]

64. That sounds like the way the Republicans do things.

[Maedhros]

66. Yeah, doesn't it? [n/t]

[MattSh]

52. Don't they have anything better to do...

Like run the damn country in 2014?

[Carolina]

86. Thank you

At this point, some Dems seem to care only about the next POTUS election. Meanwhile WTF are they doing?!

It's all about winning elections not governing. They win, we still LOSE

BTW, all this HRC hype is nauseating Last thing we need is a 3rd way (one of the original) DLCers at the helm. NAFTA, Gramm-Bliley-Leach, welfare deform, the telecommunications (consolidation) act... Haven't we had enough of the Clintons?!

[Doctor_J]

54. Probably our only chance to to hold the WH is another gimmick like 2008

The newbies/indies/undecideds who flocked to the polls to vote for Obama won't be back. They know that the "Hope & Change" was pretty much BS, that the party really can't or won't deliver much in the way of a change of direction away from what happened in the Bush years - won't even really fight back. So running a woman against the inevitable rich old white guy is probably the right thing to do. So I say embrace the TPP, KeystoneXL, corporate for-profit schools, and Heritage Care!!!! What do you want, Christie?

You're screwn, Mr./Mrs. Working American!

[madrchsod]

70. is this the best the democrats have? hillary clinton?

there`s no one else left in the party that could be considered a decent candidate for president? she'll be 71 when she`s sworn in. really there`s no one else? just before anyone jumps my shit i'm older than she is. reagan was 69 when he was sworn in. at best she would be a placeholder for someone in the next election cycle.the only consolation is the republicans really don't have anyone either.

who knows someone else might step up and lead the party.

[Beacool]

93. No, she won't be 71, she'll be 69.

And a tad younger than Reagan was when he was sworn in. He would still be the oldest president. Besides, women do live longer than men and she's got good genes. Her mom was 92 when she passed away.

[7962]

71. The GOP is still too stupid to beat whoever the nominee is

The tea party wont back a "RINO" or "Country Club" republican, and the mainstream/independent voter wont support a Cruz/Palin type. Most people here who DO NOT want Hillary will still vote for her if she gets the nod. Case closed

[JRLeft]

75. Hillary will win

[closeupready]

76. Great, but she's not running, folks. I endorse Elizabeth Warren.

I endorse Bernie Sanders. Heck, I endorse Al Gore.

Same thing.

[brooklynite]

92. Great, but he's/he's/he's not running, folks. I endorse Hillary Clinton

[closeupready]

78. Just for giggles, what is the average net worth of that list?

I'd bet it's in the tens of millions of dollars, on average?

[blkmusclmachine]

84. Hillary: Blue Dog/DLC/3rd Way, pro-Corporate, right-of-"center," triangulating war hawk.

Yeah, that's just what this Country needs...

[Carolina]

88. Touche

If she is all the Dems can muster which means more of the same corporatist shit, then why bother.

It seems that the country is going down the drain and if we've learned anything from 2008 and 2012, it's that both parties are tools of the MIC and the 1%

[Le Taz Hot]

85. And the machine is crankin' up.

All aboard the corporate express!

[Sognefjord]

94. In Related News: Flatulent Cows Cause Fire in German Dairy Farm

[Enthusiast]

95. This is extremely disappointing.