Bill Clinton Comes To Town

As president, Bill Clinton visited Westport 3 times — all for fundraisers.

He was back again last night. This time he raised cash on behalf of someone he hopes will be another President Clinton: his wife Hillary.

Attendees paid up to $2,700 for the event, at the Beachside Avenue home of hedge fund manager/Milwaukee Bucks co-owner Marc Lasry.

Press coverage was not allowed. Attendees said Clinton spent half an hour making a spirited case for his wife’s election, then chatted with guests for another half hour.

President Clinton with longtime Democratic activists Lee Greenberg and Martha Aasen.

President Clinton with longtime Democratic activists Lee Greenberg and Martha Aasen.

President Clinton and Senator Richard Blumenthal have been friends for many years.

President Clinton and Senator Richard Blumenthal have been friends for many years.

President Clinton with RTM member Kristan Peters-Hamlin. She is a descendant of Abraham Lincoln's first vice president, Hannibal Hamlin.

President Clinton with RTM member Kristan Peters-Hamlin. Her husband is related to Abraham Lincoln’s first vice president, Hannibal Hamlin.

 

33 responses to “Bill Clinton Comes To Town

  1. Bart Shuldman

    I have to ask–is this the best America can do? A socialist and another candidate who hid a server in her house running against an angry businessman and a nasty senator who has built no relations and has no compassion for people different then he.

    Is this the best we can do? Isis growing, world economies struggling, wages and businesses in the US stagnant, are these the best people to lead us forward? Can any of them truly bring us all together despite our differences? Are these the best to rebuild our global relations after Obama? Does any of these people make you truly feel good and feel you can follow their decisions?

    • Your comments are right on and raise a central question: Why in a great country with 330 million souls do not better qualified people run for high office? There must be certain inherent disoncentives or insurmountable barriers making it unattractive and/or impossible for good folks to win elections and lead the country. What are they? The sooner we address this question, the sooner better choices can emerge. I suspect most of us won’t be around by then.

      • Dick Lowenstein

        Well, there are some other people, by their comments on this blog, who think they are better.

  2. Not another belated April Fool’s day joke, I hope.

  3. Beth Orlan Berkowitz

    Bart, I’m not sure anybody that may be any better would want that job. It ages people immediately and you always make lots of people angry no matter what decisions are made, so it is quite thankless. It’s a powerful job, so whoever does want it needs to be power hungry and have a very big ego. Ideally, it would be great to have someone who could bring everyone together, but that means the people across America have to vote for other offices in a way that will work with who ever the president is. If we have senators and representatives that refuse to cooperate with the president, if the president is not from their side of the aisle, then no president can accomplish much on their own.

    Too many people are too extreme in their ideas on both sides of the aisle. People need to compromise and start working together! It’s not only the presidential race this year that matters, it’s all the local races too!

  4. Gil Ghitelman

    Dan, your Trump spoof on 4/1 was more entertaining. A lot more.

  5. Maren Lauder

    Nice to see Martha Aasen is still going strong. She was our neighbor for 17 years on Ellery In.

  6. “I do not know if the people of the United States would vote for superior men if they ran for office, but there can be no doubt that such men do not run.”
    ― Alexis de Tocqueville, Tocqueville: Democracy in America

  7. Jonathan McClure

    Dan,
    Obviously your blog is not the place for political pieces, even as neutral as a report on a fundraiser. I am surprised by the nature of most of the comments thus far.

    • Don’t be surprised…..politics is politics. At least no one has challenged another to a duel (yet) as in Hamilton/Burr!

    • Elizabeth Thibault

      I can’t say I agree with this. I am interested in hearing more about the local visits of national politicians and what areas of concern they discuss with my neighbors, from either side of the aisle. It helps ensure I am informed about issues that matter to not just me, but also helps me understand what other local individuals may be experiencing. The whole “not living in an echo chamber” thing…

  8. Our global relations have never been better http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/06/24/7-charts-on-how-the-world-views-president-obama/
    and it was because of Obama. Socialism is a balancing act and at the present it is at work favoring the very wealthy. Hillary is a rock who has weathered the slings and arrows of disingenuous detractors for decades.

    • Jack Whittle

      How the world views Obama does not equal “global relations” as many view that term; and as for what other countries think, I’m not much concerned or interested in whether the rest of the world, including those who would like to topple our way of life, “likes” Obama or either of the two likely presidential candidates. In fact I prefer it if Russia, North Korea, China, Iran, and other middle eastern countries who would like to see the US fall do not “really like” our president.

    • Bruce Borner: “Socialism is a balancing act and at the present it is at work favoring the very wealthy.” I am totally mystified as to what you mean by this!

      Insofar as Obama being relatively popular overseas, that’s nice, but this story is about the Clintons, not Obama.

  9. Yes then 11% likeability in Russia is an achievement.

  10. Westport’s Martha & Larry Aasen and many like them are and have been an inspiration to all young and old in their pursuit of political change to better all peoples lives. There’s much that they do behind the scenes to progress us forward.

  11. Marc Lasry’s Avenue Capital is the former employer of Chelsea Clinton during her brief hedge fund career. After she left Avenue, Bloomberg news reported that Chelsea “…still appreciates the finance business, she says. Her husband, Marc Mezvinsky, is the co-founder of the hedge fund Eaglevale Partners LP.

    Clinton says she believes in the industry’s ability to improve the lot of the world’s poorest citizens, by investing in their enterprises.”

    Mezvinsky, despite being the son of a convicted fraudster, was someone able to attract noted “investors” to his fund, including Lloyd Blankfein, head of Goldman Sachs. Not surprisingly, those investors have not done too well — Mezvinsky took a long position on Greece last year — but I do not think they invested for the purpose of making money!

    See this amusing story: Don’t Give Your Money to Clinton Son-in-Law Marc Mezvinsky (unless you’re a rich Democratic donor who values long-term political access over short-term financial gain) http://freebeacon.com/blog/dont-give-your-money-to-clinton-son-in-law-marc-mezvinsky/

    The world’s ultra-wealthy are within their rights stuffing money into the pockets of the Clinton family, but it’s hard to believe they’re doing it to make the world a better place.

    Having this kind of connection to politics is not something Westport should be proud of.

  12. what a shame so many people have such short memories.

  13. Nancy Hunter Wilson

    Glad I wasn’t there. I’d be searching for Purell after shaking Bubba’s hand.

  14. Bart Shuldman

    Campaign reform? Looking at the election this year, Bernie Sanders raised many many millions of dollars from many many people. In addition, a billionaire named Trump spent the least amount of money and leads (not that I support him).

    The rhetoric is noise I. Addition to the rhetoric how the economy and election is rigged by the wealthy. Just look at CT-democratic governor-democratic leader of the house and senate, and the state is failing. And the wealthy are leaving. Not sure they are rigging the economy as much as the 3 democratic leaders are. It is maybe poetic justice that the wealthy and businesses moving out of CT now have raised significant attention. No rigging there

    The noise is just that-noise. This election and the economy are proving exactly that

  15. Trump is our man !!!

  16. Nancy Hunter Wilson

    Question: The World asks, regardless of the choices, why the presidential campaign season is so long and expensive?

  17. Elizabeth Thibault

    We all have a chance to let our political preferences be known on this coming Tuesday. Whatever your stripe, make an informed choice based on reason and let your vote be counted. What I enjoy here is listening to informed opinions and logical reasoning, not personal attacks and emotional screeds. Vote!!

  18. Bart Shuldman

    So as we discuss our differences, at least some of us, we do have a primary coming up. There has been a lot of negative positions by the leading 4 candidates about the global economy.

    What we cannot deny is the global economy is here–and we need a leader to guide us forward. We cannot wish it away, we cannot insult it away, we cannot avoid it away. Trade borders will destroy our economy.

    Anyone who is working and reading 06880 knows. The next leader cannot change it-but must help workers and companies compete in this new world wide market. For if we tried to stop it or put barriers in place, we would face the most significant recession or depression. Everyone working touches this global economy and knows how important it is to their business or company.

    Manufacturing will be challenged. Job training will be required.

    Do any of these 4 candidates give you the confidence they can lead this country thru this challenge? Any of them?

    • Nancy Hunter Wilson

      Well, I wear my Bernie t-shirt proudly! Hillary has to keep working before her coronation.

  19. Elaine Marino

    Dan,

    Your April Fools day posting about the “faux fundraiser” for Donald Trump mentioned: “Approximately 40 people paid $2,700 each for the chance to eat hors d’oeuvres, drink, hear Trump talk, and be photographed with him.”

    This post also mentions that attendees paid “up to $2,700 each.” Is this figure some type of limitation imposed on in-person political fundraisers?

    • Yes, although people can give more (I think) to organizations like a political national or action committee (not directly to a candidate).

      • Bart Shuldman

        It is an individual limit. Under each name a couple can give $5,400-$2,700 each.

  20. Jeff Arciola

    What a great father husband role model. All you democratic women would love to have him married to your daughter. As a president he was a good man. As a human being he is a sleezy scum bag. Watching you women go crazy over him makes me sick. Do you have morals. Did you forget all the cheating and bad things he did to women. I wouldn’t want him near my daughters. We have no morals in this country anymore. Apparently these women don’t seem to care. Wake up people. Get some morals.

  21. Eric William Buchroeder SHS '70

    “The Big Dog” has also visited Cincinnati several times this year for lavish fundraisers with the rich and famous. Evidently if you seek a respite from “Clinton Fatigue” you have to go where the money isn’t.

  22. Eric William Buchroeder SHS '70

    I WILL say this: Laying off the Big Macs hasn’t hurt his appearance (or his life-expectancy). Self-control. What a concept!. You don’t need to pass a law.