I noticed that Charles Blow took a hard and lacerating look at Bloomberg’s history with stop-and-frisk yesterday in the Times. For those of you who don’t want to waste a precious Times click on that, Alex Pareene has a pretty exhaustive review of the same topic at the New Republic today:
Occupy and the 2004 RNC were special events, which, to Bloomberg and his defenders, justified the bulldozing of civil liberties. But his entire mayoralty was defined less by these mass displays of authoritarian force than by the everyday abuses his police committed against millions of New Yorkers of color as part of his police department’s stop-and-frisk policy. The NYCLU reports that the NYPD made more than five million “stops” during Bloomberg’s 12 years in office. The overwhelming majority of those targeted were black or Latino.
When a federal judge finally ruled the NYPD’s tactics unconstitutional, Bloomberg essentially threw a tantrum, accusing her of being anti-cop and insinuating that she would have blood on her hands once the murder rate crawled back up. (The bad old days will return if we ever take our foot off the necks of black New Yorkers is a common refrain in New York politics, and it’s one Bloomberg was happy to endorse while campaigning for his third term alongside his predecessor, one Rudy Giuliani.)
The idea that someone can swoop in and win the nomination at the last minute and not have all of this stuff come out is part of the fantasy of the rich latecomer candidate. But if dreams came true, oh, wouldn’t that be nice? Well, this ain’t no dream we’re living through tonight.
Given that nobody is particularly happy about Bloomberg, if he ends up on the ballot opposite trump, are any jackals going to stay home? Going to vote for trump? Going to write in a 3rd candidate?
To put it another way — and with respect — how does this help?
download my app in the app store mistermix
@hitchhiker: Fair question. It helps by understanding who Bloomberg is, so we can make our judgements about whether he’s the kind of candidate we want to support. We’ve had almost a year of campaigning and debates where we could do that with other candidates. Bloomberg right now is the Wizard of Oz candidate – he’s behind the curtain bombing the world with ads. We need to get behind the curtain to see what’s there that could be an issue. And, trust me, the Trump campaign will use stop-and-frisk in targeted ads in the Latino and AA communities, hypocritically, to depress turnout.
The glee with which many NYPD assholes stomped on Occupiers and the absolute bone-chilling dead-eye visages on display while others of their ilk beat and killed POC – right on camera! – should never be forgotten.
@hitchhiker: If Bloomberg is the nominee, he’ll be shredded as a racist by genuine POC and Russian sock-puppets. Depress the black vote and you get 4 more years of Trump. So the point is don’t support Bloomberg in the primary.
I’ll get a Nader trampstamp tattoo, and flounce off to go join the fucking bunny bund
A Ghost To Most
“A precious Times click”?
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
download my app in the app store mistermix
@A Ghost To Most: It means I ain’t fucking subscribing so I ration my clicks to read only a couple stories a month.
He’s not banking on this stuff not coming out, he’s banking on it coming out too late for a lot voters to hear about it.
@hitchhiker: It helps MM with his passive aggressive Bernie-bro schtick.
Is anyone here curious about Bloomberg for a reason other than his perceived electability? Just curious if there is some other case to be made for supporting him over another candidate.
I think it depends when your state’s primary is. If yours is towards the end and it’s Bernie vs. Bloomberg, that’s different than the upcoming South Carolina one, where it’s fine to vote your heartthrob.
If I lived in S.C., I’d be voting for Warren. By the time Phio’s primary rolls around, that might not be a strategic choice.
The older I get, the less I like suspense in anything.
@Baud: He can self-finance dollar for dollar against the right wing slime machine.
@Cacti: Is that different than electability?
Warren raised $6M since Iowa, hasn’t discussed dropping out
We are at a real tipping point here: replacing a racist, grifter businessman with another businessman who isn’t a monster, turns both political parties over to the money men.
We are already playing in the Reagan Stadium. We need to respond with a much more radical candidate who is going to govern for the people.
Elizabeth Warren, for ex.
@Baud: I think so. People like Joe Biden generally, but his fundraising difficulties are a big problem in the post-Citizens United world.
Thank you. The idea that Democrats are seriously contemplating a Bloomberg nomination makes me ill. I get why — Bloomberg has a shit-ton of money, and his ads “take the fight to Trump” while other candidates are mired in the traditional bullshit primary process. But FFS. Bloomberg as nominee would be a gift for an evil campaign machine that wants to depress turnout for key Democratic constituencies: minorities, women and people who don’t want to live in an oligarchy. Trump’s campaign doesn’t have to prove he’s the better man to win — it just has to make Trump’s opponent seem gross, authoritarian and corrupt too, and with Bloomberg, he’ll have a lot of material.
@germy: I’ve been assured by just about all the pundits that she had no money and her campaign is circling the drain. You can’t possibly be suggesting that they didn’t know what the hell they were talking about…
“Aren’t most of the people who sell the drugs African American? – Bernie Sanders on disproportionate incarceration
download my app in the app store mistermix
@germy: That’s the power of small donors. They believe in the candidate and they’re not maxed out. They just keep giving a few bucks every month. The big donors (Biden and Pete’s main source of funds) max out the minute they write a check. So if the candidate goes through a rough patch, cash flow can get cut off because new big donors are hard to find. Those numbers are a real credit to Warren’s campaign.
@BGinCHI: We would be replacing a monster with a lesser monster. Bloomberg has a pretty nasty record.
I’m still sort of thinking that Warren knows Bernie might stumble and if he does, she’ll get his support (vs. Biden or Bloomberg).
I guess I associate fundraising with getting elected. What I’m trying to ask is if anyone has a reason to support Bloomberg even if God herself assured us that the Democratic nominee would defeat Trump, whoever he or she is.
@Baud: Best I can say for him is that he didn’t steal money. I don’t remember much in the way of outright theft of the public purse during his tenure. Thought the 9-11 memorial which he had a big hand in creating is a long-term money suck, but at least it wasn’t built with money grifted from widows and orphans. Also didn’t make decisions based on who he was having an affair with at the time or how much he hated an ex-spouse, which made him seem friendlier than the Ghoul. Fewer outright shameless embarrassments. Didn’t pretend he was upholding Catholic orthodoxy by shutting down subways for museum exhibits. Not that I’d expect him to be the defender of the faith, but he did have that going for him. It doesn’t outweigh stomp and frisk.
@sdhays: Agreed. Plus, we’d be handing the Democratic Part over to him.
The middle of the pack-ers have the ball in the long-term game for now. If no one claims a majority of delegates through the convention, any or all of them can play King/Queenmaker. For some candidates, rough and tough play during the primary could come back to bite them. For now, anyone who has the cash and a prayer is right to stay in and stock up on delegates to leverage later.
@Peale: “Conducted himself while in office with a basic level of ethics” is a pretty low bar…
Those don’t seem like reasons to support him over other candidates though.
@hitchhiker: Jackals have said over and over again that they will crawl over broken glass to vote for the eventual nominee no matter who it is. Concern trolling is concerning.
@Baud: Made sure the gay strip clubs remained regulated and closed and when new ones tried to open, shut them down right away…I really got nothing here. It’s highly unusual to play devil’s advocate by coming up with good things to say about someone. So bear with me. I don’t think the devil’s advocate role is supposed to work that way.
@Baud: the only slight reason beyond electability is competence and I guess experience. He has run a big government before. I am afraid Bernie would screw up so badly that there would be a voter backlash. I hope he bombs on super Tuesday so it becomes moot. Also I kind of want all egomaniac millionaires to lose. Didn’t like Perot and all the others since.
@Baud: One reason to support another candidate over Bloomberg is that he has stated that he will support whoever the Democratic candidate is. If that candidate is willing to accept PAC money, that support could be significant. In the meantime, Bloomberg is apparently running a lot of expensive ads taking the fight to Trump. (But will that matter come the general election? I mean, if you aren’t already moved by the prospect of a second Trump term, what is going to make you vote?)
As I have stated before here, if it comes down to Bernie vs. Bloomberg, I’ll go with Bloomberg. Otherwise, every other candidate is better than he is.
I see Bloomberg as the Wall Street candidate. There is a real Wall Street, with banks and brokerages that employ thousands of people in and around NYC, and Bloomberg is their kind of guy. He’s smart, lucky, and obscenely wealthy. His tantrum over policing through the Occupy demonstrations is a tell, and was probably popular with the locals. My guess is that he doesn’t see a downside to running for President, and does see a possibility of taking down the manifestly unfit incumbent.
Here’s a cookbook more than a few of us could use: Rage Baking.
Fortunately there is a choice…four choices, actually…besides Bernie and Bloomberg.
Two of them come with minimal flaws compared to the other two.
For once I am in alignment with The NY Times editorial board. How odd.
@Baud: If we’re putting aside electability, I’d still support him over Sanders and probably even Buttigieg because I think he’d be a far better President than either. Even if you assured me that BS and PB would beat Trump, I’d be concerned that they would do long term damage to the left (one by pissing everyone off and being an incompetent executive, and the other by being in over his head and easily influenced by the media and the GOP). I think Bloomberg could do a decent job of righting the ship and then paving the way for a much better President down the road.
Of course, I would far, far, far rather have Warren, Klobuchar, or Biden as President.
I don’t care about any of this. The country is now in the hands of Putin. We have to get it back and then worry about the rest. Bloomberg is not a Russian asset.
@PJ: That’s where I am. I dislike them both, but in terms of giving us the best chance to beat Trump and gain seats in Congress, I trust Bloomberg’s money and media prowess over Bernie’s “revolution.”
My sister, who lives in TN, was all in for Biden, hates Trump, despises Bernie, and has switched to Bloomberg “to win”.
She was a political tourist to Iowa to visit my niece. (Ex-Dem operative supporting Warren.) Where she met many of the candidates, and MSNBC anchors. With pics to prove it.
She was crushed by Biden’s event. Lackluster, dull. And Joe seemed old and his heart not in it.
Yesterday, she went to Bloomberg’s rally in TN. Over 1000 people came out in the rain. Midday. In Chattanooga. They overflowed the overflow room. Mike started in the overflow, a few feet from my sister.
She was enchanted. Said he was sincere, humble, warm, energized. And amazed at the turnout. She’s sold.
Same thing happened that evening in Nashville.
The people running the campaign in TN are Black. They spoke at the event. My sister said they were great.
Big spread of catering, too. Cookies, tea, wraps, cupcakes. For 1000.
@Peale: You missed: Doesn’t report to Putin, might not alienate our allies and get cozy with our enemies. I can’t imagine Bloomberg being a bigger ass than Trump on the international stage.
That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t prefer Warren or Klobuchar, or even Biden, but if I had to hold my nose and vote for somebody, I would feel better about Bloomberg than Wilmer.
And I see other Jackals feel the same way.
As opposed to the delightful prospect of DNC Chair Nomiki Konst.
I would put Pete over Bloomberg. There’s risk, but I think it’s the lesser risk.
@download my app in the app store mistermix: The only donors who max out are the ones who make FEC-limited contributions to a candidate. The max for primary donations for these people is ~$2500. There’s no way that puts you in the “big donor” category. The real whales donate through PACs…where their contributions remain invisible to the citizenry, but not to the recipient.
Neither Bloomberg nor Bernie are real Democrats. But at least Bloomberg has been one longer than Bernie.
What is sort of odd to me is that the black commentators on CNN (black women, forgot who) during the NH primary coverage stated that their ear to the ground suggested that the black vote would mainly shift to Bloomberg if Biden turns out not to be viable. Rather than Klobuchar, Buttigieg, or Warren.
I’m not exactly sure why that would be. Perhaps the more urban NYC vibe over the corn-pone midwestern “heartland” nonsense that Buttigieg and Klobuchar throw off. Maybe better the devil you know. I don’t know.
That’s the key, right there.
O/T but Nevada Culinary 226 to announce endorsement today at 4 PM.
I wonder if the timing is in response to some Wilmerites doxxing the chapter secretary today.
I think it would be unhelpful concern trolling if the primary were over and we’d chosen our candidate. But it’s still primary season. I still think it’s OK to talk about who we like and don’t like.
I’m on team broken glass, but I’m hoping Warren gets the nomination.
The republican reporters on ABC and NBC broadcast news (Jon Karl and a new guy with glasses whose name I can’t remember) like to talk about “democrats in disarray” but it’s a primary. Of course we’re debating. They never talk about cancelled primaries on the GOP side.
“I said black 50 times”
@Baud: He’s not Bernie Sanders.
The secretary was anonymous?
I am enraged at how the media is now helping Trump with the anti-Biden campaign he tried to get Zelenskyy to do. But I’m afraid that hasn’t been the only factor in Biden’s fading. He looks okay in those national debates, but when I see him at rallies he looks so old and befuddled. And don’t get me started on “lyin dog-faced pony soldier.”
Buttigueg and Klobuchar are problematic too, if this author is right:
A Ghost To Most
@download my app in the app store mistermix: Whatever. I prefer to live my life with neither NYT nor FaceBook. It hasn’t let me down yet.
Lack of sun making you grouchy?
That’s the biggie. Plus he’s not a Russian asset. But I repeat myself.
@MazeDancer: I’m going to a Bloomberg event here in Dallas because Bernie ain’t gonna win and the only way we start fixing stuff is getting back in the game. Plus can you imagine the catastrophic loss of the house? With a Bernie ticket, it becomes a real possibility
Bloomberg is a moderate Republican. I certainly won’t vote for him in the primaries. What is really making my head spin are all the people he is obviously paying to write positive comments about him in most WaPo articles. I Ignore User them right and left as they are trolls.
Which one is going to help Joe Manchin keep his seat? I think I know.
@Chyron HR: Did I say I favored Sanders?
How about neither.
Right. But we still have five other viable candidates who are not Bernie Sanders. Between those five and Bloomberg, is there any reason to choose Bloomberg other than perceived electability? That was my initial question anyway.
As the Idiocracy proceeds, the bar is continually lowered.
OTOH, maybe Bloomberg had a notion, a notion deep inside.
Someone made a reference to a Bloomberg forecast in my work meeting today, and I thought: At least he made is money on knowledge and such, unlike the current occupant.
@Peale: Bloomberg has put a lot of money into gun control groups over the past few years. They have turned out to favor Bloomberg as a candidate.
There was a time when ignoring gun control was considered a bad thing by Parkland teenagers.
@Baud: Yes. Only appears in public in full furry costume.
yes. Gun control. Money where mouth is.
I am not saying I prefer him to others, but you asked.
Mike in NC
I’ll take Bloomberg any day over the Mango Mussolini and his criminal family.
My preference is Warren, Amy K, Bloomberg, Biden, Mayor Pete, Bernie (intentional spaces, that’s how far down he is). And if you had a machine that accurately predicted electability, and it said that Bloomberg was the most electable, I’d choose him first. If Trump wins this America experiment is pretty much over, imagine a few more Neil Gorscuchs on the SCOTUS. If Trump wins he will not serve out his term because of dementia, etc., but whoever replaces him will not be much better.
download my app in the app store mistermix
Donors who come to the fundraising events for Biden and Pete write $2800 (the current limit) checks in addition to whatever other donating they do. Bundlers who attend those events also solicit $2800 checks from people they know who may not want to attend these events. These $2800 checks are the only money that goes directly to the candidate’s campaign, it’s what’s reported to the FEC, and they are what powers a campaign. You can’t pay staffers with SuperPAC money. You can’t open field offices with SuperPAC money. So, when Pete and Biden can’t get new big donors, they have a big problem. Warren, Sanders and Klobuchar do not, because their donor solicitation strategy relies on donors giving $5/10/15/25 a month who can do that for months without hitting $2800.
@catclub: Thanks. I knew he was good on gun control but not that he was better than our other candidates (except Bernie, who has had his issues).
Bloomberg has large investments in Russia. Bloomberg News has a Moscow bureau and Bloomberg Professional Services (the financial computer terminals) operates in Russia as well. All those Russian oligarchs who support Putin are probably sitting in their Moscow penthouses keeping track of their vast financial empires on Bloomberg Terminals.
Doesn’t mean he is a Russian Asset like Trump, but he does seem a lot more sympathetic to Russia than other Dems such as Clinton: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/11/not-long-ago-bloomberg-likened-putins-attack-ukraine-americas-annexation-california/
It occurs to me that we really don’t know much at all about the real workings of of someone like Bloomberg. Real oligarchs like him (as opposed to fake ones like Trump) move in completely different circles. Bloomberg doesn’t need to set up some sort of ridiculous meetings with shady Russians like the Trump clan did. He has extensive legitimate business interests in Russia and partnerships with Russians.
For all we know, he might have some sort of secret non-aggression pact with his Russian counterparts. He is throwing hundreds of millions into this race. What does he know that we don’t? Not trying to be tinfoil hat here, but maybe he thinks he has the clout to call off the Russian dogs in a way that Bernie or the other candidates don’t.
@kindness: My criticism of Bloomberg was that he stated that the Bloomberg organization will be neutral towards his candidacy.
I think he should say that the Bloomberg organization will be as neutral toward his candidacy as the Trump organization is toward Trump, or less so.
Let Trump whine about unfair.
@MazeDancer: Wait, Bloomberg brings cookies? I’m in!
Manchin isn’t up for re-election until 2024 when we will be in a whole new Presidential campaign season.
I’m not Bloom-curious. He’s either even with or below Sanders to me. I’m for Klobuchar and I’m hoping she’s still in it when it comes around to Illinois. In fact, I’ll probably vote for her anyway because even if she fades, she’ll still probably be on the ballot and her delegates will be uncommitted going to the convention. I’d vote for Bloomberg over Trump in a general election (because of his gun control and trade views), but I hope it doesn’t come to that. I want a mainstream liberal Democrat as President.
The facts have a liberal bias. All they have to do is report on Trump neutrally and it will come out pro-Bloomberg. That is the world we live in. But actually SAYING they are going to be biased only gives the right an excuse to dismiss it all.
If it comes to it, I’ll vote for motherFucking Bloomberg. I think the nation’s schoolchildren will have someone who will try to save them from gun violence and climate change. But this is so infuriating. The media basically got all the votes before we got a chance to cast ours.
@Baud: I was surprised at the post above that said Bloomberg was good in person. I also preferred Pete over Bloomberg, because I thought Bloomberg was charisma free. I may have been mis-informed.
I honestly don’t care who’s been in the club longer. I care about who has demonstrated true progressive values throughout their career.
That ain’t Bloomberg.
Bloomberg is the only one buying ads and putting them onto my Facebook Feed. They are very good ones too…short snappy video clips about “Mike” that are very well made. I’m sure they are smart enough to know that I’m a March 10 Washington Primary voter as FB seems to know all.
I get Elizabeth Warren online ads but they are more fundraising appeals than messaging. No other candidate has crossed my electronic threshold so to speak.
@MomSense: We’re only two contests in. This nomination fight is long from over. And Wilmer could easily have another myocardial infarction tomorrow. Last picture I saw of him he looked terrible.
@patroclus: I’m with you. Honoring party name or power over ideals is the trap Republicans fell into. Bloomberg does not represent the ideals that we should be advancing and he’s definitely not going to be pushing for them if he’s in office. Like you, I’ll vote for him against Trump, but I’ll do it knowing he’ll doom any chance we have at addressing inequality.
Not quite. If the Bloomberg organization reports something accurate but unfavorable to Bloomberg, the RW will be all over that. That is the kind of thing that NEVER appears in the RW media: neutral but unfavorable to Trump. Being neutral is self-handicapping.
@zhena gogolia: Manchin’s not up again ’till 2024. Won’t need anyone’s help if he runs again. Doug Jones (AL) probably needs a solid candidate at the top of the ticket. Sanders I think would doom him. Bloomberg might improve his chances some.
“Build relationships, but don’t bring Fredo!”
I imagine Kushner standing behind him as he tweets going, “Yes, poppa, you are right, he should not bring Fredo to our meeting!”
I dunno Bernie, but most of users are white. And another thing, the Sacklers are white, right?
@Baud: It’s a close call for me. At the moment, I lean Bloomberg over Buttigieg, but I might feel differently in a couple days.
Doxxing means releasing personal information so that the bros can send them death threats (and rape fantasies, if female) to make them realize the error of their ways.
What? That cannot be! Why just yesterday here, a jackal declared that the Warren campaign saying they needed to raise $7M before Super Tuesday was a sign of weakness, and they’d never make it!
I honestly don’t care about words or “values”. I can find a dozen old white guys in my local pub spouting all the right words. I care about deeds and accomplishments. In the past 40 years, what kind of progressive legislation has Bernie shepherded through Congress into law by building a working majority of legislators in the House and Senate? That is what he is claiming he can do to reach a 60 vote majority for all his progressive ideas. Has he ever demonstrated the ability to do that in the past? Don’t tell me about various things he has voted on. Every senator casts votes. That is what the do. Tell me about how he has successfully assembled a diverse majority coalition in support of one of his ideas.
@Baud: Pete’s a real Democrat, whatever his faults. He’s not one of my top choices, but he doesn’t scare me the way others do.
Did I miss the thread where we covered Bloomberg calling trumpov a “carnival barking clown” on Twitter.
Should be a fun evening!
@Chyron HR: Gotcha.
And besides free food, Bloomberg is giving away his logo’d t-shirts. And, of course, free bumper stickers, of which he is not running out.
Because he doesn’t have to sell merch to make money, he just gives it away.
The really rich guy thing he did is print “Chattanooga” over his name on the sign attached to the podium.
That’s right, he prints a new sign for every venue. No crappy all-purpose reuseable for Mike. (though seems less environmentally sound)
Agreed. Most of the criticisms of him seem to be that he’s too centrist and fundraisers from rich people. Certainly not reason to choose Bloomberg over him.
@Betty Cracker: But can’t this be said of every candidate?
Biden- Anita Hill, Crime Bill
Sanders- Crime Bill, anti-Identity Politics, Primary Obama
Buttigieg- South Bend Police
Warren- DNA test,
Bloomberg- S&F, Redlining etc.
The fact that trolls and bots were able to somewhat successfully lower turnout of Black voters for Hillary because of Superpredators and the Crime Bill that she never voted for (with an obvious assist from Voter Suppression), leads me to believe that either 1.) ANY Dem candidate will be about equally subject to this tactic or 2.) it won’t matter because Black voters are smart enough not to fall for it and realize that Trump is exponentially worse than any Dem candidate.
Yeah, I was using him as placeholder for that type of Dem.
I hope Bloomberg stays in the race as long as possible just trolling Trump and making him go nuts.
Kay called it long before Biden’s campaign imploded and the polling started to shift: Bloomberg has a built-in ground game because of working with gun safety groups and mayors nationwide. He’s also poured money into a lot of people’s campaigns, and they’re returning favors. Because of that, Bloomberg might actually be able to pull this off, unlike Giuliani, who thought he could 9/11 his way to the GOP nomination.
If Bloomberg is the nominee, I’ll vote for him, to get rid of Trump and only to get rid of Trump. But also with the full knowledge that doing so is casting a vote for oligarchy and with the hope that the children of Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates don’t decide it would be fun to hunt people like us for sport in our golden years when it’s their turn to be president.
But if 2020 is a turnout election, we damn well better hope Bloomberg can buy turnout as well as he can purchase a political infrastructure that hands out cookies because the shit-storm the Trump campaign will throw at him will be even uglier than what they’ve got on tap for the nominees who aren’t trying to buy the nomination.
One thing is for certain.
2020 is going to be an online civil war in which truckloads of money will be spent, much of it dark money.
Bloomberg is hiring the very best media and advertising experts money can buy. Not the best partisan political consultants like the Carvilles and Mark Penns of the world. But the actual best ones who normally work for companies like Nike and Apple. And he commands one of the world’s bigger media empires, his own Fox News if you will.
Bernie has an army of leftist twits madly tweeting away from their coffee shops in Seattle and their mother’s basements in Madison. They are completely overmatched for the war to come. Snake emojis for fucks sake?
Which one is more likely to win the online media war, or at least play Trump to a draw?
For another perspective on Bloomberg, this article by Michael Harriot of The Root is beautifully written and gut wrenching. He makes an effort to explain why a recent Quinnipiac poll had Bloomberg getting 22 percent of Black voters, compared to Biden at 29 percent :
@Chyron HR: Fredo apparently is Cuomo’s brother, the talking head.
@catclub: How effective has he been, though? Supporting Toomey in 2016 or Snyder in Michigan did not advance that cause .
Culinary Union not endorsing a candidate in NV.
“We’re endorsing our goals, not a candidate.”
Dorothy A. Winsor
Can someone explain what’s going on here?
@Baud: I’ve been thinking about this and I believe he is not ideological and will hire strong professionals to work out pragmatic solutions plus he understands the world of social media and information tech and that to win this election will require a massive online ad blitz
fwiw, Bloomberg just received the endorsement of Houston’s African-American mayor and several local pastors (the AME church is powerful in Houston). I don’t doubt that he threw some money at them (altho the mayor was just reelected to a final term so he doesn’t really need it). Quinnipac is cited as saying he raised his approval ranking 18 points among African-Americans in the past 2 months.
@UncleEbeneezer: I agree. No candidate is perfect, and all have some history that can be used against them. And the GOP and Trumpsters are full on authoritarians by now and play by ruthless authoritarian rules. The GOP has played by these rules for decades. One rule is from the old Soviet secret police” “Give me the man and I’ll give you the case.”
I think voters forgive quite a bit of history if the candidate can make a convincing case that they will do the right thing going forward. Politics is a ‘what will you do for me tomorrow’ game for most voters. Political junkies and partisans (to party or individual candidate) have a different view.
I think more important that a candidate against Trump can find a way to play smashmouth without descending to his level of insults, smears and lies, because you cannot descend to that level of complete disregard for decency and truth without disgusting and discouraging a lot of voters. The Trumpsters will keep almost all of their base with that filth, but the opponent will lose a lot of their supporters, or discourage them from turning out.
When Bloomberg jumped in I figured that he was banking on Biden frizzling out. Which I guess has come to pass. I vote in Virginia March 3, and I’ll vote for Warren. She will beat Trump, I think, as will Klobuchar. I think Bloomberg would win, also, but while I am not as pessimistic as some about a Bloomberg administration, his is the wrong damn way to choose a nominee. I think a lot of people are going to vote for him in the primary out of their fear of Trump. I may disagree with the choice, but I can’t blame them.
@Dorothy A. Winsor: No idea, but I suspect Barr is just lying through his teeth and trying to maintain the laughable fiction that he is independent from the White House as he is supposed to be.
@UncleEbeneezer: Bloomberg’s baggage is worse, IMO. There’s the recent recording of Bloomberg talking about throwing black and brown kids against the wall. There’s the extensive history of making sexist remarks and forcing employees sign NDAs. There’s the public enthusiasm for cutting Social Security and Medicare. Bloomberg has a lot of baggage that is tailor made for depressing Democratic turnout. Maybe he can buy his way out of it. Maybe not.
@Baud: The enemy of my enemy is my friend?
@Betty Cracker:I really doubt many Dems will support Bloomberg. The puzzle now seems to be about why he does so well with AA voters.
At the risk of white-splaining what goes on in the souls of black folk, it is good to remember that a small but significant share of the New Yorkers among them endorsed stop and frisk. As they did with the law that Biden, Sanders and Clinton supported and later regretted that took aim at “predatory” offenders. It wound up targeting many petty criminals instead, but maybe drive by shootings declined?
Live in a high crime district and you tend to look for any solution. I think that happens all across the Rainbow Coalition.
Now if Bloomberg wants to disprove the racist motivation for his policies, he could always endorse stop and frisk for white guys with gun racks and rebel flags when they come within a half mile of a school, synagogue or mosque.
@hitchhiker: It helps because we need to vet these guys now, not after the primary.
@Dorothy A. Winsor: I saw that too, if AG Barr feels so strongly about that(spoiler alert: he doesn’t) he can just submit his resignation. Easy peasy.
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
Matt Miller suggests Trump continually givng away the game is making it politically difficult for Barr.
Barr is suggesting Trump cool it so Barr can continue to go after people with a fig leaf of cover.
@Dorothy A. Winsor: Barr is lying, mostly. However, it’s merely a fact that Trump is making his job harder.
@Baud: gun control, climate change, real support of Planned Parenthood
@Betty Cracker: It seems he brings cookies though.
@Eljai: Harriot’s a powerful writer. Hilarious when he wants to be, but powerful when he is serious.
@Geminid: I wonder how well he would be doing if he had entered the race a year ago like just about everyone else and had been subjected to multiple challenges in various debates and in the media over his record and past statements. I feel like people are endorsing him or saying they’ll vote for him without much knowledge of him beyond being a competent mayor of liberal NYC and a billionaire. He’s a clean slate right now for lots of people.
I have a “ally with Stalin to defeat Hitler” feeling about Bloomberg. He’d add a lot of firepower but half of our agenda would be be behind an iron curtain if he won.
This concept, that we don’t really get to choose the candidate, which is what Blooms money is buying him, pisses me off to no end. I can see the rich fucker doing this, it works for him and I trust his scruples about as far as I could throw trump.
We are between more layers of bullshit this election than I can remember in my lifetime. People rightfully concerned about every conservative wanting trump, people who have no actual place running for the presidency and most of the media in the pockets of rich fuckers who just have to have that last 25cents to make that 50 billion into 51 billion for bragging rights because Sam forbid that they might not be the richest kid on the block. And we are acting like the fucking race is all but lost and we all will have to, as the old obnoxious saying goes, suck hind tit.
The race isn’t fucking over, we haven’t even gotten to the first turn, let alone the last lap.
Rant done but not over.
@Topclimber: I’m not sure Bloomberg s numbers are anything other than the brief spike many candidates get when they first enter the race. He’s saturated the airwaves and coverage has so far been positive. Let’s see where he is in a few weeks after the pushback before interpreting his support among demographic subgroups.
@sdhays: Bloomberg would have never made the debates due to the donor rules. He’s self funded, cause he can.
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
How can I do Trump’s shadow work when he keeps spotlighting what we’re doing with his tweets?
He stayed in the closet.
I don’t wish it on him, but I wouldn’t be surprised. He looks frail and his color is awful. I can’t imagine campaigning for president or the stress of being president are appropriate for a 78 year old who recently had a heart attack.
I cannot believe he is still in the race. No one else would get a pass like that.
@Topclimber: I think it’s as simple as this: everyone is scared shitless and looking for a guaranteed Trump slayer. Bloomberg shits money and pisses cash. His MONEY makes $2B a year without him lifting a finger. That’s like a superpower, and it sure can grease the skids during a primary race, especially when the other candidates are mired in the usual bullshit process.
@MomSense: On our 11pm news here in LA we get one Bernie ad(along with one for Steyer and Bloomberg), even in the ad, he looks awful.
@Betty Cracker: We lost the whole “buying the Presidency” thing when Citizen’s United was decided. Obama told us and just got a Justice shaking his head and mouthing ‘not true’.
I don’t buy that black turnout was low because they didn’t like Hillary. They had their votes stolen from them by Republican voter ID laws and other dirty tricks.
@Yutsano: Despite disliking him, I don’t wish that on him, but we should be talking about this more NOW rather than after Super Tuesday or even later when it may be too late. What he does with his health is his business until he jeopardizes the entire nation over it.
Bloomberg is a product of the largest and most diverse city in the country. He is urban, in other words. Buttigieg and Klobuchar pander to the white midwestern “heartland” values nonsense suggesting that the guy on the tractor with the John Deere cap who eats ‘hotdish’, knows more about how to run the country with common sense than the black guy riding the A-train to his office job or the black woman working as a nurse in South Carolina. When those folks know damn well it is the white guy on the tractor and the nice white folk with their cream of mushroom soup “hot dishes” who gave us Trump.
And I write this as a Klobuchar supporter. But I also know that most of my upper midwest relatives who bake casseroles and go to church on Sunday, who Klobuchar and Buttigieg are appealing to, also voted for Trump.
Imagine if Warren had had a heart attack (and waited a while to tell everybody)?
@?BillinGlendaleCA: And that was already a step up from “You lie!”
Yeah, KCMO girl here and the “hotdish” stuff really pisses me off.
That is quite a slander of Bloomberg, if you consider how many people Stalin had murdered by the time we allied with him.
@zhena gogolia: The first paragraph of every story for the rest of her life would note it.
This is so true. I’m white, but this is my psychology as well. Can’t stand Bloomberg, but this is the real argument.
This is the fucking stupid thing. Trump is PRESIDENT of the US. He can pick up an actual red telephone and tell any of his cabinet secretaries in private what he wants done any time he wants. He doesn’t need to tweet away in public with his personal iPhone like he is on the outside looking in.
She would have had to periodically post her EKGs online to stay in the race.
@sdhays: Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.
A reminder that many of trump’s young judges will be around long after the rest of us are pushing up daisies:
Longest-serving federal judge, named by LBJ, retires at 98
@rp: Buttigieg is a Democrat. Bloomberg is not. Look at his record. He is a Democrat when convenient, same as Bernie.
I want a DEMOCRAT. A real Democrat.
She would have to do a live stream of her EKG and give a press conference during her stress test.
@zhena gogolia: I concede your point. I’m quite drawn to the firepower Bloomberg can bring to the fight and his combativeness. Maybe he’ll be more like the Roosevelt’s, a wealthy class guy putting some limits on the wealthy class. The power of a tiny group of wealthy folks in our society is feeling a bit feudal.
I do wonder whether the “authoritarian” Bloomberg might actually have a certain appeal to white people who like the “law and order” cosplaying side of Trump (yes, I know, he provides neither) but are not… enthusiastic… about the boorish, hateful shrieking and general embarrassment to the nation that come with it. I can’t call myself a Bloomberg enthusiast exactly, but if the alternative is 4 more years of Yabber the Bulk in the White House…
But her fibrilations!
@Dorothy A. Winsor: I think the first tweet at your link pretty much covered it:
@Kent: By any pragmatic measure, Bernie has been a staunch Democratic voter who has served our party well by supporting virtually all its key votes in the Senate and opposing GOP crap. (Credit whosits from a few days ago who pointed that out here).
Bernie’s tragedy is that his militancy, tendency to hire bomb throwers for key positions and tolerance (at the very least) for idiot Bros has convinced so many folks that even a plutocrat like Mayor Mike is preferable.
@Kelly: I don’t believe Bloomberg believes that limits should be put on the wealthy. Just Trump.
The one positive thing I might surmise about a Bloomberg presidency is that I think his ego is big enough that he will want to go down in history as having real accomplishments, and that will mean working with Dems on things. Not as good as a real Dem, but perhaps we can move the ball forward on some issues.
I think this is very much true. The perceived “competence and experience” and the perceived law and order focus probably wins him a lot of votes from mushy centrist types who are GOP leaning but don’t like all the fundie crap and uncouthness of Trump.
My small town midwestern relatives don’t care about Stop and Frisk, and they will nod approvingly if they hear the famous tapes going around about “don’t carry a gun if you don’t want to get arrested”
Bloomberg’s appeal is his big dick energy. He’s the alpha in a Trump v. Bloomberg battle. He is what Trump wishes he could be.
One of the ten richest guys on the planet, and shows that his funding for his campaign is nearly inexhaustible.
He has flaws, but right now he’s projecting a level of self-confidence and calm not seen in the other candidates.
@Baud: I think that too many people are discounting the fact that Speaker Pelosi and a Democratic House are not going to enable the worse angels, so to speak, of Bloomberg’s nature. I think there’s a decent chance that they might be able to have a productive relationship. Of course, there is the little matter of the Senate to consider.
You have to play the rules of the game. The rules of 2020 is that Russia is invited to play, Barr will launch investigations into everyone and the feds will interfere wherever they can, money will come from everywhere, all the rules will be broken because nobody is enforcing the rules.
Yes, voters want an old white guy, but you also need someone who can fight off an entire institution attacking the candidate. Bloomberg is honestly the only candidate that stands a chance on that front – not only because he has a lot of money, but also because he has a lot of friends that scare Republicans.
Yes, he’s a terrible democrat. But it doesn’t matter if the nominee is the best candidate if you lose and we have another 4 years of Trump setting shit on fire. Tolerate a President Bloomberg and put your energy into winning the Senate so Congress can set the rules.
@Baud: Bloomberg appears to get climate change. If he only helped put us on the right track to limit carbon he’d have his positive spot in the history books.
I’m confused about something. Do the polls show Bloomberg has any following among Dems? It’s fun to see him needling Trump. But he seems to be just another flavor of the month.
@Topclimber: I’m also really concerned about his honeymoon in Soviet Russia. Regardless of the actual facts, there’s a lot of them that haven’t really been aired the way they will when the general election gets going, and he’s going to be branded a capital-C Communist. And I worry what essentially harmless (I’m assuming) but damaging kompromat Putin has from those days.
I don’t like people comparing him to Dump because for all his sins he’s nothing like President Odious, but this is an aspect where his position in the primary is similar to Dump in 2016 – no one wants to alienate his supporters by going all out against him despite glaring flaws. Those flaws will become more apparent in a general election, and then it will be too late.
@WaterGirl: Buttigeg was elected with, what, 10,000 votes in South Bend? He’s never held statewide or federal office. Clinton and Obama both struggled when they took office because they were fairly young and there’s a very steep learning curve. Buttigeg would be like that on steroids, and that’s coming on the heels of the most corrupt, most dysfunctional administration in the country’s history. I don’t have much confidence in his ability to run the country.
For me, this is as much a job interview as it is about my policy preferences, and Bloomberg wins that battle hands down.
But, as noted earlier, I’m ok with Buttigieg generally and put him about at Bloomberg’s level. Both are far better choices than Sanders.
@Morzer: Can you imagine the hay Trump will make of Bloomberg’s soda tax, etc., out there in childhood type 2 diabetes country? Bloomberg will get the worst of both worlds — the necessity of apologizing to Democrats for his shitty (and RECENT) defense of stop-and-frisk PLUS hounding by the Trumpsters for insinuating they don’t have an inalienable right to a 5-gallon Big Gulp, like it says in the constitution.
I’m not arguing his voting record. Other than on gun control I would imagine it to be more or less identical to any mainstream Dem like Schumer. I’m saying that he is applying for a leadership job when he has never shown the slightest leadership qualities in his 40 years in Congress.
The next President is going to have to persuade the rest of the world to repair our tattered alliances and that we are able to lead again on things like Climate Change. And it will take real leadership to put together the shattered wreckage in the executive branch from the Justice Department to the State Department to the EPA. I don’t see Bernie as ever exhibiting any of those qualities.
Even if Bernie can beat Trump (and I’m not convinced he is up for that job) I’m not convinced he would actually make a good president.
J R in WV
Ooh, good one. Can’t be done, Bernie has never ever done anything like that, ever! Now, if renaming a post office is what you need, maybe then Senator Sanders is who you want…
Sorry, he ain’t no Roosevelt either!
@Martin: I’ll add to my own comment – Bloombergs ability to ignore the other candidates and just focus on Trump is something the others need to emulate. This Biden/Bernie/Pete catfighting says more about why they’re bad candidates than what they are fighting about.
And can we please stop litigating M4A? We’re not getting jack shit so long as Trump/McConnell are in charge.
You make it sound like his skills as a politician could use some work.
@The Truffle: He’s basically picking up every vote that Biden is losing. He’s currently viable in every Super Tuesday state that has recent polling, something I think only Bernie can claim.
No one gives a shit about a 50 cent tax on 2-liter bottles of coke except for the obese working class white folk shopping at Wal-Mart who are Trump’s base anyway.
@Kent: You are wrong. I’ll leave it at that.
@Martin: Yeah, I was surprised Bloomberg was so high in the predictIt betting market. (second to Sanders) I had not been paying attention.
@zhena gogolia: Historical analogies aren’t working. I’ll get back to you after I consider fictional characters.
No kidding. I’ve been saying I’d dance with the devil if that’s what it takes to take on global warming in a major way while there’s still time. I still mean it. But I won’t try to convince anyone that Bloomberg’s anything but. He’s a racist, sexist asshole, and that’s on his good days.
Bloomberg or any of the others, the question for me is, who wins the states we need to win? Not who runs up the numbers in states we’re going to win regardless of the nominee, but who gets us Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Colorado, Virginia, and maybe North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona (I’ve given up on Ohio and Florida)? Who gets the voters in the cities, and the women from the suburbs in those states to come out and vote?
I don’t have an answer to that question. More of a list of “who doesn’t.” I’m hopeful that the answer is “whoever the nominee is”, but I just don’t see Sanders, Buttigieg, or Bloomberg being that candidate.
@Martin: Bloomberg’s ability to float above it all is directly related to having such mountainous piles of cash that he doesn’t have to participate in the process the other candidates are embroiled in to be a viable candidate. It’s not transferable to the others, who are competing for our money.
@Kent: I think Bloomberg is focused enough to simply say ‘Presidents don’t enact soda taxes, and have more important things to focus on’.
@NeenerNeener: I agree with you. Not only does he not report to Putin, but I doubt very much that Putin wants him to win. Whereas it’s fairly clear that Putin wants Bernie to win the nomination and then lose the general election. I’m not saying this is Bernie’s fault, but doesn’t it worry any of his supporters that some of those supporters are Russian trolls?
I’m definitely in the crawling-over-glass category when it comes to supporting the Democratic nominee, but I would so much prefer Warren or Klobuchar or even Biden (if he survives the next couple of weeks). Given the choice between Bloomberg and Bernie, I would prefer to disappoint Putin.
@Kent: That was Joy Reid.
While he’s not my first choice, or second, or third, I did love Bloomberg’s response to Trump’s insults today. You know it got under Trump’s skin: “ we know many of the same people in NY. Behind your back they laugh at you & call you a carnival barking clown. They know you inherited a fortune & squandered it with stupid deals and incompetence. “
If it comes down to Trump v Bloomberg, I will suppress my gag reflex and vote for the racist billionaire who at least is anti-gun and pro-environment.
Since California votes on Super Tuesday this year I won’t need to make that kind of tough decision for my primary vote. Phew!
@Betty Cracker: I don’t think most Dem voters care about M4A either. Everything needs to be ‘how do we beat Trump’. Everything else weakens the candidates.
They can compete for our money by outlining the most effective plan to beat Trump. The policies aren’t worth debating – nobody is torn between Trump and Kloubouchar on immigration.
@Betty Cracker: OK, in my own upper middle class purple suburb here in WA I guarantee no one cares about a silly soda tax. If the are die-hard Republicans they might say they do if that is the Fox News talking point of the day. But no persuadable voters do. Especially as it isn’t some new proposed national policy in the Dem platform but something he did years ago in New York City.
Dems, if they are competent can also run ads against the hundreds of thousands of new 25% sales taxes that Trump has imposed on nearly everything they buy as a result of Trump’s tariffs. Trump has raised a lot more taxes that Bloomberg.
I’ve been living for the last 17 years in a rural community where two families that own sawmills and timberland have been the feudal nobility for generations. It’s very unsettling to see this sort of thing could become nationwide.
The popular black former mayor of Columbus, Mike Coleman, endorsed Bloomberg. The mayor of Houston endorsed Bloomberg. I heard Lori Lightfoot may endorse Bloomberg. Lucy McBath endorsed Bloomberg. Bloomberg donated $5 million to Stacy Abrams’ voting rights group. Bloomberg has been strong on voting rights and gun control He was a big city mayor. Appeals to the urban voters. I can understand his appeal. I would vote for him in a heartbeat over Trump. Unlike some of my preferred candidates, I’m certain he will be on the ballot in Ohio on March 17.
@Martin: I agree that most voters don’t give a shit about policy, and I wish all the candidates would have said “enough with debating this notional healthcare bullshit” after the first debate. But people like Warren, Biden, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, etc., have to go through media gatekeepers because they need to get their faces in front of voters and they can’t do what Bloomberg’s doing. Maybe they should stage a revolt at the next debate and say all we’re going to talk about is how we’re going to beat Trump?
@Betty Cracker: Ok but do we have to settle for being punked. Yay we defeat Trump but go oligarchy!
Maybe Bloomberg concentrates Bernie’s mind on the notion that if he doesn’t make peace with the rest if the Democratic party he risks either keeping faux billionaire or way billionaire Bloomberg as our next president?
Does the guy who fu Wilmer haters has done more to highlight the tyranny of wealth disparity than almost anyone really want to be the tool who delivers the Democratic Party to a Plutocrat?
@Betty Cracker: I’m not saying this is a desirable situation. I’m saying this is the situation we’re stuck with. And all of this was happening before Mike entered the race, so he’s not the cause of it, he just doesn’t need to play it.
Is it fair? No, of course not. But the 2020 election will in no way be fair. We can play by the rules as we want them to be or we can win.
J R in WV
At this point, I can say I will vote for either Amy Klobuchar or Elizabeth Warren in the WV primary, in May. I can also say that come November, while I may work hard for the Dem nominee, there are lively candidates for the nomination I would have a real problem actually voting for, let alone working to elect.
Because I am registered to vote here in WV, my actual vote doesn’t matter as much because my fellow Mountaineers will be overwhelmingly be voting for Trump. So I can write in SP Warren if I want. Or leave that ballot item blank. I really hope hard that we will have a Democratic candidate I can vote for with enthusiasm rather than necessity.
@Betty Cracker: Democrats are utterly desperate to beat Trump and I think Bloomberg’s law-n-order past will play well in flyover country, even if for disreputable reasons. I kinda doubt that the soda tax will matter much, to be honest. If that’s all Trump can manage, he might as well quit and scurry home to Putin. Whoever the nominee may be, they’ll be attacked with the same vicious dishonesty – and all of them have flaws. Bloomberg has money to burn and he’s managed to attract some real talent. And much as I hate to say it, an awful lot of the country would like the idea of a stern, successful White Daddy after the disgusting chaos of Trump.
@Topclimber: You already have an oligarchy. Bloomberg is not the proof of that, Trump and Citizens United is.
You know what might change that? Dems winning thanks to those rules. You know what won’t change that? Dems winning despite those rules.
@Kent: No argument here. Must mean I am getting tired.
” Maybe they should stage a revolt at the next debate and say all we’re going to talk about is how we’re going to beat Trump? ”
I wish they would stage a revolt. The debates are a mess, and the moderators indulge in grubby gotcha gimmick grandstanding, and patently unfair preferential treatment of candidates by preferential time allocation and targeting different questions to different candidates. But, some in that bunch wouldn’t do it, and at least one guy (it is a guy, small town guy) seems to have taken out a catering license, so is in a different business than participating in an honest debate.
I’d like the candidates answers to each question to be ‘STFU”.
One would think the multiple questions that went “Hey K, you will now dish about what S said about W” would be the last straw, but probably not.
@sdhays: I take your point. He has been slick and crafty about crafting his image for the tens of millions of people who had only maybe heard a little about him before they saw his TV commercials. And when the rest of field have knocked enough of each other out, the ads Bloomberg runs trashing them will be the most a lot of people will have heard about them. As I said, the wrong damn way to win the nomination. On the other hand, he’s been in the public eye for a couple decades. His criminal justice policies have been no secret, and his remarks at Aspen are not surprising, just embarrassing. If Bloomberg is the nominee, his record will cost him some votes among white liberals, but no more than he’ll gain from white centrists. As for African American voters, I suggest people read the Michael Harriot article eljai referenced. The Root where Harriot appears is worth checking out anyway.
@Martin: All M4A has done for the Democrats is make them look like an impractical, squabbling bunch of people who haven’t learned anything from the problems both Clinton and Obama had with healthcare reform and the backlash to it.
download my app in the app store mistermix
Yeah, he’s been gaining recently. If he was a Steyer I wouldn’t be posting this stuff. Q poll has him 3rd nationwide, and he’s 3rd in a recent TX poll I saw. Haven’t looked at others.
@J R in WV: Again, I agree. The GOP and the Trumpsters will tell any outrageous lie they think will work, and the corporate media will feel obliged by their notion of ‘balanced’ journalism to give any lie some plausibility.
By Abraham Lincoln’s criteria for what constitutes a lie, that means the corporate media will lie to the public, but that is another topic.
I’m still not sure which candidates will be the best ones to effectively counter that garbage.
@Martin: I happen to think oligarchy is not so bad. Oligarchy that ignores its responsibility and the interests of the commonwealth, not so good. Until citizens all decide to pay attention to politics, oligarchy is as good as it gets.
Honestly it is their own damn fault. Rather than meekly raising their hands to all the “gotcha” poll questions at that first debate someone like Warren should have interrupted and said. “Healthcare is a complicated question not some simple yes/no talking point. And it deserves serious debate and discussion. If you want to know my policy and plans on health care I am more than happy to answer that question. This is a debate, let’s knock off this nonsense and actually debate.
She probably would have gotten a standing ovation.
@Topclimber: You can argue that the party system effectively makes democracy into a form of oligarchy. Sure, we get to vote for candidates – but ultimately we don’t get to control the party and its hierarchy.
Interesting, but to prove out your theory, we’d have to trust a benign oligarch to change the very rules that put him — personally this time, not as a donor — in power.
@Kent: “She probably would have gotten a standing ovation.”
And her campaign would very probably be in much better shape.
As I typed yesterday,it would be like Warren walking into a crooked poker game and throwing the card table against the wall. That is what she would have needed to do in order to explain her much more honest and competent approach to health care reform than any of the other candidates.
That approach would have required immense self-confidence and nerves of very high tech steel. No criticism of Warren that she didn’t go there. National politics is very hard, and I think everyone makes big mistakes, at least on the first run.
@Betty Cracker: We have a distinctly non-benign oligarch in office now, so even a semi-benign oligarch looks like quite the improvement.
@Kent: Maybe someone will do that at the upcoming debate. He or she would get a standing ovation from me at any rate. But in a very real way, they’re trapped by our shitty media culture. They need access to TV time, they’re competing for voters against each other, so they have incentive to participate in the reality show, the narrative of which is shaped by the same dicks who ask the gotcha questions. Bloomberg can bypass all that shit. They can’t.
Gin & Tonic
@Kelly: Bloomberg, whatever his other faults, is not from generational (“feudal”) money. He built a business from the ground up, providing a product that people wanted enough to pay lots of money for.
If Bloomberg starts closing ground with the more moderate voters it will be telling to see what Bernie’s response will be. If he double’s down with the Michael Moore and Susan Sarandon crowd then he is a lost cause. If he makes more expansive centrist overtures, like floating the idea of someone like Klobuchar as VP, then it will get more interesting. Unfortunately I think he is such a hidebound iconoclast that he’ll just double down. Grumpy 78 year old white men tend to be pretty set in their ways.
@Kent: Yep, he’ll double down. If Bloomberg starts to look like a real threat, Bernie and his Bros will be all over him in a way that they’ve never done to Trump.
@Betty Cracker: Well, you need to trust him to not veto what Congress passes. Or, if a constitutional amendment is needed because of USSC, then you don’t even need that. President has no role in amendments.
It will be an amusing shit-show. A whole bunch of obnoxious “woke” white guys in Seattle hammering away trying to convince black folk that the 3-term mayor of the most diverse city in the country is an unmitigated racist while the prophet from lily white rural Vermont has all the solutions to their problems. Which, of course, are all caused by the 1% and not the racist foreman who runs their shop.
@Kent: It would be a shit-show alright, but how amusing it would be depends entirely on the outcome. That’s exactly the kind of scrum that could make lots of people say “fuck the lot of them.”
Most people will have no idea it is even happening. Rose Twitter is not much followed in the “heartland”
Well, I, for one, do not welcome our new billionaire overlords. As a result, I will be voting for a Democrat in the WI primary.
@Omnes Omnibus: What happens if it is down to Bernie and Mike by April 7 ?
@divF: I will burn that bridge when i get to it.
I hear the words Bloomberg curious and I swear my blood pressure must go up 15 points. It’s so foolish for people to be taken in by ads when his record for decades is so awful, that I will not be surprised if steam actually comes out of my ears.
Trying to CONVINCE? Kent, the guy specifically wants to throw black people against the wall because they are where all the crime is. It’s hard to GET more racist than Bloomberg. I completely buy that the black support for the man is purely transactional.
And the picture you describe is, indeed, ridiculous.
But what the fuck is with this ‘trying to convince’? Let’s not be in hell and call it Bridgeport.
@Chris Johnson: Have you been to Bridgeport?
A bit late on this thread, but this is a good place for it: https://twitter.com/blakezeff/status/1227976156936171520
Great link. Here’s another one that Betty provided a couple days ago:
Bloomberg may be good on climate change and gun control, but if he’s the Democratic candidate, I’ll be rooting for the end of the world, and I’ll want a gun to shoot myself.