What will people read into Hillary's self-loan?

Great Debates
41

[QUOTE=jayjay]
And there are probably legal reasons it’s being called a “loan”, for that matter. I can’t imagine why a presidential candidate with $5 million dollars to blow would cavil on whether or not she gets it back if it helps her to the White House.
[/QUOTE]

One legal reason I can think of is she might want to get it back, if she can. They have millions but not, that I know, hundreds and hundreds of millions. Campaigns are little mini-corporations, specially set up and specially-regulated. If they have a surplus (and sometimes friends or want to be friends of a candidate failed or successful will keep paying into the fund up through and including the election), they can pay off their debts and then do other things with their money (including, potentially I guess, refunding donations). By making a “loan” rather than a “donation,” all she’s doing is staking her place in line such that if there is a surplus, the campaign can pay her back as an as-of-right creditor in a quasi-arms-length fashion.

42

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Regarding the title question of this thread, I’d say the OP demontrates that people will read into this whatever they want to, to confirm what they already believe.
[/QUOTE]

That’s true of everything regarding the Clintons. If Obama is a blank slate, Bill and Hillary are a Rorschach test.

43

[QUOTE=Stranger On A Train]
Hillary Clinton has always struck me as Nurse Cramer for some reason…
[/QUOTE]
Reminds me more of Nurse Ratched.

44

I had the same reaction as burundi. When I heard about the loan on NPR, she sounded kind of amused about it, in a, “isn’t life crazy?” way. Poor little rich girl: the fact that you’re loaning yourself $5 million does not in any way engender my sympathy, much less my empathy. I can’t even imagine loaning myself ten bucks. Loaning myself more money than my expected lifetime earnings is beyond the pale. The weirdest part for me is that she is talking about the self-loan at all: what on earth does she hope to gain from talking about it?

A month ago, I was pretty evenly split between Clinton and Obama. Pretty much everything either of them does moves me closer to Obama.

Daniel

45

[QUOTE=Duckster]
You may be correct here.

At the same time, if the only people who “buy” into your campaign include the candidate’s own money (loan or gift) and not PACs, ordinary folks and friends, that says to me there must be something wrong with the candidate. More so, when said candidate has a long and well known public track record.

For me, Hillary is in deep trouble.
[/QUOTE]

Maybe, but check this out. She’s not going to go away.

CNN) – Hillary Clinton raised over $7.5 million online since February 1, $6.4 million of which has come in the last 24-30 hours, her campaign chairman announced Thursday.

That number appears to fall short of what rival Barack Obama has raised in the same timeframe. Earlier Thursday, the Illinois senator’s campaign announced it had raised $7.2 million in the first 36 hours after polls closed on Super Tuesday.

“The grassroots in the last 24 hours or since Super Tuesday have really stepped up,” Clinton Campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe said on a conference call with supporters. “It has been spectacular, it has been a huge outpouring of support.”

He also said that since Super Tuesday, the campaign has seen 40,000 new online donors.

McAuliffe suggested the news of Clinton’s decision to loan herself $5 million in January was a chief reason for the heightened fundraising haul, saying many supporters were unaware the campaign was in need of cash.

He also said all campaign staff was now being fully paid, following reports some senior staff members had voluntarily offered to forgo pay for a month.

The campaign will begin to air television ads in Washington State, Nebraska, Maine – states which are set to hold nominating contests this weekend. It will also begin airing ads in Ohio and Texas next week ahead of the March 4 primaries in those states.

– CNN Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: Barack Obama • Hillary Clinton

46

[QUOTE=kevja]
Maybe, but check this out. She’s not going to go away.

CNN) – Hillary Clinton raised over $7.5 million online since February 1, $6.4 million of which has come in the last 24-30 hours, her campaign chairman announced Thursday.

That number appears to fall short of what rival Barack Obama has raised in the same timeframe. Earlier Thursday, the Illinois senator’s campaign announced it had raised $7.2 million in the first 36 hours after polls closed on Super Tuesday.

“The grassroots in the last 24 hours or since Super Tuesday have really stepped up,” Clinton Campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe said on a conference call with supporters. “It has been spectacular, it has been a huge outpouring of support.”

He also said that since Super Tuesday, the campaign has seen 40,000 new online donors.

McAuliffe suggested the news of Clinton’s decision to loan herself $5 million in January was a chief reason for the heightened fundraising haul, saying many supporters were unaware the campaign was in need of cash.

He also said all campaign staff was now being fully paid, following reports some senior staff members had voluntarily offered to forgo pay for a month.

The campaign will begin to air television ads in Washington State, Nebraska, Maine – states which are set to hold nominating contests this weekend. It will also begin airing ads in Ohio and Texas next week ahead of the March 4 primaries in those states.

– CNN Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: Barack Obama • Hillary Clinton
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, another story said it may have been a stunt all along. “Loan” money to your campaign (thus assuring you that if there is a surplus, which you are pretty sure there will be, you’ll definitely get it back and not have to divvy it up with other “donors”); “suddenly” discover a groundswell of support; claim a “comeback bounce” or momentum.

Plays in well to two threadbare themes they can’t get enough of: Hillary the beleaguered lil’ victim gal, and the sick-of-it-twelve-years-ago “comebacnk kid” crap. By the way, alternatedly poor-mouthing and presenting yourself as the inevitable candidate of destiny are not mutually incompatible, and she’s done both. Of course Obama’s also been sure to let people know he’s the “underdog” as his contributions and delegates grow. All the tiresome spinning of expectations is part of what makes you sick about the whole game.

47

First:Hilary got millions from speaking fees (which are thinly disguised bribes). Second, her husband go $11 million for his biography. So the Clintons have plenty of money-given to them by people ho want a return on their investment.

48

I don’t find anything that odd about it. Romney just spent his own money on his campaign, no “loan” about it.

49

Except that he can’t pocket future contributions under the guise of having his campaign repay the loan.

So, Lib, what do you want her to do? Go to the loan sharks instead? Or maybe just go away, since it is her very existence on the same planet that vexes you so?

50

Kerry did the same thing in 2003, to the tune of $6 million. I don’t recall anyone having a problem with that back then.

51

[QUOTE=Huerta88]
Yeah, another story said it may have been a stunt all along. “Loan” money to your campaign (thus assuring you that if there is a surplus, which you are pretty sure there will be, you’ll definitely get it back and not have to divvy it up with other “donors”); “suddenly” discover a groundswell of support; claim a “comeback bounce” or momentum.
[/QUOTE]

Don’t forget to add into the mix the smoke-filled room, back door politicking that will surely go on before the election. Obama may be the golden boy popular candidate of the masses, but as pointed on on Olbermann tonight, it’s 80 some days between the last Democratic primary in early June and the August convention. You can bet Hillary will use her contacts and clout to stack the deck in her favor during the long hot, summer; favors she will be expected to deliver come January 20th.

52

Here’s the “It was a stunt” interpretation

53

[QUOTE=MilTan]
Although it’s not the case for Obama, whose net worth appears to be less than 2 million. This doesn’t seem to take into account sales of Audacity of Hope, which I’m sure bumped his net worth up a couple of million, though.
[/QUOTE]

Gosh, just four million or so. I bet his family goes hungry most nights.

54

[QUOTE=Menocchio]
Here’s the “It was a stunt” interpretation
[/QUOTE]

I think it was. As I said in my first post, you generally know a decent amount of time in advance whether you can pay your staff for the upcoming month. We would have heard if she were that low on money a while ago. This was all a calculated move.

55

[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
So, Lib, what do you want her to do? Go to the loan sharks instead? Or maybe just go away, since it is her very existence on the same planet that vexes you so?
[/QUOTE]
Already said what I wanted her to do. Have a read of the thread.

56

I mistrust Hillary Clinton so much that I would not be surprised if it were a ploy to make her seem like an underdog, an image she’s tried to foist on her gullible public already.

If that’s not the case–actually, either way–I think it looks pretty bad for her campaign. Either a blunder, financial mismanagement, or her support isn’t as broad-based as the well-heeled Democratic machine makes it look.

Frankly, it’s motivated me to send some cash to Obama, something I have never done before someone was actually, clearly nominated.

57

[QUOTE=Knorf]
I mistrust Hillary Clinton so much that I would not be surprised if it were a ploy to make her seem like an underdog, an image she’s tried to foist on her gullible public already.

If that’s not the case–actually, either way–I think it looks pretty bad for her campaign. Either a blunder, financial mismanagement, or her support isn’t as broad-based as the well-heeled Democratic machine makes it look.

Frankly, it’s motivated me to send some cash to Obama, something I have never done before someone was actually, clearly nominated.
[/QUOTE]

Newt Gingrich agrees with you according to him on GMA this morning. He thinks Obama is going to stomp her. I don’t know many others who know the back room smokey ways better than he…I think he’s right.

58

$5 million worth of designer handbags down the drain. What was she thinking?

Probably that this move will make her seem like she’s struggling and fragile… bring on the pity votes.

59

[QUOTE=casieispretty]
$5 million worth of designer handbags down the drain. What was she thinking?

Probably that this move will make her seem like she’s struggling and fragile… bring on the pity votes.
[/QUOTE]

Votes? Maybe not. But donations… You don’t give money to someone who doesn’t need it.

60

[QUOTE=Menocchio]
Votes? Maybe not. But donations… You don’t give money to someone who doesn’t need it.
[/QUOTE]

I think the answer is . . . both. The housewives who were influenced to cast their vote for her when she wept (in response, let it be remembered, to one brainiac’s question that began by asking about how she kept her hair so nicely coiffed) in N.H. will feel similar pity to the Gal In Peril here. Not sure those are the real cash cows or Dem. activists – those folk might or might not care if she sheds a tear, but could be alarmed at the notion that their faction of the party is on the ropes financially and open their wallets yet again.