Support NeoGAF

[NullPointer]

Because she doesn't need to and there has never been a tradition of presidential candidates releasing transcripts of their paid speeches, unlike those of tax returns, which Bernie has been unable to provide completely.

She said she would though, once her nonsensical demands were met, which they have been.

 

[User 463088]

I know as a Hillary supporter you don't want to acknowledge this, but the reason she won't release the speeches is simply because they would make her look really bad.

"When Hillary Clinton spoke to Goldman Sachs executives and technology titans at a summit in Arizona in October of 2013, she spoke glowingly of the work the bank was doing raising capital and helping create jobs, according to people who saw her remarks.
Clinton, who received $225,000 for her appearance, praised the diversity of Goldman’s workforce and the prominent roles played by women at the blue-chip investment bank and the tech firms present at the event. She spent no time criticizing Goldman or Wall Street more broadly for its role in the 2008 financial crisis."

“It was pretty glowing about us,” one person who watched the event said. “It’s so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.”

More at:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/clinton-speeches-218969

Actually, I'm capable of not being swallowed up in partisanship, and I can happily criticize Hillary when she deserves it.

Refusing to release the transcripts of these speeches is a non issue because 1) No one has ever done it before and 2) it doesn't matter. Is there something in there that would be politically problematic for her? Maybe. Could be.

At the same time, there must be something in Bernie's tax returns that he doesn't want us to see. If there's nothing sauce there, he should have had no trouble releasing them.

But this goes back to Bernie's motivation the entire primary season. He just kinda wink wink nod nod "fraud" "corruption" and people buy it hook, line and sinker.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

She said she would though, once her nonsensical demands were met, which they have been.

Actually they haven't in any reasonable standard. He released some partial clippings of a single year. That's a joke.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Things with more dignity than Bernie Sanders:
Ted Cruz
Marco Rubio
Mitt
Every other candidate ever

Come the fuck on.

The only way you could get any more hyperbolic is if you added Hitler to that list.

Ted Cruz fucking treats women like shit and thinks God speaks to him directly.

Marco Rubio, in a live presidential debate, said Obama had a master plan to destroy the country.

Bush fucking ran a campaign where he used people's racism against McCain.

Bush, Sr. has been quoted as saying, in the White House, that Atheists are not citizens.

You're seriously going to say Bernie Sanders, a guy that wants to actually try to make America great, has no dignity? Or even just less dignity than those others I listed? Plus, "every" is a pretty big word.

 

[royalan]

She said she would though, once her nonsensical demands were met, which they have been.

Have they?

Because the primary is, for all intents and purposes, over. And her general election opponent has not released his transcripts.

 

[Davide]

Have they?

Because the primary is, for all intents and purposes, over. And her general election opponent has not released his transcripts.

Really disappointing Clinton doesn't hold herself to a higher standard on this than the GOP.

 

[davepoobond]

...you do realize that Wall Street plays a fundamental role in the American and global economy right? That they don't actually operate from the Death Star...right?

Hail hydra

 

[User 463088]

She said she would though, once her nonsensical demands were met, which they have been.

I haven't seen the transcripts of the speeches Trump was paid for.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Alot of assumptions here.

First, you seem to imply that Hillary will "spread Bernies message" I think a lot of Sanders supporters would take issue with that.

Not really, I said you as in his supporter spread his message while voting for the candidate who is obviously going to win. Get the transcript. And really I don't care what Sanders supporters take issue with, many of them don't deal in reality.

Second, you make the assumption that the supporters of the Socialist candidate come from a position of "privilege", just historically speaking that has never been the case.

Sanders has only been able to capture the white vote. I know many straight white Americans think they're the most oppressed group in this country...but they're not. Again their rights (that some groups still don't have) weren't added as a clause that get violated by states constantly in the name of religion and other nonsense.

Third, you seem to think everyone holds the integrity of their conscious in as low esteem as yourself.

No, it's that I assume those people are straight white male. I'm a not a white male, so I can't "Stick it to system" and vote Trump or not vote at all, my conscious doesn't allow me to fuck both myself and my fellow minorities like that. I have too much integrity for such shallow nonsense.

Like I said, can't wait till this election is over so most of yall can hop off the bandwagon and go jump on the next fad. If his supporters cared about his ideology and platform as much as they pretend they do, they'd vote at the state level...but that's too much work and all.

 

[D.Lo]

Why debate someone you aren't even running against mathematically

Because she agreed to.

It makes sense why she doesn't want to do it, but it's still a very public broken promise.

 

[Koyuga]

This can only result in good things. Bring it on.

 

[Davide]

and 2) it doesn't matter. Is there something in there that would be politically problematic for her? Maybe. Could be.

At the same time, there must be something in Bernie's tax returns that he doesn't want us to see. If there's nothing sauce there, he should have had no trouble releasing them.

But this goes back to Bernie's motivation the entire primary season. He just kinda wink wink nod nod "fraud" "corruption" and people buy it hook, line and sinker.

But it does matter, because it would seriously damage her credibility. Yes, Bernie not releasing his tax returns is a mistake, but is not in the same league as Clinton hiding her speeches when it has been asked of her so many times and reports say her speeches contradict her current rhetoric.

 

[royalan]

Really disappointing Clinton doesn't hold herself to a higher standard on this than the GOP.

This coming from someone defending the only candidate this primary on either side who was caught red-handed stealing his opponent's campaign data is laughable. Bernie Sanders is in no position to talk standards.

 

[M0nochromatic]

It's kind of a weird ass cycle. The Bernie "jailers" are the modern version of the Hillary "birthers". The salt must always flow in one way or another.

I agree that this won't change the endgame in November. I was just expressing my exasperation over these stupid decisions that his campaign keeps making.

Like you said, Bernie and Hillary are nearly identical in their outlook for the country, even if the path is different. So now that the game is almost done, the focus should be on working together to defeat Trump, but it's not. If any votes are swayed, it wouldn't be from this one debate. True. It would be the culmination of Bernie's crazy attacks over the past few weeks. This debate is just a continued pattern of incompetence that's become infuriating.

After a cool down and a big ole' heaping of self pity in June, Sanders and the diehard revolutionaries will get on board. This never ending primary will be a neat page in a history book.

I'll even throw in a naive and optimistic hope that the down ticket funding will mix with that new millennial fervor and we'll see some excitng mid term results, but that's a ways off.

 

[davepoobond]

But it does matter, because it would seriously damage her credibility. Yes, Bernie not releasing his tax returns is a mistake, but is not in the same league as Clinton hiding her speeches.

According to what metric? Lol

Tax returns are way more important. That's who gives you MONEY -- especially since sanders' platform is all about that aspect

 

[HUELEN10]

But it does matter, because it would seriously damage her credibility. Yes, Bernie not releasing his tax returns is a mistake, but is not in the same league as Clinton hiding her speeches when it has been asked of her so many times and reports say her speeches contradict her current rhetoric.

That and candidates aren't legally required to release their taxes.

Completely different league indeed.

 

[NullPointer]

Actually they haven't in any reasonable standard. He released some partial clippings of a single year. That's a joke.

I thought the deal was that she'd release her paid speech transcripts once all the candidates, Democrat and Republican alike, released their paid speech transcripts.

That's happened.

 

[Hige]

Lol at all the FUD over this. This is like when GAF freaked out about Bernie doing a town hall on Fox and had to backpedal once Hillary joined and the sky didn't fall after the town hall aired.

 

[Fat4all]

That and candidates aren't legally required to reveal their taxes.

Completely different league indeed.

And they are legally required to release speech transcripts?

 

[royalan]

I thought the deal was that she'd release her paid speech transcripts once all the candidates, Democrat and Republican alike, released their paid speech transcripts.

That's happened.

Trump has released all his speech transcripts?

 

[Davide]

According to what metric? Lol

Tax returns are way more important. That's who gives you MONEY -- especially since sanders' platform is all about that aspect

What, do you really think Bernie Sanders has been taking money from Super PACs, Wall Streets, and billionaires over the years?

 

[davepoobond]

That and candidates aren't legally required to reveal their taxes.

Completely different league indeed.

Candidates aren't legally required to release transcripts either.

Also they aren't legally required to comply with Inspector General investigations about emails.

Except if you are Hillary Clinton, then it matters when something isn't legally required and she doesn't do it

What, do you really think Bernie Sanders has been taking money from Super PACs, Wall Streets, and billionaires over the years?

How would I know? He hasn't released all of his tax returns!!!

 

[royalan]

What, do you really think Bernie Sanders has been taking money from Super PACs, Wall Streets, and billionaires over the years?

No.

But knowing some of the batshit crazy views he's held over the years, I wouldn't be surprised if he's donated to some questionable organizations.

 

[User 463088]

But it does matter, because it would seriously damage her credibility. Yes, Bernie not releasing his tax returns is a mistake, but is not in the same league as Clinton hiding her speeches when it has been asked of her so many times and reports say her speeches contradict her current rhetoric.

This doesn't even make sense, considering Bernie has said multiple times the rest of his tax returns were coming...but then, magically, Jane decided that they'd only release them when she released her speech transcripts. (Holy non-sequitur Batman.)

The number of people who actually care about these speech transcripts is in direct proportion to the number of people who post on /S4P.

Interestingly, Bernie didn't even think he should attack her on them because, in his words, she had the right to make a living. It was only when he started losing that he latched onto it in an attempt to sway voters.

No one outside a very niche group of people cares about these transcripts. No one cares about Bernie's taxes because it's irrelevant.

 

[Davide]

How would I know? He hasn't released all of his tax returns!!!

Well again, it would be delusional to think that there is more to be suspicious about in his tax returns, over what's in Clinton's speeches which we have reports about and it sounds like they would be pretty damning.

And yes, I think he should release his tax returns ASAP.

 

[Angelus Errare]

I'll even throw in a naive and optimistic hope that the down ticket funding will mix with that new millennial fervor and we'll see some excitng mid term results, but that's a ways off.

Come on, you know they won't. I know you said optimistic hope but deep down you know they won't. =P

 

[NullPointer]

Trump has released all his speech transcripts?

Touche. Not at all, but its been reported before that he had no paid speeches for Wall Street.

The context has always been Wall Street, but widening it out to all paid speeches is a fine riposte.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

...you do realize that Wall Street plays a fundamental role in the American and global economy right? That they don't actually operate from the Death Star...right?

The Democratic Party really is a shadow of it's former self. It's now the party of the 1%, the financiers and bankers and globalists.

Meanwhile...

I have hedge fund guys that are making a lot of money that aren't paying anything. They're paying nothing and it's ridiculous. I want to save the middle class. The hedge fund guys didn't build this country. These are guys that shift paper around and they get lucky. Some of them are friends of mine, some of them I couldn't care less about. It's the wrong thing.

And Democrats wonder why Trump is so popular. Maybe they should look at themselves and what their party has become.

 

[davepoobond]

Well again, it would be delusional to think that there is more to be suspicious about in his tax returns, over what's in Clinton's speeches which we have reports about and it sounds like they would be pretty damning.

And yes, I think he should release his tax returns ASAP.

Why is it delusional? You are making assumptions about a man most people didnt even know existed before last year. He has lived for 70+ years.

What do you even think is in those speeches, seriously? Plans for Nazis to take over America?

 

[User 463088]

What, do you really think Bernie Sanders has been taking money from Super PACs, Wall Streets, and billionaires over the years?

Well, except for the time Bernie took money from Hillary's SuperPac....

 

[Davide]

What do you even think is in those speeches, seriously? Plans for Nazis to take over America?

If you haven't read what I already posted, her speeches seem to have been absolutely contrary to the rhetoric Clinton has had this election season.

I'm off for the night, I did not expect so many die-hard (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way) Clinton supports on GAF.

 

[davepoobond]

If you haven't read what I already posted, her speeches seem to have been absolutely contrary to the rhetoric Clinton has had this election season. It shows that she is not an honest person.

There should be a tax on Wall Street speech speculation.

Give me a break. "Seems like" and "might be" isn't good enough. Tell me exactly what you think is in these speeches and what points are exactly supposed to be contradicted.

 

[eBay Huckster]

There should be a tax on Wall Street speech speculation.

I approve of this idea if only because it would be a strong disincentive against Twitter usage

 

[royalan]

The Democratic Party really is a shadow of it's former self. It's now the party of the 1%, the financiers and bankers and globalists.

Meanwhile...



And Democrats wonder why Trump is so popular. Maybe they should look at themselves and what their party has become.

Honest question: do you think the beings who work on Wall Street are lizard people?

Demons?

Is Wall Street actually the hell mouth?

Because some people seem to show nothing but contempt for an industry they don't know much about besides what can be gleaned from headlines.

Not saying Wall Street/the financial industry is above reproach, but the impulse to show nothing but contempt for anyone who so much as drives down the street is cartoonish.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

The Democratic Party really is a shadow of it's former self. It's now the party of the 1%, the financiers and bankers and globalists.

Meanwhile...



And Democrats wonder why Trump is so popular. Maybe they should look at themselves and what their party has become.

Uh-huh..

No, we all left GAF political threads after getting bans.

It's okay, during my ban I actually went to r/Politics for the first time ever in my life and now I have a place to go when I want the truth.

I already have a strong feeling I know how you came to that conclusion.

 

[Wallach]

Uh-huh..

buhahahaha

 

[Toxi]

Uh-huh..

Damn.

 

[IrishNinja]

And Democrats wonder why Trump is so popular. Maybe they should look at themselves and what their party has become.

oh yeah, Trump's popularity is practically hinged on his legit & thoughtful platform of progressive taxation, good call here

Uh-huh..

...well, shit

 

[kirblar]

And Democrats wonder why Trump is so popular. Maybe they should look at themselves and what their party has become.

Yes, lets stoop to scapegoating entire populations of people for incredibly complicated issues without easy solutions!

That always ends well.

 

[M0nochromatic]

Come on, you know they won't. I know you said optimistic hope but deep down you know they won't. =P

I can dream of our society suddenly leaping forward!

That's probably all it'll ever be, a dream, but it's one I enjoy indulging in. Hey, at least with those Supreme Court seats being replaced we'll be making progress at like the pace of a brisk jog.

 

[Toxi]

Come on, you know they won't. I know you said optimistic hope but deep down you know they won't. =P

They never will because the moment they vote in anything that actually matters, their purity is instantly tainted for all eternity. Far better to remain virtuous.

 

[Clockwork5]

Yes, lets stoop to scapegoating entire populations of people for incredibly complicated issues without easy solutions!

That always ends well.

That's politics, baby!

 

[eBay Huckster]

Thing is, we already know why Trump is so popular.

The reason starts with a "w" and ends with "hite resentment".

(Which is itself a complex issue without any easy resolution!)

 

[TheLaughingStock]

The Donald going for the jugular. Master class. If he takes out the democratic socialist or makes him look good heads he wins...tails you lose. I love it.

 

[Davide]

There should be a tax on Wall Street speech speculation.

Give me a break. "Seems like" and "might be" isn't good enough. Tell me exactly what you think is in these speeches and what points are exactly supposed to be contradicted.

"I did stand up to the banks. I did make it clear that their behavior would not be excused." - Hillary Clinton

Meanwhile... "It was pretty glowing about us. It’s so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.”

The person who saw Clinton’s Arizona remarks to Goldman said they thought there was no chance the campaign would ever release them. “It would bury her against Sanders,” this person said. “It really makes her look like an ally of the firm.”

It seems Clinton was unable to admonish them in the slightest degree - hardly standing up to the banks. Difficult to outline the exact points for you when I haven't seen the transcripts for myself but the consensus from everyone who heard who speeches contradicts what she has been telling people about her attitude towards the banks.

Release of Clinton’s Wall Street Speeches Could End Her Candidacy for President - Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/release-of-clintons-wall-street-speeches_b_9698632.html)

Hillary is absolutely a weak candidate who Trump will hammer away at in the next months far more aggressively than Bernie Sanders ever did.

 

[eBay Huckster]

You're aware that Seth Abramson just apparently disavowed his posts from the past several months by claiming they were some kind of elaborate "metamodernist writing experiment", right?

 

[Toxi]

The Donald going for the jugular. Master class. If he takes out the democratic socialist or makes him look good heads he wins...tails you lose. I love it.

Trump is laughing at how a LOSER thinks he can DEAL with a WINNER who makes GREAT DEALS.

After this HUGE debate, he will celebrate with a TRUMP STEAK.

 

[Davide]

You're aware that Seth Abramson just disavowed his posts from the past several months by claiming they were some kind of elaborate "metamodernist writing experiment", right?

And that matters why?

Politico has all the same information.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/clinton-speeches-218969

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

"I did stand up to the banks. I did make it clear that their behavior would not be excused." - Hillary Clinton

Meanwhile... "It was pretty glowing about us. It’s so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.”

The person who saw Clinton’s Arizona remarks to Goldman said they thought there was no chance the campaign would ever release them. “It would bury her against Sanders,” this person said. “It really makes her look like an ally of the firm.”

It seems Clinton was unable to admonish them in the slightest degree - hardly standing up to the banks. Difficult to outline the exact points for you when I haven't seen the transcripts for myself but the consensus from everyone who heard who speeches contradicts what she has been telling people about her attitude towards the banks.

Release of Clinton’s Wall Street Speeches Could End Her Candidacy for President - Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/release-of-clintons-wall-street-speeches_b_9698632.html)

Hillary is absolutely a weak candidate who Trump will hammer away at in the next months far more aggressively than Bernie Sanders ever did.

Once again I say, uh-huh...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/

Sorry, but this guy seems biased as all hell.

 

[eBay Huckster]

And that matters why?

Politico has all the same information.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/clinton-speeches-218969

It matters for the same reason that I wouldn't take @dril seriously on the merits of buying candles.

And lo, your secondary source is the site that exists so Beltway pundits can circle jerk!