Ballots for the primary went out in the mail today for Colorado. We have been inundated with Bloomberg ads since November-December. The result is I have many Bloomberg-curious friends and ballots are arriving in days.
Because of who my friends are, politics are discussed at lunches, dinners and coffee breaks. I have Sanders-curious, Pete-curious and Yang-curious friends and while we talk, I’m able to give them resources for fact-checks.
But with Bloomberg, I actually have no counterpoint – I have not paid that much attention, but I know his ad-blitz has been effective here.
So give me the scoop. Pros and cons on the “Mike Can Get It Done” campaign.
I’ll check back later to see if he has survived the melee and if the blog is still standing.
JR
If you actually look at Bloomburg’s platform it’s to the right of Sanders and Warren, but to the left of Biden and Buttigieg. I’d be fine with him as the nominee if I can’t have Warren. But really anyone is okay with me.
PJ
Copying this from downstairs:
Bloomberg is a very wealthy man with a massive ego who thinks organizing a city (or country) for the convenience and taste of rich people is the best way to go about things. He sure as shit is not going to do anything about income inequality on his own. But he is not an idiot. He hired excellent ad and communications people for his campaign and it is paying off. He would never hire people like Nina Turner and David Sirota to work for him. Despite his ego, he would be concerned, if not disturbed, if his campaign staff led a chant of “the One! the One!” at his rally. I’m against Bloomberg, but his judgment is way better than Bernie’s.
WaterGirl
Just say ‘no’ to Mike Bloomberg. If I wanted Republican or Republican-lite, who hates unions and helps Republicans get elected, I would not be a Democrat.
Why are so many people considering settling for a non-Democrat almost right out of the gate? One state has caucused, and that’s it.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
I have to give Bloomberg credit: he has an effective, slick media operation behind him. I’m sure it’s very convincing with low-info voters.
Based on the ads, he doesn’t seem that bad. However, stop and frisk and his general authoritarian tendencies give me pause. That, and I don’t like a billionaire buying his way into the race
Baud
@WaterGirl:
Because of how well the other non-Democrat is doing.
We destroyed our own soul in 2016.
chopper
well, he’s got more money than god, and if he opens up his checkbook for downticket races we have a better chance taking the senate. bloomberg isn’t a rank and file democrat so he’s not the sort of guy who’d normally have much mojo with congress, but if he helped get a bunch of people elected he’d do much better.
that’s about all i got. oh, and he’s good on guns.
Fair Economist
Bloomberg spent 11.7 MILLION to re-elect Republican Senator Toomey in 2016. If we end up one short in the Senate, Bloomberg will be at fault.
Obviously Bloomberg vs. Trump is Bloomberg by a mile, but he is not on our side.
JPL
My personal advice which is free, ignore him. He’s better than trump and wilmer , but that’s about it.
rp
@WaterGirl: because Biden is fading fast, Warren can’t seem to catch fire, and Buttigieg is a bit of an empty suit, so it looks like sanders has a real shot. That scares a lot of people (including me)
Marcopolo
Bloomberg has been anti-labor (when he left office in NYC most if not all unions had unresolved contracts.
He has supported cutting entitlements (SS & Medicaid).
Stop & Frisk
Helping R’s win Senate & Governor races in PA & MI.
He has NDAs with many employees vis a vis working for him & having disputes.
While I think he’d be a benevolent despot president, I don’t think he has the same view of an expansive government that works to help it’s citizens that I do.
Making dinner so gotta run but there is more. His ads are propaganda.
MazeDancer
He has more money than it is conceivable to have.
He could spend 20 Billion dollars on the election and not feel a thing for the rest of his life.
He hates Trump.
He hates guns.
He is worried about climate catastrophe.
He believes in the Constitution.
He understands what the election is about – destroying Trump.
He is not exciting.
He may end up being our only choice. Because Bernie is a lying, grifter and does not deserve the nom. Black people and grown women despise Bernie. At least Bloomberg apologized for Stop and Frisk. Not enough. But it’s a start.
Interesting point – if Bloomberg chooses Stacey Abrams as his Veep, two single people will be on the ballot.
laura
his campaign ads are very good. He is not. He’s not a Democrat. He’s actively worked to get Republicans elected. He’s down with cuts to both Medicare and Social Security. His campaign at its essence is “don’t touch My Stuff.” Hard pass on that particular billionaire.
debbie
I love the scarved hen on the fly-out!
WaterGirl
@Baud:
Say more?
khead
Bloomberg? Full stop (and frisk).
Fair Economist
@rp: Bloomberg vs. Sanders to face Trump would be a horrible choice to have to make. I think I’d go with Bloomberg because I think Sanders is much more likely to lose. 4 more years of Trump will probably end American democracy and that’s totally unacceptable. Bloomberg would be bad in many ways, but he wouldn’t threaten the nature of the country.
debbie
@laura:
It will be interesting to see if he keeps his promise to spend $1 billion on ads for the eventual nominee. Even if it isn’t him.
ETA: And if he does keep his word, he’ll be a far better billionaire than Trump!
WaterGirl
@Baud: I think 2016 destroyed our confidence and the last 3 years have destroyed our faith and trust in our instittutions.
However much confidence, trust and faith we had before, much of it seems to be gone now, the result of a deliberate campaign dedicated to this end result.
JPL
After the results roll in tomorrow night, we might have a clearer picture of the remaining candidates. Surely someone will exit the stage.
@laura: He’s better than Wilmer on guns, and better than trump on everything. I’d trust him on appointing judges.
rp
@Fair Economist: bingo
WaterGirl
@rp: Only one state has “voted” and we are buying into the media spin. This is how they want us to feel.
JPL
@debbie: trump isn’t a billionaire. It’s up to trump to prove me wrong by releasing his taxes.
debbie
@JPL:
I think there won’t be a clear picture until after SC.
debbie
@JPL:
Understood. But all the better to rub his nose in it!
Chip Daniels
I may have said this on an earlier thread, but:
I’m generally meh on Bloomberg for all the reasons most progressives are;
But here in California when I see his Youtube ads bashing Trump its like the fucking St. Crispin’s Day speech, and I almost shout “Fuckin A!” while I’m at the gym.
Maybe its just that no other candidate is making ads where I can see them, but his voice seems to the the one taking a blowtorch to Trump and I can’t help but think there are a lot of folks hungry for that.
BBA
Bloomberg is an odd duck. There’s nobody else in domestic politics with comparable views; honestly, he reminds me of the ruling party in Singapore more than anything else. Which on the one hand, I’d take a competent authoritarian who actually cares about the people’s welfare over a Republican, but on the other hand, good God is he ever a police statist.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
in 2018, he supported people who support trump, including Steve Scalise, “David Duke without the baggage”, among a host of other beauties. I’ve seen it said on-line, FWIW, that his money bailed out Pat Toomey’s arse in PA in 2016.
OTOH, he’s serious about climate and can match anything trump and his supporters can put up in terms of money, and I don’t think he would have any negative coattails that I can think of.
If the Bernie Cult forces me to choose between the old fool who will hand 2020 to trump, and a guy with a checkered political past I think can actually win, I know how I’ll decide.
PJ
@PJ: Also, Bloomberg is a “socially liberal, financially conservative” guy. He will take children out of cages, put an end to the Muslim ban, work to prevent LGBT discrimination, etc. But he sees nothing wrong with massive wealth – he thinks he deserves it and the power that goes with it. I could see him expanding Medicare or adding a public option, getting universal pre-K or childcare, etc, but he would never sign a bill for a wealth tax.
He has no respect for democracy – he spread enough cash around to special interest groups and the City Council to get them to overturn term limits (which had been established by referendum) just for him, and only him. He has a vague sense of noblesse oblige, but doesn’t really care about poor or middle class people who are struggling. He is all for public welfare for developers and big corporations.
On the other hand, his concern about global warming is real, and he is environmentally progressive, for a Republican. If we have to have a Republican President, he would be far better than any Republican in Congress now. But really, why should Democrats vote for a Republican? The fact that he is able to run the campaign he is running (and everything seems to be top notch) out of his own pocket is reason #1 for massive taxes on the uber-wealthy.
Also, too: stop and frisk.
Jamie
@MazeDancer: This, particularly understanding what the election is about. Who gives a shit about healthcare overhauls that can’t pass the Senate when we’re already past playing footsie with authoritarian kleptocracy?
WaterGirl
@JPL: I don’t think any of the top people drop out until after the first 4 states, maybe longer.
Warren’s not leaving after 4 states.
Bident’s not leaving after 4 states.
Pete’s not leaving after 4 states.
Bernie’s not leaving after 4 states.
Bloomberg’s not leaving after 4 states.
Even Amy K is not leaving, though she is the most likely.
Yang drops out. I don’t count Tulsi or the other rich guy as serious candidates.
Who am I missing?
Deekaa6
He is an excellent manager who has a history of successfully addressing complex problems. He understands technology and would begin to move the ball forward on climate. He is correct on guns and choice and he is electable. I prefer Warren but would happily support Bloomberg.
rp
@WaterGirl: I agree and I’m still all for Warren. But I can see why folks are Bloomberg curious.
debbie
Say what you will about Manchin, but I like this:
dr. bloor
@PJ:
Well said. If he was an athlete you were thinking about selecting in a pro draft, he’d be what’s called a “high floor, low ceiling” prospect. Don’t expect much in the way of real progress, but he’ll get the kids out of the cages.
As for myself, I don’t think he gets that far. His ego results in too much irritability and scolding at times, and Teh Heartland is going to hate his “Kill the Supersized Soda” instincts.
Baud
@debbie:
Manchin did good on impeachment. He deserves kudos.
debbie
@Baud:
Now if we could just get him to refer to Trump as President Tubby…
Morzer
@debbie: I liked Bloomberg’s response when asked about having two billionaires fighting for the presidency. He asked who the other billionaire was supposed to be. That must have twisted Trump’s bankrupt tail hard.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Baud: I sometimes remind myself of his support for gun safety (modest as it may have been in global terms) after Newtown, which I at least thought he was putting his seat on the line.
Formica
My biggest problem with Bloomberg is that he is a surveillance state nutjob.
PJ
@dr. bloor: I really don’t think anyone is going to vote for Bloomberg because they like him – he’s not very likeable, for the reasons you mention and more – but people will vote for him because they think he is the one most likely to crush Trump. It’s a vote out of fear, which I am sympathetic to, but we have much better options.
Amir Khalid
@BBA:
Trust me on this: you do not want a Lee Kuan Yew type for POTUS.
Spanky
I suppose I’m in the majority of Juicers who will take Mike over Bernie, but not happily. I do think he’s enough of a pragmatist to be able to work with the House to get shit done, and not necessarily exactly as he’d like it. Supreme Court choices would be interesting, though, and I doubt I’d be happy. I’ll bet he’d not “look forward, not back”, though! Wonder who his AG would be?
Baud
@PJ:
A lot of our better options have already left the race though. That weighs on people.
dr. bloor
This, and Wilmer would have negative coattails. There’s a nonzero chance of losing the House with Pointy McShoutface at the top of the ticket. The Senate would be a distant fantasy.
WaterGirl
@Baud: @Baud:
I hope you will be feeling better arrayed tomorrow. :-)
Spanky
@PJ: I think that’s built into his campaign, with the “Mike will get shit done” ads.
mary s
Before the Iowa caucus — which involved maybe 2,000 “voters” (aka caucus goers) — Biden was being talked about as if he’d already sewn up the nomination. Now he’s getting his last rites. I agree that the idea of Trump getting reelected is horrifying. But now we’re talking about a(nother) white guy in his late 70s who is not a Democrat– a kajillionaire who made his money helping the financial sector get bloated, and who is trying to buy the nomination? In addition to the stop and frisk debacle and the benevolent dictator thing he’s got going on, his sexism/misogyny is a dealbreaker. (Unless he somehow manages to buy his way to the November election — in that case, I’ll have to vote for him.)
WaterGirl
@Baud: Maybe all the candidates who have “suspended” their campaign are going to hold one big collective “SURPRISE!” party after Nevada, and jump back into the race.
TaMara (HFG)
@WaterGirl: The problem here is ballots arrive this week and can be turned in anytime until March 3. So decisions here are being made before SC more than likely.
Note, I was asking about what to tell my Colorado friends.
If it’s between Bloomberg and Sanders, fucking A I’m going with Bloomberg.
And that’s a choice Colorado is looking at tomorrow when ballots arrive.
BTW, there are no other candidates running ads but Bernie and Bloomberg here.
SiubhanDuinne
@debbie:
I haven’t the faintest idea what a “fly-out” is or where one would go to find one, but at the bottom of this post there is a Twitter by John Cole showing a chicken in a knit scarf, so I imagine that’s what you mean. Very cute. I love the way her claw prints in the snow leave beautiful geometric patterns!
?BillinGlendaleCA
@WaterGirl: We’re getting Baud some high school math textbooks so he can feel more comfortable with arrays.
Baud
@WaterGirl: Depends on NH voters.
Spanky
Not terribly OT, a new WaPo article:
AliceBlue
@Chip Daniels: That’s Josh Marshall’s take. He thinks the Democratic primary is dispiriting to many people, then they see Bloomberg pounding on Trump and doing it with some very good ads.
TaMara (HFG)
@Spanky: I’d be curious to know who they are polling. All my clients are not optimistic about the economy, especially after looking at how 2019 wrapped up financially.
PJ
@Baud: after tomorrow, probably less than a 100 delegates will have been distributed, and I’m betting that there will not be one candidate way out in front. It’s the media and twitter that get everyone in a frenzy, and it’s worse this year because everyone knows what the stakes are. But we have to be hopeful. If it comes down to Bloomberg or Bernie by the time I get to vote, I’ll hold my nose and vote for Bloomberg, but in the meantime I’m supporting Warren and hoping that optimism wins.
Redshift
@debbie: I actually thought Manchin’s call for censure after the impeachment cover-up was clever (though I couldn’t quite convince myself he was thinking as strategically as I was theorizing.) I wish it had gotten more support. It could have been another way to box in Republicans – plenty of them were willing to say what Trump did was wrong once it no longer mattered. But Trump would have gone nuts if they actually voted on that, even if it was a censure vote that had zero practical effect. So it would have highlighted yet again that they were acting out of fear of being on the enemies list rather than any real judgment.
Dan B
Bloomberg has been quoted as saying , in so many words, Poor people have LEDTX’s and cell phones. They complain about being poor. The consistent dislike (hatred?) of unions could make election very dicey.
His positions on gun control, climate change, refugees, and minority rights seem to be okay or excellent.
Martin
Cons – he’s arguably terrible on Dem economic policy. Yes, he will sign a rollback of the Trump tax cuts as well as a 5% increase on the top marginal rate. That’s all good. He won’t back a wealth tax. He will go after deficits, which means that even with the increased taxation, he’ll cut spending. My bet is that will mostly be DOD spending, but he’s not going to be a friend on social services. But he may not veto increases on them either. He supports charter schools.
Pros: He’s very good on climate change. Better than most of the field. He’s very good on guns. Again, better than most of the field. Better, not because his policies are more aggressive – they’re comparable, but better because he’s been funding those efforts from his foundation for years. These are genuine areas he supports.
Horserace pros: He will outspend Trump. He will not lose the social media bullshit fight. He’s appealing to the ‘run it like a business’ idiots. He doesn’t have much baggage to attack him on. His past conservative actions won’t hurt him in the general, just in the primary.
I would argue he would be a very Jerry Brown like President. Brown was very outspoken on issues he was passionate about, he supported progressive actions but he was fiscally conservative – wouldn’t fund things as quickly as the legislature wanted, instead focusing on stabilizing the tax base, putting money aside so that programs wouldn’t need to be cut in the next downturn, etc. He was also very mercurial in terms of what he would or wouldn’t sign. If he thought something wouldn’t hold up in the courts, he wouldn’t sign it, even if he liked the idea. Those traits frustrated many Dems.
He was also willing to throw his weight around. When we couldn’t get climate progress with the feds, Brown went off and signed a deal with China. That pissed off a lot of folks in DC. Brown didn’t care.
So, Bloomberg would really be a challenge for a lot of established Dem thinking. But Bernie is as well. He’s not going to be as reflexively supportive of unions. He’s going to criticize unionization that he thinks is counterproductive. He’s supportive of charter schools. Remember, he’s going to be the most traditional capitalist in the field. (Warren is a capitalist as well, but heavily focused on regulation and balance). On the other hand, I can see Bloomberg making more progress on climate change and gun control than Obama was able to – he’s been more willing to be outspoken on those issues, where Obama tried to minimize confrontation there.
So, the calculus is whether you think he’s more likely to win the general and not advance many Dem goals (though maybe return things to pre 2016 states) or whether you think we’re better off advancing those Dem goals at the risk of possibly Trump being re-elected.
I’ll confess I’m firmly in the former camp. I’ll give up dem priorities to get Trump out. Simply undoing Trumps damage is critical. I’m not convinced Bloomberg is a sufficiently better candidate to beat Trump than a Warren or Klobuchar or Biden to check his box on my ballot, but I do think he’s a better candidate than Bernie or Pete in that regard. It’s tough.
jl
Get that crotchety old billionaire on the debate stage asap, so we can see how well he actually does in a public exchange of ideas, how quickly he can think and respond to the inevitable attacks if he is the candidate in the general election. Some of Bloombergs commercials are great. But, when he gives a speech, does Q&A with voters, has to respond to attacks in real time, is Bloomberg the person as great as some of his ads? And…. what are his specific policies? I think a much larger proportion of voters are interested in specific policies and commitment to them, than in previous cycles. IMHO.
Edit: I think choosing a candidate based mainly on commercials is riskier than choosing a crusading old lefty coot, a very establishment ex-VP who is very sharp in some ways, and out of it in others, a technocrat ex Ivy league professor who is not the ‘correct’ gender according to US political traditions, etc.
Spanky
@Spanky:
Based no doubt on their vast experience and/or research into pandemics’ effects on economies.
Baud
@PJ:
It’s just hard to see how one of the better candidates gets back in it, absent an upset tomorrow in NH.
Wag
@TaMara (HFG):
I’m in Denver waiting for my ballot. My choices in order: Warren #1, then Amy Klobuchar #2, Bloomberg #3
Morzer
I see why Bloomberg is problematic to some people, but I think all our candidates are potentially problematic to some degree. I suspect that Bloomberg would be better for retaking the Senate than many of them and much more convincing than say Sanders against Trump. If Bloomberg gets the nomination, he’s a choice that I could live with fairly happily.
TaMara (HFG)
@jl: Good point
Spc
@Jamie: yes, this election is less about policy at this point and more about saving our institutions.
The Thin Black Duke
A Bloomberg presidency will be the day when democracy finally dies and the United States of America collectively bends the knee to its new king.
sukabi
https://twitter.com/Trisha_Tahmasbi/status/1227014773021323270?s=20
For the Bloomberg curious…
TaMara (HFG)
@Wag: I’m probably Warren, Biden, then Bloomberg or Klobuchar
jl
One thing we know, if Bloomberg is president, drink your soda-pop, slurp your slurpies, snack your big bag snacks, smoke your smokes, drink your beers, now.
For Baud 2020! Bloomberg should be the evil of all evils.
Marcopolo
@Chip Daniels: Bloomberg is coming up on $400 million dollars spent on ads. He is running ads nationwide. Steyer is at about half that but he’s spent more of it targeted to early voting states. Sanders is next at about $37 million, pretty much all targeted to the first 4 contests.
Anyway, my point is Bloomberg’s advertising/propaganda effort is like a tidal wave running inland swamping everything. And he’s mostly dodging public appearances where he’d have to answer questions from voters, reporters, or really anyone. Kinda makes you wonder if there’s a possibility he’d carry on the Trump administration’s lack of transparency—its not like there are many folks (including our media) who are up in arms over the lack of White House press briefings (has it been a year now more or less—I know the new woman hasn’t held one).
Sally
It doesn’t say Open Thread, but may I return to a previous thread on which I’m too late? I thought this Pew research paper was interesting on the “urban” vs “rural” comments. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/05/22/demographic-and-economic-trends-in-urban-suburban-and-rural-communities/
Fewer than 50 million Americans are classified as rural. The rest are urban and suburban. Not arguing they (or anyone) should be ignored though. Just about who represents “real” America. I would argue that it’s “real” vs “complex” (joke for the mathematicians).
Redshift
@Spanky: Everyone on the wingnut bubble thinks the economy is the bestest ever because Dear Leader and his propaganda network tell them so nonstop. There are a segment of people who are actually doing well on top of that. Despite both-sides blather about us all being in our own information bubbles, there is no professional propaganda on the Democratic side (or a con man in charge), so while Democrats may judge the economy more positively under a Dem administration, we’re not fucking delusional about it.
Ksmiami
@WaterGirl: Because Bernie is at war not with the GOP but with the Democratic Party and he should never have been allowed to use our platform
Ohio Mom
If Bloomberg wins the White House, I think you can kiss the Emoluments Clause goodbye.
His holdings are beyond huge. They aren’t a family peanut farm, even if he puts them in a blind trust, he will always be aware of how whatever it is he is doing as president will be affecting his fortune. He can not be disinterested.
Combine that with the finagling he did to get out of NYC’s two-term limits for mayors, and he’s a kindler, gentler continued attack on representative democracy.
Even so, I would choose him over Bernie. Bernie either loses big or inspires an unbelievable backlash during his presidency.
Wapiti
I would like to see a debate pledge, once Bloomberg’s on the stage, to see who will put a Republican (:spit:) in the Cabinet.
Ksmiami
@The Thin Black Duke: Id argue that electing Trump was national suicide and the end of America but…
WaterGirl
@TaMara (HFG): Yeah, I caught that you were asking what to tell your friends.
If I had a ballot mailed to me in this election, I would most definitely wait to fill in my vote for president, and wait to turn in my ballot, until much closer to the March date.
I think things are going to change a lot, one way another, and I think that waiting is the best way to make an informed choice. That’s what I would tell your friends, if I were you.
Morzer
@Ksmiami: I think it’s a bit late to worry about the Imperial Presidency at this point. I don’t see how we escape from it in these days of hyper-partisanship either.
Mary G
I had an acquaintance who worked for him years back who said he’s got major exposure to #MeToo claims because he ran his company like a fraternity. No idea if it’s true or not, and his anti-Trump ads are excellent, as is his gun control and climate change activism are admirable.
All that said, I don’t like him and don’t want him to win. He feels like a Trump with real money and brains, but still an egomaniac on a power trip who would govern way to the right once he gets in. I would prefer even Bernie.
Martin
I think a lot of these questions regarding emoluments, transparency, etc. should be drawn out in the debate. Would he nominate Republicans? Would he support electoral reforms like public financing of elections?
Marcopolo
@JPL: Honest question: While Bloomberg would presumably nominate judges who are light years more qualified than the cretins Trump is putting in, and while the judges he nominated will be towards the moderate/liberal end on social issues, will they be judges who take the side of average Americans against big business or who take the side of employees versus employers or who take the side of citizens against governmental over reach? His record says they might not.
I have no interest in electing someone who will work to comfort the comfortable & further afflict the afflicted in our society.
dr. bloor
@Martin:
Honest, and yeah, slightly provocative question: How far does this put him from Barack Obama in the political landscape. Discuss.
Chris Johnson
@dr. bloor:
The funny thing is, stuff like that I actually approve of. Yes, kill off things like horribly unhealthy junk food. I do not know how seriously to take his climate change concerns: is he invested in energy stocks, or perhaps in green/solar? Or is he just that type of rich dude who legitimately studies these things and figured out the obvious?
I’d like to see him talk with Nick Hanauer. (the rich dude that gave ted talks, etc. on the subject of, watch out, kleptocrats, the guillotines are coming.)
I’d also point out that people have been saying, the one saving grace with Trump is that he’s a fascist authoritarian but incompetent, that we need to watch out for when the next one comes along that is Trump but slick and capable.
Clearly we didn’t have long to wait.
Jeffro
Watch this, folks…
Bloomberg/Harris
Bloomberg/Abrams
Bloomberg/Klobuchar
I’m not a huge fan of ol’ Mike’s but even I felt a nice sigh of relief seeing those tickets on the ballot this coming fall.
Ok, experiment over. We now bring you to the daily s-show that is trumpov and his administration: DOJ gave a $500k grant to Hookers For Jesus instead of established anti-trafficking groups. For realz!
Ok, shock moment over. We now return to the reality that trumpov & co are going to campaign on cutting entitlements in order to finance their massive tax cuts for the wealthy (while also destroying coverage for pre-existing conditions).
I’d rather be us than them, that’s for sure.
Kent
S C O T U S
That’s what no one else on this thread had mentioned or discussed. Will Bloomberg appoint a YOUNG RBG to replace the old RBG? Or will he make some sort of weak centrist placeholder appointment like Merrick Garland in an attempt to appease McConnell? And will he go to the mattresses and FIGHT for his nominee with all the guns blazing? That’s what much of this is going to be about.
Ken
Bloomberg is the only candidate who can deliver the dream moment at Presidential Debate #1, where he turns to Trump and says “My people just finished a deal with Deutsche Bank and the Russians. I now own you.”
The Thin Black Duke
dr. bloor
@jl:
Baud!/Mountain Dew 2020!
sdhays
I think point #1 disproves point #2…
Brachiator
@Marcopolo:
Presumably. We don’t know anything much about Bloomberg. He has not been a governor or Senator, so he has never had to appoint or vote to confirm a judge. I have no idea what his beliefs are and no reason to fill in possible beliefs based on speculation.
Bloomberg is an enigma with interesting political ads. He should maybe be donating to Democrats, not running for president.
Redshift
@Spanky: Since Kudlow is a Fox News crank who pulls all of his opinions out of his ass, expertise has no effect on the quality of the product. Some of the other “private sector economists” may know what they’re talking about, but if so, they should be pissed to be lumped in with him.
dr. bloor
@Chris Johnson:
I certainly wouldn’t miss supersized sodas myself, as I’ve never had one, and the public health benefits are easy to grok. Putting the government in charge of deciding How Big Is Big Enough is a very slippery and dangerous slope to go down.
Brachiator
@Kent:
What’s wrong with a weak centrist placeholder?
If the Democrats don’t have a majority in the Senate, and the GOP is still committed to obstruction, there ain’t much anyone can do.
Wag
@TaMara (HFG):
I could live with that order as well
Redshift
@Kent:
Or, out of sincere preference rather than misguided compromise, will he appoint a “business-friendly” Justice who will not be an unqualified Federalist Society wingnut, but will still join the Roberts Court in constantly favoring corporate power over citizens and unions
low-tech cyclist
Here’s my elevator pitch for Bloomberg: he is extremely serious about climate change. He hasn’t mentioned the filibuster that I know of, but he’s not going to agree that an arcane Senate tradition is more important than saving the planet.
There are other issues that he’s genuinely bad on. They can wait, or if they can’t, we can oppose him on them. But climate change can’t wait. Most other things can.
low-tech cyclist
Mind you, I’m still hoping for a deadlocked convention where Bernie has 45% of the delegates, and Warren becomes the compromise candidate.
piratedan
I’ll say this, I don’t think Bloomberg has been bought, he’s the guy who buys other guys… Sanders, I’m not sure you can say that about him.
schrodingers_cat
Only 44 or so delegates have been awarded. We need to chill. Polls are not actual elections. Super Tuesday will give us a clearer picture. MSM and Rs are trying to make it seem like BS is inevitable, he is not. He was supposed to win Iowa, he didn’t, no one had predicted that Pete B would be on par let alone win more delegates than the St of Vt.
schrodingers_cat
@low-tech cyclist: If you think BS supporters will support her you have not been paying attention.
RedDirtGirl
Yeah, buying his way around term limits really pissed me off. @PJ:
Sturgeonmouth
Tell your friend that Bloomberg endorsed Dubya and spoke at the Republican convention in 2004, well after it was obvious Bush had lied his way into a war with Iraq. Unforgivable in my opinion.
namekarB
Ya gotta fight fire with fire. Who better to take down Trump than another Gazzillionaire who knows Trump as a chump. Mad Max Thunderdome: “Two men enter. One man leave.”
However he has some baggage like “Stop-n-Frisk” and is more comfortable as a moderate Republican who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
Redshift
@low-tech cyclist: And yet, as has been pointed out above, he put major resources into keeping the Senate Republican, undermining any action by the federal government, whether he intended to our not. On guns, there’s less conflict, because the action there is mostly at the state level, but there’s really no question that supporting Toomey reveals he has other priorities he’s willing to put above the survival of human civilization, no matter how passionately he talks about it or how much money he spends.
David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch
Anybody ßut Wilmer.
marklar
Considering his “support” for Toomey…if I remember that correctly the support was based on Bloomberg taking the lead on gun legislation, and Toomey was the Republican who co-sponsored a background check bill. If you are trying to get something done (e.g., background checks) in a Republican controlled Senate, you occasionally have to dance with the devil.
David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch
Shantanu Saha
If it were down to Wilmer and Bloomberg(spit), I’ll choose the cranky grandpa and watch the Democratic party go down in flames. I will NOT vote for that piece of shit Republican who turned Democrat for convenience sake, even in the general. I’ll leave the President line blank and vote for the down-ballot races, but I will never pull the lever for Michael fucking Bloomberg.
NeenerNeener
Out of curiosity, will our home-grown Nazis crawl back under their rocks in a Bloomberg presidency, or will they go even more batshit… and how would he respond if they did?
My Side of Town
So I’m not going to criticize any democratic candidates tonight, but I offer up this prophetic music for you consideration. https://www.youtube.com/embed/mDTph7mer3I?fbclid=IwAR1ihWG5jm9GLjUTQ7rJHdxgnKEXCEhybKFOpCSuhLuD-8tCzWsm4ILHC4I
Kent
Yes, this too. SCOTUS is potentially the biggest legacy the next president will leave. I’m fairly confident of the sort of justices that Klobuchar, Warren, or Biden would appoint. I’m yet to be convinced that Bloomberg is that committed to the long-term progressive project that is the Democratic party to really really fight for a young progressive SCOTUS nominee.
I mean go WAY outside the norms if necessary since Trump and the GOP have broken all of them. Send your nominee up to the Supreme Court with armed secret service escort and seat them without confirmation if the Senate refuses to act. And come down with the full force of executive fury on that 50th GOP Senator. Move every damn Federal office out of their state if you you have to. Cut every dime of Federal aid. Drop $500 million dollars of your own money into a scorched earth campaign against their re-election and future employment in any lobbying or consulting firm. Make them toxic for life.
That’s what Trump would do.
Kent
They will go bat-shit crazy no matter who wins because that is who they are. They thrive better in the opposition anyway. They are the flip side of the Bernie bros who want to burn the place down. And hopefully Bloomberg responds with more forcefulness than Obama did with the coddling of the Bundy’s and their ilk in Oregon and Utah.
Sab
Just a test. I thought I would give you my new secret e-mail that I won’t give out to anyone commercial or political who might share it. Cole and Crew seem to respect privacy.
bluehill
@NeenerNeener: I don’t think he would say there’s good people on both sides.
Crœsos
The negatives on Bloomberg are adequately summarized in this piece: A Republican Plutocrat Tries to Buy the Democratic Nomination. I leave it to the Bloomberg campaign to promote his positives.
Ryan
@Shantanu Saha:
Congratulations, you just re-elected Trump.
LeftCoastYankee
A wanna-be King whose not a dumpster-fire is still a wanna-be King.
Hell no for the primaries.
piratedan
Also have to note that Bloomberg was essentially blocked from challenging Trump on the GOP ticket thanks to that party effectively bending the knee…. we do share one thing in common… he hates 45 with the heat of a thousand suns… still broken glass caveat and all that
hitchhiker
@Martin:
That’s very interesting. You reminded me of the time a quadriplegic friend of mine spent years struggling to get a dollar added to every traffic ticket to pay for spinal cord injury research. Years.
He finally got it through a committee, and then it was passed by both houses. Jerry Brown vetoed it, saying that he just wasn’t a fan of using fees to fund projects that ought to be in the budget.
So, no dedicated fund for that kind of research. I guess that’s the sort of “fiscal conservative” approach you’re talking about.
I’m willing to give Bloomberg a thorough look, and I’m guessing that I’m like a lot of others in seeing him as an opposite number to trump. Stability. Lack of bombast. Genuine accomplishments. Deeply held positions that he’s actually tried to move policy on. Executive experience that includes accountability.
For so many Americans, that’s MORE than enough.
Anomalous Cowherd
I’m 100% in favor of letting Bloomberg volunteer to be a lightning rod for Trump’s Twitter Tourette’s Tantrums (TTTT). Dunno how good he is beyond that, but that’s something.
bluehill
@hitchhiker: Agree with this. I think a fair number of people want things to go back to “normal” and not to swing all way to “socialism” even if they actually support the underlying “socialist” policies.
Tenar Arha
@Marcopolo: my thoughts exactly except it’s really hard to think long term when everything is on fire.
@TaMara (HFG): That really would be a nightmarish choice.
But like Marcopolo said, there’s good reason to carefully consider who to pick. One of the many differences between Bloomberg & Sanders would be their Supreme Court & Judiciary picks.My candidate criteria absolutely includes who I’d trust to choose the next Justices for the next 30-40 years, bc I ’m assuming Ginsberg & maybe a couple others will have to retire. I’m not sure I’m willing to trust my rights to a man like Bloomberg who was known as a raging misogynist at work. I also don’t think any of us here want more of the same NDA, money, & corporate friendly decision making on the courts, but he’d definitely pick as justices those who think that corporate personhood is okay. And the Common Cause article today reminded me that he’ll let the FBI & surveillance state do whatever they want, even if it’s targeted harassment & surveillance of minorities. So he may pick justices who would agree with what the Roberts Court has already allowed there too.
I will point out that Bloomberg too is going to have coattails problems, just different ones. He’ll be wide open for advertising that turns off black women & men bc of stop & frisk. He’s not exactly someone who’ll turn out new or younger voters. Especially because every criticism that could be honestly leveled at Trump for corruption, would also hurt him even if everything he’s ever done was all above board & legal. Because he truly did buy his way into a 3rd mayoral term, & this primary.
Basically if those are my choices, my strategy would be to wait as late as possible before I submit my ballot, and hope that by Super Tuesday some real vetting of Bloomberg takes place, & Warren &/or Biden are doing better.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@bluehill: A lot of folk want to put out the fire before thinking about renovating the kitchen*.
*h/t to Silverman.
oatler.
“When you dance with the bear, you can’t stop until the bear wants to stop.”
Comrade Misfit
Bloomberg is a wannabee autocrat, like Trump. The difference is that Bloomberg is smarter.
New Yorkers put in term limits by referendu,. Bloomberg twisted arms/gave contributions to the NYC City Council to get those lifted so he could be elected to a third term. Then, towards the end of his third term, he had term limits re-enacted. In short, Bloomberg is a guy who thinks that the rules don’t apply to him (much like Trump).
The Stop & Frisk matter is instructive. When a Federal judge ruled the NYPD’s program to stop every brown male and frisk them was unconstitutional, Bloomberg cried that the judge was crazy and overreached– the same sort of bullshit that Trump would have spewed. Bloomberg maintained that he was right and the judge was wrong right up to the point that he realized he’d do worse than Trump in winning votes of Hispanics and African Americans if he didn’t recant.
Bloomberg is Trump. He has the same regard for the Constitution as does Trump. He’s wealthier, much more intelligent and a whole lot more dangerous.
If you want to complete the destruction of the U.S. as a republic, then Mikey’s your guy.
TaMara (HFG)
Thanks you guys. That was a fairly flame-free thread with some good points on both pros and cons.
Psych1
I do think that it comes down to a choice between Bernie and Bloomberg. Everyone else has already lost. Bernie won’t compromise, something that I admire, but not a good position to take politically. Bloomberg is very smart and politically astute. He would, will, both make the necessary compromises and select a VP and take positions that are acceptable to the left. As of today, I think Bloomberg is going to get it. Big bonus- he can beat Trump.
Not my choice but ————–
rattlemullet
I live in Florida and have no TV connection other than Netflix. So I have not seen a single political ad, I am very grateful for that fact. I am an educated voter to liberal causes. Bloomberg would fall under the he would be better than T-rump but so would my dog, so that is a very low bar. Sanders supporters have a lot of cult like tendencies not unlike any cult and group like behavior. They would not vote, rather than elect another candidate some will even fall to T-rump as they need a leader. Bloomberg sucks, you don’t get rich by sharing your money with others. Look at Bill Gates I’m giving 100 million to fight Corona Virus but I’m also buying a 600 million dollar yacht. Most likely to sail the high seas to avoid the same virus. 100 million to him is 10 dollars to me. Fuck him and all billionaires, the tax systems and politicians that allow them to prey upon the us and the earth….
Geminid
@Debbie I like Joe Manchin. He’s way better than any Republican we’d get out of West Virginia. I see him as the pole holding up the conservative end of the Democratic big tent. Rural and small town people from Kentucky, Georgia, Kansas etc. can look inside and say, “that’s not bad space. I could even play cornhole with those people.”
Omnes Omnibus
Good fucking God, we’ve had one primary (where Bloomberg wasn’t even on the ballot) and people are already accepting him? In my mind, he’s got a shitload of work to do before I even think about considering to look at him as a potential candidate.
kindness
Bloomberg is a fine middle of the road candidate. You just have to ignore/forget Stop & Frisk. Bloomberg won’t get any support from me.
Sturgeonmouth
@Crœsos:
That analysis on Bloomberg, which Betty linked to in an earlier post today, should be required reading for anyone thinking about Bloomberg. It’s better than anything you’ll find in the comments here, mine included. Please read it:
https://editor.currentaffairs.org/2020/02/a-republican-plutocrat-tries-to-buy-the-democratic-nomination/
Anya
@Fair Economist: why isn’t anyone doing ads “X senator supported caging children, Trump’s lawlessness and has voted to gut Obamacare, elimination of coverage for people with pre-existing condition. Bloomberg donated $$$$$$$ to re-elect X senator.” Instead of all the stupid rhetoric against billionaires why not expose his actual record?
Cacti
Not my first choice. Or my second.
But the fact that he can self-finance on par with the right wing slime machine is a huge point in his favor.
We can’t afford to fuck this up, or there might not be a 2024 election. Not in any meaningful sense anyway.
Anya
@Geminid: we won’t have anyone better than him in West Virginia but I really dislike him because he went out of his way to disrespect Obama while sucking up to Trump.
Original Lee
@Formica: He tried to make us use Bing as the default search engine, because Bing has a behind-the-scenes alert system for forbidden websites. The problem was, Bing could look at all of your search results, while you had to go through page one, page, two, etc. This meant you could be lighted up in IT as looking at a forbidden website without even clicking on it. This came to a head when some of the journalists who had attended the White House Press Corps dinner decided to see if they had photobombed some of the photo ops with certain celebrities and the whitehouse.com website turned up on page two of their search results. All were immediately terminated, but the union was able to get all reinstated, except for one who was a manager and therefore an at-will employee. Thereafter bargaining unit employees used Bing only to find Google.
Sturgeonmouth
As if Bloomberg’s support of W isn’t enough of a disqualifier, consider that Bloomberg supported Scott Brown’s reelection over Elizabeth Warren. He is not a Democrat.
Bruuuuce
I’m not fond of Bloomie (speaking as a survivor of his term as Mayor). Yes, I like his stance on guns, and his willingness to attack Don the Con. Bit we can do better. Nevertheless, I’d gladly vote for him over Donne Yechiest, the same way I’d prefer syphilis to Ebola.
TriassicSands
The latest poll gives Klobuchar a reasonable chance to finish ahead of Warren in NH. If so, that could push Warren close to the edge. Right now, there doesn’t seem to be a victory in sight for Warren. Sanders is getting countless votes she would have if he would just disappear (Please?)
Warren is my first choice, but I don’t see an opening for her unless Sanders has another MI. Unless something dramatic happens (see last two letters of the previous sentence), I don’t see her lasting much longer.
Things may be brighter for Klobuchar. Her competition (ideologically) comes from Biden (cratering as usual?) and Buttigieg. If Buttigieg stumbles or people realize that he’s not ready, Klobuchar could get her opening. I think her “work with Republicans” is somewhere between delusional and dangerous, but I’d prefer her to any of the men still in it.
khead
Here’s what every BJ jackal should be saying:
“Fuck him, but I’ll take his money and his ads that shiv Trump.”
Anything beyond that? Just no.
Geminid
@Anya: He wasn’t sucking up to Trump today.
Not saying you should like him.
PsiFighter37
The biggest problem is money. Only Bloomberg and Wilmer have the money to even look past the first four states. Yang is going to drop out after tomorrow, and Steyer will probably stick it out because he’s blanketed South Carolina with so much money that he can probably get a vote or a delegate. I think Klobuchar will stay in, but unless she dramatically overperforms tomorrow, I think she’s near the edge financially. Warren has openly said that her campaign’s budget is quite a bit tighter now. It’s no secret that Joe has had trouble raising money, and Former Mayor Pete can’t hold enough high-dollar fundraisers to keep up with Wilmer.
So – if you have other candidates in the race, but no one is giving them money because they aren’t convinced they can win – that leaves you with Mike and Bernie. Having lived in the NYC suburbs at the start of Mayor Mike’s reign and in NYC for the last 5 years of it, I have a lot of issues with Bloomberg. But, without a moment of hesitation – I would vote for him over Wilmer. It’s not even close. We nominate Sanders, and you will find out just how much more scared Americans are of a socialist than they are about the degradation of American democracy.
YMMV. I have the benefit(?) of not having to choose until April, but if the race has narrowed, I would be very unsurprised if Bloomberg racks up a healthy margin in Manhattan and Staten Island (while likely losing the other boroughs to Bernie).
Martin
@dr. bloor: I would argue a lot of it is a matter of approach. I think Obama demurred on a lot of things that he supported. I think Mike simply doesn’t support those things. I think Obama tolerated a lot of things he didn’t like, I think Mike will fight those things.
So, the GOP theory of politics is win first, shape policy second. I’m not saying the results of that approach has been terribly successful, but that’s the theory. Dems tend to be the opposite. I’m willing to try it out though. I think our Dems in Congress are tough enough to not bend the knee.
Anya
@Geminid: I liked his dig at Trump. Hope he keep it up
anarchoRex
Bloomberg is Trump but competent. Swap sodas for a wall, and everything else is the same. If he wins the nomination, this country and its democracy are well and truly fucked.
Martin
@hitchhiker:
Exactly. Also keep in mind that state budgets have to balance. We don’t have the luxury of running state deficits, even when they’re appropriate – so I caution people from making inferences from Mayor Mike to President Mike. Similarly, from Mayor Pete to President Pete or Senator Warren to President Warren.
But Brown was very much a ‘build the right system and it’ll run right’ kind of guy. Tacking on a fee is very antithetical to his approach. He’d sign 3 gun control bills and then veto 2 of them because he felt it worked against a durable system of government.
One thing I would expect out of Bloomberg – he seems like a pretty good collective action thinker. I think he would build coalitions across levels of government and the private sector to solve problems. He’s got a pretty good record of doing that for gun control and climate change. I think he’d be good on immigration and civil rights (despite his stop and frisk position – I think he knows this is a place where Democrats will not compromise). Watching him answer for that should be entertaining.
But yeah, in my mind, a Democrat billionaire should want to pull that particular ladder up behind them and support public financing of election, etc. I don’t have much faith that he’s that kind of Democrat.
CaseyL
We keep telling former GOPsters to compromise on their policy preferences in order to vote for a Democrat in November. We keep telling them the only important thing right now is getting Trump out of office; we can fight over policy later.
That’s how I feel about Bloomberg. Like most everyone else here, I’d rather see Warren or Klobuchar on the top of the ticket; and like most everyone else here I’m very worried about Bernie being the nominee. (Yes, yes, I know it’s very early days… but money is already an issue for our favored candidates, and money has already driven more of our favorites out of the race.)
So, like we keep telling former GOPsters, my thought is that we focus on getting rid of Trump, and rid of as many GOP Reps and Senators as possible. I don’t know what kind of coattails Bloomberg would have, but Bernie will have NEGATIVE coattails: most of his supporters know little and care less about downticket races. (Remember, no Justice Democrat flipped a seat from Red to Blue in ’18. The Bernie-endorsed candidates who won, like AOC, did so in ultra-safe Democratic districts.)
If the choice is between Bernie and Bloomberg, I’ll go for Bloomberg. I just hope it doesn’t come to that.
Morzer
@anarchoRex:
That’s not a trivial difference you are highlighting.
Kay
How can he possibly be committed to climate action and gun regulation if he spent all that money supporting Republicans?
He’s passionately committed to these things but he spent tens of millions of dollars helping to elect people who made sure they wouldn’t happen?
He prioritized. He put Right wing economic policy first. Hence his unbridled support of Republicans all over the country.
He supported George W Bush. Was George W Bush an environmentalist? Toomey?
anarchoRex
@CaseyL: This comment is what people mean when they write “BluE nO mAtTeR wHo.” You’d rather vote for the woman hating, minority targeting, police state supporting autocratic billionaire over a guy who want to make Medicare universal.
Y’all need to wise up quick: Bloomberg doesn’t give a flying fuck about any of y’all’s progressive priorities. He’ll do the things he’s interested in, and blow off any Dem who tells him different. And why wouldn’t he? If he manages to buy his way into the WH, he’ll feel no pressure to do anything that he doesn’t personally like, and if those things are issues Dems won’t work with him on, he’ll be very happy to turn to the Republicans to pass his pet issues. He’ll appoint police state and corporate supporting judges that will sabotage any piece of progressive Dem legislation that he doesn’t just veto outright. He’ll let the MIC do whatever the hell they want, while he focuses on cutting the deficit by gutting what little social services we still have. And all of this will be done “bipartisanly” because it will be a Dem president signing Rep bills.
He will destroy the party. Young people and minorities will see the God-awful candidate that a bunch of pussy-ass centrists turned tail to because they decided the prospect of a Sanders presidency was too scawwy, and they’ll just stay home. You’ll disillusion two generations of Millenials and Zoomers, and you’ll never get them back. Two billionaires back-to-back in the WH, from both parties, will destroy any illusion that this country is anything other than a plutocracy. And, god forbid, he loses!? The Democratic Party, and the country, might survive a 2nd Trump term, but a Bloomberg nomination will put it in the ground.
anarchoRex
@Morzer: This doesn’t mean Bloomberg will tear down the wall, he’ll just leave whatever they’ve built up, and he’ll be more than content to let ICE and CBP continue their reign of terror. Oh, and we’ll have to pay a regressive tax on sodas.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Jesus, a bernie supporter warning about destroying the Democratic party and a second trump term
Kay
@Sturgeonmouth:
Yes. Consider. And also consider that his supposed passionate commitment to addressing climate change is directly contradicted by the millions and millions he spent to keep Congress in GOP hands.
anarchoRex
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I’ve voted exclusively for Dems since I was old enough to vote, and I’ve worked to help get them elected. I’ve been down on the ground in crucial swing districts. I was an RFD for Pete Gallego when he tried to beat Hurd in 2016. I spent months knocking on the doors of people who live in trailers out in the desert without running water or sewage. I’ll work hard again this cycle to help down-ballot races. But, if Bloomberg wins the nom, this will be the first time in my life I’ll just leave the choice for president blank.
Kay
Here’s Rick Snyder, another Bloomberg pal.
Is Snyder an environmentalist? No, he is not.
Weird that such a smart guy who is so passionately committed to climate change action somehow mistakenly spent all that money all but assuring nothing would happen on climate change.
But he did like Snyder’s economic policies a lot!
hitchhiker
@CaseyL:
That’s interesting. It gets at a dynamic a lot of us are kind of pointing at in different ways, which is the tension between what’s possible after 2020 and what’s abso-fcking-lutely non-negotiable.
It’s possible, maybe, to elect leadership that will get to work on making us more like Finland, (or pick your favorite democratic socialist-leaning society).
But it’s imperative to crush trump and trumpism like rock under a sledgehammer. Destroy them. Turn them to dust.
Some people are gung ho to drive toward the most optimistic end, and others are not willing to risk missing a chance to do a simple reset.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@anarchoRex: so.. if the election is a choice between your vote in a red state, and the electoral votes of New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, Michigan, Arizona, Colorado, Minnesota, North Carolina… tricky call. I’ll have to ponder on that one.
Kay
Also, I’m not 100% confident in the thinking that goes “the billionaire who worked as hard as he could to keep Republicans in Congress will have ‘coattails’ to get Democrats elected to Congress”.
I’m not even sure he’ll endorse our congressional candidates. Might be a little awkward, considering he supported their opponents. Our Presidential candidate might have to sit some out, in order to avoid the incumbent Republicans he backed.
anarchoRex
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Oh yeah, there’s no minorities or young people in any of those states, huh? If you thought black and youth turnout was lower under Hillary than Obama, just wait ’til Bloomberg gets a crack at it.
Kay
Maybe he isn’t 100% sure how government works. If he is, I’m having trouble figuring out the plan that goes “give hundreds of thousands to mayors to address gun violence, while also giving millions to congressional Republicans who will block all gun regulation”
What were his mayors supposed to do? Dig a moat between their city and the rest of the state?
anarchoRex
@Kay: God bless you, for real. You and a bunch of others in the comments flat out against Bloomberg give me hope.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@anarchoRex: could be a problem
he’s still a safer bet in a national election than the shouty old idiot and his cult of starry-eyed children of all ages
anarchoRex
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Mmm, yes, this is obviously clear-eyed political calculation and not a knee-jerk grudge.
ETA: Here, don’t take my word for it: https://twitter.com/BenjaminPDixon/status/1226884635910660097
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@anarchoRex: do I hold a grudge against that stupid old man for the damage he and his dumbed-down politics for dumbed-down voters have poisoned Democratic politics? Sure
Does that have fuck all to do with Sanders’ electability? Nope
And I see you found a tweet. A remarkable tweet it must be if it proves that Bernie Sander can win the electoral college (spoiler alert: he can’t).
hitchhiker
@Kay:
I don’t think it’s fair to say that he spent millions and millions to keep congress in Republican hands.
The Toomey support in 2016 was 11.7 million, which as I read those numbers means that support for dems in the last 8 yrs was 7 or 8 times higher than for republicans — and if you take the Toomey dough out, the ratio is closer to $5 million for republicans vs. $86 million for dems.
If we’re going to hold him to account, we have to do it based on the numbers.
(I want Warren to win, btw. My beef with him is about having a fundraiser for stupid Scott Brown. I’d like to hear exactly what he had in mind there.)
dr. bloor
@Martin:
Hmm. Maybe, I don’t really know. But I suspect Tim Geithner and Arne Duncan would feel right at home in a Bloomberg cabinet, and I suspect Bloomberg would be fine with them as well.
anarchoRex
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: If you read the tweet you’d see that it’s about Bloomberg, not Bernie, doesn’t even mention Sanders. But this fits with the knee-jerk theme.
Ruckus
I see Bloomberg as better than Bernie. That’s the sum total of what I’ve got.
What he’s doing now is running a very effective campaign against trump. And that’s because his primary attraction is that he isn’t trump. He’s not horrible but I doubt he will fix much of anything but at least the bleeding would stop.
He’s a 77 yr old very wealthy, possibly slightly to the left of center, but most likely to the right of it business man with a so so at best record as mayor of NYC. There are people running on the D side who I would trust much more than him, Warren and Klobuchar.
Sturgeonmouth
@hitchhiker:
I also want Warren to win, so I share that beef. However, my biggest beef is that Bloomberg supported pre-Iraq-War George W. Bush in 2000 *and* post-Iraq-War George W. Bush in 2004. Unacceptable.
Ruckus
@hitchhiker:
In the primary I’m voting for who I think will be the best democratic president out of the choices running.
In the election I’m voting to beat trump’s ass like a rented mule.
zeecube
@khead: What khead said.
Ruckus
@anarchoRex:
There is a huge difference in being for Bloomberg now and voting for him in November if it’s between him and trump.
I think it’s pretty clear that the vast majority here are not for Bloomberg as anything other than last choice. But he may be the candidate in Nov. If he is you bet your ass I’m voting for him over trump. I’m a super Tuesday voter, except I vote by mail in CA and I already have my ballot. I’m voting early, I’m hopeful on my candidate and then it’s on to Nov.
Look at #170 for clarity on my thoughts.
Morzer
@anarchoRex:
Your evidence for this is … what exactly? Comparing Bloomberg’s view on soda taxes with Trump’s wall and the barbaric horrors that come with it seems absolutely ludicrous to me.
anarchoRex
@Morzer: you miss my point. All the barbaric horrors under Trump will continue under Bloomberg, he could care less. Look at his Mayoral term, he turned NYC into an open air prison for Black and Hispanic people. At least Trump is a self-defeating moron, Bloomberg is competent, and will crush any hopes the posters here might have for progress under a Dem president, all while sinking the party with its base.
@Ruckus: there’s plenty of examples of posters here who would take Bloomberg over Bernie. The only reason Bloomberg would be our “last choice” would be because a majority of Dem primary voters voted for him. His nomination wouldn’t be something that just happens to us, people would have to actively go out and choose him.
JAM
Bloomberg shares Trump’s contempt for women, racial minorities, and low-income people. The fact that he’s a lot smarter and vastly richer than Trump makes him worse in a lot of ways because he knows how to get people to do what he wants– bribe them. Trump can’t afford that so he has to resort to intimidation.
I live in a red state, but I’ve always cast my completely symbolic party-line vote for the Democrats, just so they know we’re out here. If he’s on the ballot, I’ll have to actually check all those other boxes individually, but I would never check his.
Ruckus
@anarchoRex:
Take a step back and look where we are right this minute. Not at the possibilities but at the entire situation. trump is a unmitigated fucking disaster. You don’t like Bloomberg, neither do I. Being president is far more than giving speeches. And in all his years in office that’s all Bernie has shown he can do. It’s not an impressive record. And all his plans are a 100 feet wide and a 1/4 in deep. In any system this big, any plan needs to be a hell of a lot wider and a hell of a lot deeper. So based upon his record what the hell does he stand for and why should I, a democrat vote for someone who refuses to be one? So where does that leave us? People are going to vote for the candidate that they think is best, you are going to vote for Bernie, I’m going to vote for my choice. But come November, if your guy isn’t standing on top the box, what the hell are you going to do? Vote for the person on top of the box or sit on your thumbs and rotate?
Sorry if this comes off too strong or a bit too much asshole but you keep telling us we need to choose Bernie or bust. And that’s just bullshit.
artem1s
Looks like the open primary R voters Democratic candidate of choice is now Bloomberg over Biden. this is more election rat-f**king by the GOP.
Yes, Democrats need lots of money to win back the Senate and keep the House. And if we can convince more 1%ers to give us some of their juicy Sorosbucks to fight voter suppression and GOTV, fabulous. But what we don’t need is to nominate a Republican 1%er who buys his way into office to replace the lunatic Republican 1%er who already bought his way into the WH.
go away Mikey.
anarchoRex
@Ruckus: You guys really have this strawman you’ve built up of Bernie supporters. I have never advocated a Bernie or Bust position, go ahead and try and find it. I’d feel fine voting for Amy, Elizabeth, Joe, even Pete over Trump. But, I really mean it, I think Bloomberg would be worse for the party and the country than Trump. I’m a young Hispanic guy with family who are afraid everyday of ICE knocking on their door, and I still think we’d be better off with another Trump term than 4-8 years of Bloomberg. He’s evil, straight up.
And about Bernie’s history in office, you’re running with a narrative that just doesn’t match reality. There’s plenty of write-ups, even from publications that are not what you’d expect to be fans of Bernie, that show that he has a solid record as a mayor and a legislator. He’s not magic, he’ll find it very difficult to pass any of his signature legislation, but he’s not this incompetent windbag y’all have convinced yourself he is.
tam1MI
@anarchoRex: To paraphrase the great Muhammed Ali, no Bloomberg supporter ever called me a c*nt to my face.