Robert Reich Says Elizabeth Warren Should Challenge Hillary Clinton

[RiverLover]

Robert Reich Says Elizabeth Warren Should Challenge Hillary Clinton
The Nation
3/6/2015



Former secretary of labor Robert Reich says Hillary Clinton should face “a tough primary challenger” and he knows who he would like to see mount a run against the presumed Democratic front-runner.

“I wish that challenger would be Elizabeth Warren,” Reich explained Friday, in a short statement that has energized supporters of a burgeoning movement to draft the senator from Massachusetts as a populist alternative to Clinton.

...Reich has always spoken well of Warren, with whom he shares many positions. They have worked together. And he has spoken about the prospect that she might might challenge Clinton. But this is more than just an expression of ideological sympathy, and more than punditry. This is a former Bill Clinton cabinet member saying, specifically, that he hopes Warren will run.

Coming as the current Clinton controversies are grabbing headlines, Reich’s move is going to garner attention.

Reich knows this. He is a savvy veteran of the political fights of the past four decades (who has campaigned for many Democrats, advised many more and once sought the Democratic nod for governor of Massachusetts). He is an important figure on the left of the Democratic Party. And he has a following—indeed, there has been soft speculation about the prospect that Reich, himself, might be a presidential prospect.

With all of this is mind, here’s how Reich frames his intervention in the current discussion about 2016:

"I’ve been getting lots of calls from reporters wanting to know if Democrats should have a “plan B” if Hillary’s candidacy implodes. I tell them (1) it’s still way too early (there’s not even a plan A because she hasn’t yet declared, and it’s more than a year and a half before Election Day anyway), (2) if she runs the odds of her imploding are very low; she’s been through all this three times before (once as a candidate and twice as Bill Clinton’s de facto campaign manager) and will be a strong candidate, (3) but it would be good for the Democrats and the country—and good for her (it will make her an even stronger candidate)—to have a tough primary challenger, and (4) I wish that challenger would be Elizabeth Warren."

http://www.thenation.com/blog/200713/robert-reich-says-elizabeth-warren-should-challenge-hillary-clinton

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

1. An honest, fair, no hidden agenda challenger like Liz would strengthen everyone on our side

including and especially Hillary.

I would love to see it.

There are those who dont want to see a strong Democratic nominee...however

[still_one]

2. I agree primaries are like boot camp for the general election, however, I take Warren at her word,

she doesn't want to run at this time

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

3. True, she doesn't wanna run at this time - but then, there's always tomorrow.

[still_one]

5. No way for 2016

[RiverLover]

7. Now you're trolling Warren supporters in the Warren Group.

In the interest of being a "safe haven" for Warren supporters, Buh bye

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

10. lol, only Hillary supporters need a private room to avoid scrutiny and debate...

As a strong Elizabeth supporter who believes in her as much as she believes in herself, there's no need to "bar the door" - unless, of course, that is the rule here or the consensus of the other room members.

[RiverLover]

8. Hope for tomorrow!

I'm right there with ya, InAbLuEsTaTe!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

11. Thx River, just watch, as Hillary continues shootin herself in the foot everytime she makes an appearance or exercises poor judgment...

it's just one step closer to a Warren candidacy. As Hillary would say: you can "bank" on it.

[RiverLover]

4. Minds can change. Like when she ran for senate, after not wanting to do so.

And we know she would challenge special interests!

*President Elizabeth Warren*

Will the Democratic Nominee for 2016 Take on the Moneyed Interests?
Robert Reich
3/3/15

The big unknown is whether the Democratic nominee will also take on the moneyed interests -- the large Wall Street banks, big corporations, and richest Americans -- which have been responsible for the largest upward redistribution of income and wealth in modern American history.

Part of this upward redistribution has involved excessive risk-taking on Wall Street. Such excesses padded the nests of executives and traders but required a tax-payer funded bailout when the bubble burst in 2008. It also has caused millions of working Americans to lose their jobs, savings, and homes.

Since then, the Street has been back to many of its old tricks. Its lobbyists are also busily rolling back the Dodd-Frank Act intended to prevent another crash.

The Democratic candidate could condemn this, and go further -- promising to resurrect the Glass-Steagall Act, once separating investment from commercial banking (until the Clinton administration joined with Republicans in repealing it in 1999).

The candidate could also call for busting up Wall Street's biggest banks and thereafter limiting their size; imposing jail sentences on top executives who break the law; cracking down on insider trading; and, for good measure, enacting a small tax on all financial transactions in order to reduce speculation.

Another part of America's upward redistribution has come in the form of "corporate welfare" -- tax breaks and subsidies benefiting particular companies and industries (oil and gas, hedge-fund and private-equity, pharmaceuticals, big agriculture) for no other reason than they have the political clout to get them.

It's also come in the guise of patents and trademarks that extend far beyond what's necessary for adequate returns on corporate investment -- resulting, for example, in drug prices that are higher in America than any other advanced nation.

It's taken the form of monopoly power, generating outsize profits for certain companies (Monsanto, Pfizer, Comcast, for example) along with high prices for consumers.

And it's come in the form of trade agreements that have greased the way for outsourcing American jobs abroad -- thereby exerting downward pressure on American wages.

Not surprisingly, corporate profits now account for a larger percent of the total economy than they have in more than eight decades; and wages, the smallest percent in more than six.

The candidate could demand an end to corporate welfare and excessive intellectual property protection, along with tougher antitrust enforcement against giant firms with unwarranted market power.

...The candidate could also propose true tax reform: higher corporate taxes, in order to finance investments in education and infrastructure; ...

She (or he) could likewise demand higher taxes on America's billionaires and multimillionaires ...

Not the least, taking on the moneyed interests would necessitate limiting their future political power. Here, the candidate could promise to appoint Supreme Court justices committed to reversing Citizens United, push for public financing of elections, and demand full disclosure of all private sources of campaign funding.

But will she (or he) do any of this? ...

[still_one]

6. Enjoy your alternate reality. No doubt there is a parallel

Universe where she is running, but not this one

[Dawgs]

9. Scared shitless is not a good way to support your candidate. n/t

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

12. haha, good one Dawgs. Just listen to Elizabeth speak for 5 minutes & you can see why she's scarin 'em.