Priorities USA reconfigures for Hillary

[RogueBeaver]

With new leadership.

[RogueBeaver]

Said new leadership might include Granholm.

[Frodo]

Does anyone here still doubt Hillary Clinton is running for President?

Biggest Liberal ‘Super PAC’ to Fund Possible Clinton Bid

By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE
JAN. 23, 2014

The largest liberal “super PAC” in the country has begun raising money to elect Hillary Rodham Clinton president, formally aligning itself with her undeclared presidential ambitions more than two years away from the election.

The group, Priorities USA Action, which played a pivotal role in helping re-elect President Obama, also named new directors to steer the organization, appointments that will both cement the group’s pro-Clinton tilt and thrust veterans of Mr. Obama’s political and fund-raising operation into the center of the post-Obama Democratic Party.

The move marks perhaps the earliest-ever start to big-dollar fund-raising in support of a non-incumbent presidential candidate, providing a fund-raising portal for wealthy Clinton supporters eager to help her White House prospects — and to the legions of others eager to ingratiate themselves with Mrs. Clinton and her inner circle.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

All the headlines said it's a liberal super PAC. Hillary is no liberal.

[Ogre Mage]

This is perhaps the clearest sign so far.  The fact that the Obama high command is lining up behind Hillary is no coincidence.

[Mr. Morden]

This is perhaps the clearest sign so far.  The fact that the Obama high command is lining up behind Hillary is no coincidence.

The clearest sign of what?  That the party establishment backs her?  We've known that for some time, no?  'Will she actually run?' is a separate question.  Of course, she probably will, but moves like this don't really speak to that, one way or the other.  This stuff necessarily happens without any direct input from the candidate herself, since any such input would be illegal.

[Ogre Mage]

This is perhaps the clearest sign so far.  The fact that the Obama high command is lining up behind Hillary is no coincidence.

The clearest sign of what?  That the party establishment backs her?  We've known that for some time, no?  'Will she actually run?' is a separate question.  Of course, she probably will, but moves like this don't really speak to that, one way or the other.  This stuff necessarily happens without any direct input from the candidate herself, since any such input would be illegal.

It is the clearest sign that the party establishment is convinced that she will run.  They would not be going through all this trouble if there was considerable uncertainty.  The actions being taken here go way beyond a mere verbal endorsement.

[Mr. Morden]

This is perhaps the clearest sign so far.  The fact that the Obama high command is lining up behind Hillary is no coincidence.

The clearest sign of what?  That the party establishment backs her?  We've known that for some time, no?  'Will she actually run?' is a separate question.  Of course, she probably will, but moves like this don't really speak to that, one way or the other.  This stuff necessarily happens without any direct input from the candidate herself, since any such input would be illegal.

It is the clearest sign that the party establishment is convinced that she will run.  They would not be going through all this trouble if there was considerable uncertainty.  The actions being taken here go way beyond a mere verbal endorsement.

It sounds like everyone has talked themselves into believing that she's running because they desperately want her to run.  The party establishment wants her in the race, and in their own minds, greasing the wheels like this will make that happen.  But there is still the fundamental point that she needs to want it herself.  From reading her public statements, it sounds like she's leaning towards jumping in, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.

[Ogre Mage]

This is perhaps the clearest sign so far.  The fact that the Obama high command is lining up behind Hillary is no coincidence.

The clearest sign of what?  That the party establishment backs her?  We've known that for some time, no?  'Will she actually run?' is a separate question.  Of course, she probably will, but moves like this don't really speak to that, one way or the other.  This stuff necessarily happens without any direct input from the candidate herself, since any such input would be illegal.

It is the clearest sign that the party establishment is convinced that she will run.  They would not be going through all this trouble if there was considerable uncertainty.  The actions being taken here go way beyond a mere verbal endorsement.

It sounds like everyone has talked themselves into believing that she's running because they desperately want her to run.  The party establishment wants her in the race, and in their own minds, greasing the wheels like this will make that happen.  But there is still the fundamental point that she needs to want it herself.  From reading her public statements, it sounds like she's leaning towards jumping in, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.

I think the Establishment's current actions speak to the reality that the lead time and preparation required for a presidential campaign is far greater than it was a generation ago.  As far as Messina & Co. making these moves out of "desperation," I find it hard to believe they would waste all this time, energy and money on someone who had signaled little interest in running.  They are aware of insider information which we can only hypothesize about and are quite familiar with the Dance of the Seven Veils which precedes a run.  Clinton isn't going to show her cards at this early date and she understands this game as well as anyone.

[Mr. Morden]

As far as Messina & Co. making these moves out of "desperation," I find it hard to believe they would waste all this time, energy and money on someone who had signaled little interest in running.

No, that's not what I meant.  She has signalled interest in running, and she will probably run, but we already knew that from her own words, how she shifted from "I'm not running" to "I'll think about it" about a year ago.  But the establishment is nonetheless desperate for her to run.  (Being "desperate" for something to happen doesn't mean that it's unlikely to happen.)

I'm unconvinced that Messina & Co. have some kind of insider info on this.  Maybe they do, but this move doesn't convince me one way or the other on that.  Read most of the stories in which Dem. insiders gush over Clinton.  Their logic tends to be "We need her to run, therefore she will run."

[IceSpear]

All the headlines said it's a liberal super PAC. Hillary is no liberal.

But liberals know the importance of the Supreme Court, unlike liberals who would rather flame out and lose McGovern style with Brian Schweitzer.

[Beet]

But Morden, why is the establishment so desperate for her to run? Because of polls? I'm unconvinced it's the end of the world if she doesn't run. There are other candidates.

[Mr. Morden]

But Morden, why is the establishment so desperate for her to run? Because of polls? I'm unconvinced it's the end of the world if she doesn't run. There are other candidates.

OK, let me clarify what I mean further.  Maybe "desperate" is the wrong word.  Let's just say that they very strongly desire it.  Doesn't mean that they couldn't win with another candidate.  But the bulk of the party establishment seems to have convinced themselves that she's their strongest candidate.  Doesn't mean that they're right, but that's what they seem to think.

And the bonus is that there's a belief that if Clinton runs, there's a decent chance that she'll only face token opposition in the primary.  And the establishment also tends to believe that primaries are risky, and it's preferable to just let their candidate skate through unscathed.  Again, doesn't mean that they're *right* in thinking that.  But that appears to be a common belief, based on my reading of the situation.

Finally, there's also the groupthink desire to be on the winning side.  It looks like she's probably going to run anyway, so if I'm a Democratic operative, it's in my interest to suck up to her early and promote her candidacy, because she'll remember that when she's in power.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

All the headlines said it's a liberal super PAC. Hillary is no liberal.

A liberal is a humanist-capitalist who supports modest reform but fundamentally believes that the system as it exists is a good one. Hillary is a "liberal', but leftists like you and me should abandon that label.

[Beet]

But Morden, why is the establishment so desperate for her to run? Because of polls? I'm unconvinced it's the end of the world if she doesn't run. There are other candidates.

OK, let me clarify what I mean further.  Maybe "desperate" is the wrong word.  Let's just say that they very strongly desire it.  Doesn't mean that they couldn't win with another candidate.  But the bulk of the party establishment seems to have convinced themselves that she's their strongest candidate.  Doesn't mean that they're right, but that's what they seem to think.

And the bonus is that there's a belief that if Clinton runs, there's a decent chance that she'll only face token opposition in the primary.  And the establishment also tends to believe that primaries are risky, and it's preferable to just let their candidate skate through unscathed.  Again, doesn't mean that they're *right* in thinking that.  But that appears to be a common belief, based on my reading of the situation.

Finally, there's also the groupthink desire to be on the winning side.  It looks like she's probably going to run anyway, so if I'm a Democratic operative, it's in my interest to suck up to her early and promote her candidacy, because she'll remember that when she's in power.

That makes sense, thanks.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

She's probably planning to run as of now, but her health and Bill's health are up in the air and could very well put the kibosh on it.

No doubt this will shift to whichever female candidate captures the momentum if that happens, though.

She's a strong candidate, but I think Cuomo is the single toughest candidate to beat on either side.