If Mike Bloomberg is the Democratic nominee, will you vote for him in November?

Yes

yes, but until then I will talk as much shit as I can

I hate his fucking guts but I hate Trump more

easiest and most depressing yes of all time

I will cross that bridge when I come to it, not before.

Saw this thread at almost the exact same moment as this

I voted for Hillary Clinton against Trump in 2016 and it was an easy decision.

I genuinely don’t know if I could bring myself to vote for Mike Bloomberg against Trump in 2020.

— Emma Vigeland (@EmmaVigeland) February 13, 2020

I mean feel free to ban me but ONLY if Georgia somehow ends up in the swing column. and well, it won’t.

I'm a hard no.

yes, but until then I will talk as much shit as I can

― sleeve, Thursday, February 13, 2020 1:14 PM (six minutes ago)bookmarkflaglink

I hate his fucking guts but I hate Trump more

― Οὖτις, Thursday, February 13, 2020 1:14 PM (six minutes ago)bookmarkflaglink

easiest and most depressing yes of all time

― nothing in the dialog (unregistered), Thursday, February 13, 2020 1:15 PM (five minutes ago)

all these

Yes, would vote for likely second shittiest president ever over allowing shittiest president ever to be reelected, yes.

I mean, fuck him forever if he becomes the nominee, just to be clear. And also just fuck him forever for pulling this shit in the first place.

Literally eat the rich, is what I'm saying here, basically.

Darkest timeline is: Bloomberg buys the democratic nomination because he's another bored rich fuck who sees human lives as playthings, and Trump squeaks to a win by an even narrower margin than before.

I'm not convinced we aren't in that timeline.

It would not be a narrow margin.

Mike Bloomberg is why we’ll have 6 conservative justices


whether he wins (he won’t) or not

yeah if Bloomps is the nom, Trump will finally get that landslide he's always claimed he got in 2016.

everybody's freaking out about Bloomberg but honestly I think it's unwarranted - the odds of him cracking 15% in the Super Tuesday states don't look good to me

I only posited the narrow margin for my darkest timeline scenario to give us a glimmer of hope until the moment late on election eve when it's rudely snatched away and we fall into a bottomless void of horror forever and ever.

xp This is an insane amount of money even for big money politics though. There are stories going around of him poaching staff from other campaigns.

I'm less freaking out about Bloomberg than I am walking up to him and screaming 'FUCK YOU, BLOOMBERG' in his rich asshole face over and over. If that makes sense.

xp - it's not a likely situation but we elected a rapist game show host, who's to say a guy worth $50 billion can't buy an election? We're in uncharted territory.

best case scenario is that he just pours a billion into Instagram influencers to get 1% of people under the age of 30

Bloomberg’s hiring spree is so massive, he is leaving lots of local campaigns in the lurch, resulting in crucial lost races for Dems. https://t.co/DT2JRntErO

— Alexander Chee (@alexanderchee) February 13, 2020

Would never vote for him and fear he may be even worse than Trump in some ways. Worried he may run as an independent in the general if Sanders or Warren win the nomination.

i am voting only for Sanders or maaaybe Warren in November

anyone else doesnt need my symbolic, self-hating vote in NY

it'd be the first gen prez election btwn two Republicans

also it's not happening

If he's running against Trump, of course I will vote for him. It's not a hard question.

not if youve been "settling" your whole life

every prez election of my adult lifetime has been worse than the preceding one

this matchup wd blow past all of them

If you've been "settling" your whole life, aren't you used to it?

Anyone who quits a legit dem campaign to work for Bloomberg should be put on a watchlist.

This election would be the meme of the 2 Spider-Men pointing at each other. 2 rich, racist, misogynist, authoritarian New York Republicans bickering. Dismal turnout, Democratic party broken, easy incumbent win.

in fact i'd urge a Sanders third-party run in this case

If he needs my vote in WA it’s a lost cause. If the Democrats nominate him they’d deserve to lose. Love to argue “we need to get rid of the racist sexist authoritarian billionaire by any means necessary, so get out and vote for the racist sexist authoritarian billionaire!”

ugh I guess so

the Carvilles and Joy Reids wd lean on climate and gun control

BUT NO, THIS ISNT HAPPENING

I think he would have a more accomplished left-wing presidency than bernie sanders since spending $300 million on ads is a more viable path to passing the public option than having your fans show up to mitch mcconnell's house a bunch

also unlike sanders he has pretty genuine views on gun control (which is prob why he is a bad candidate)

Even if Sanders accomplishes none of his domestic policy goals, having him in charge of American foreign policy for four years would be enough for me.

otm

I think that is a fair argument to make, I just wonder how many people at his rallies also agree with that

feel like it barely matters since i can't see bloomberg actually winning the votes of enough democrats to win the general election, but i'd probably hold my nose and vote for the guy just for the sake of having a president who believes that climate change is happening

i doubt sanders would actually get much of anything passed, but foreign policy + executive orders + judicial appointments could wind up making him a pretty consequential president anyway

Those who have said "blue no matter who" kinda hafta mean it, even if it means a pretty major nose-holding vote like this one

I think when Republicans inevitably stonewall his policies, Sanders could tell a pretty simple, coherent story about who the villains are and what they are keeping from the average American. And that might mitigate some of the attacks on him as an extremist who can’t accomplish anything, and might be more effective than a moderate who tries to reach across the aisle and gets rebuffed. But I don’t know! And I don’t trust a Democratic Congress to stick together on any of his proposals.

Bloomberg's currently polling as the Dem candidate with the best shot to beat Trump but I wonder how much of that is because most people haven't heard him speak yet

so was Biden.

he's going to show up at one or more of the remaining debates, I assume?

when Republicans inevitably stonewall his policies, Sanders could tell a pretty simple, coherent story about who the villains are and what they are keeping from the average American

I have been looking at the news for the past 40 years and I think that "simple, coherent story about who the villains are" is pretty well-told by now.

Just to take a recent example, Republicans inevitably stonewalled impeachment and Democrats generally told a simple, coherent story about who the villains were, and... (crickets)

he's going to show up at one or more of the remaining debates, I assume?

― bold caucasian eroticism (Simon H.),

Bloomberg too, I think.

ayooo

anyway I'm not american so not voting in this but I wouldn't relish the chance to choose btwn NY billionaire Epstein-associated sex pests regardless of whether I was in a swing state or not

In the future, every NY billionaire Epstein-associated sex pest will be president for fifteen minutes.

I probably would because my wife would divorce me otherwise, but fuck Bloomberg.

I think he would have a more accomplished left-wing presidency than bernie sanders

I wish he'd arrested you ya bloody lunatic

do you give a shit about civil liberties? obv not

"Bloomberg is not perfect" could be even more fun than "Obama is not perfect"

turn on MSNBC to find out

sorry morbs I guess I just care about passing left wing policy more than you

Morbz has never cared about policy

or math. or facts.

i doubt sanders would actually get much of anything passed

landmark legislation of the last Dem prez: Bob Dole's healthcare plan

fuck both of you shits hard

let Bloomshit spend on those public option ads w/out thinking he needs to buy the fucking presidency

Lol at the idea of Bloomberg passing more left wing policy than Bernie. Unless by left wing policy you mean industrial development zones and tax breaks for fat cat developers, in which case Bloomberg all the way.

dude go meditate or something xp

If he gets it (which, probably not), I could say I was alive to watch the right realize their mission to completely infiltrate and take over the Democratic Party. /TinfoilHatButStill

tell the OWS centrist to go meditate

Bloomberg is doing all this to kneecap a progressive agenda, not advance it. He knows MSNBC Dems are the easiest marks.

the Dems are already 'right' or haven't you been noticing which candidate they MUST stop

the Repugs are tinfoil hats & brownshirts

ok I told him

I don't care if he thinks climate change is real, he'd sooner be the one to usher in our likely inevitable era of eco-fascism rather than see his taxes go up.

I don’t disagree with you Morbs. I know it shouldn’t be but, but god help me it’s honestly *shocking* to watch Clinton partisans on cable news and social media getting wet for Bloomberg

they voted for him 3x in NYC

Giuliani endorsed him as his successor bcz he'd keep the police state and hedge funds humming

Yeah, Bloomberg is like Giuliani without the Trump brainworms.

they voted for him 3x in NYC

maybe someday Trump will run against Giuliani and we'll have a real choice

liberals can and always have been racist in regard to any or all "perpetrators"

bloomberg and bloomberg are not entitled to hear my answer to this question

I think of deportations and I do feel it's every persons duty to vote against Trump no matter what

^^^

Trump wins that's four more years of trump and then we reset, likely with a dem

Bloomberg wins that's 8 years of Bloomberg followed likely by a Republican because parties usually switch after 8 years in power, but maybe not seeing as mike isn't actually liberal

or 4 years of Bloomberg followed by a Republican

Either way that's 8 more years minimum of a horrible, racist man in the white house

You can say "but the supreme court" but does anyone think Bloomberg would actually nominate liberal judges? His campaign contributions in recent elections helped us get to the majority that allowed Kavanaugh

I'm not saying I would vote Trump, I'm saying it's not as easy a tradeoff as people say

yes it is

yes it is

Prefer trump, not vote*

That's not a thing I would ever do lol

liberals in over-thinking things shockah

We really think president Bloomberg will make it all better huh

that's not the point, the point is "get Trump out"

lol I just got an e-mail from my mom about how "impressive" this mailer she received from Bloomberg is

rmde. fuckin boomers.

"make it all better" gtfo

yeah I actually FP'd that post

If Bloomberg did succeed in buying the nomination, that's about the best opening you could ask for to launch a populist-left third party run imho

if bloomberg wins the nom and sanders launches a third-party run, that could cripple leftist politics in america for decades, no matter how morally justifiable his choice to run would be.

Yeah sadly true I think

which hey, another Republican/ Democrat win-win!!!

Worth a shot anyway, seeing as nominating Bloomberg would prove that the Dems are beyond saving

nb if I lived swing state I would probably vote Bloomberg

But without a pathway to primarying him in 2024 that would doom us to 8 years of shit

Y'all just have more faith in Bloomberg to be anything more than a less vulgar more efficient trump. I don't buy his act.

ok so then I won't vote for Bloomberg. and then Trump will win. So we'll be stuck with the more vulgar less efficient Bloomberg.

NY billionaire Epstein-associated sex pests

I just want to go back to this because it's a great phrase

xxp

no, that's exactly what he's gonna be. but he's less likely than trump to start a nuclear war, and more likely to take 'meaningful' steps against climate change.

obviously, he's still terrible, and as a ny resident i would strongly consider voting third party if he's the nominee.

Xp for four years instead of 8. That's my entire point. If Bloomberg promised to drop out or drop dead after 4 years it'd be different.

I still think it's our duty to vote for the better candidate without worrying about what's gonna happen 8 years down the road, especially when there are certain issues which absolutely can not wait that long. if the DNC nominates Bloomberg then they clearly did not learn the lesson from 2016, so then who's gonna save us in 2024? at the end of the day I'd take Bloomberg over Trump. I mean I'd rather it be Jared Fogle than either of those two, but if this is the choice we have....

the point is "get Trump out"

you might as well be my 77yo MSNBC-addict friend

a third-party run, that could cripple leftist politics in america for decades

lol as opposed to the robust US leftism of the last 40 years

I think a Sanders presidency being within reach and getting swatted down by a fake-Dem billionaire like Bloomberg would indeed be far more damaging than the last 40 years of neoliberal compromisers, yes.

Bloomberg is equally likely to get us into a war with Iran.

milo, goddamn you for starting this signature ilx panicpoll

lol as opposed to the robust US leftism of the last 40 years

― brooklyn suicide cult (Dr Morbius), Thursday, February 13, 2020 4:46 PM (two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

yeah, i mean, it's finally on the verge of making a bit of a comeback.

yeah we don't really need to worry about the hypothetical until like mid-March

close this thread plz

Bloomberg's the opposite of trump, he'd start a war with NK instead

to form 3rd party, or not form 3rd party

The SPUSA is available to absorb the DSUSA

I refuse to vote in this poll

If the poll is Mike Bloomberg is the Democratic nominee, will you vote for him in November?, will you vote in it in 4 days?

i'm voting for trump

not really

I refuse to vote in this poll

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive), Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:02 PM (twenty-one minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

how irresponsible. state your reason:

- Not interested; felt vote wouldn't make a difference
- Too busy or conflicting schedule
- Illness or disability
- Out of town or away from home
- Registration problems
- Users such as imago
- Forgot to vote

Trump wins that's four more years of trump and then we reset, likely with a dem

Bloomberg wins that's 8 years of Bloomberg...

Or 12 (shudder). I think he has made it fairly clear that he's not going to let a thing like term limits stop him from staying in office?

OP: Yes. From a consequentialist standpoint, the climate crisis dwarfs every other concern.

Sanders and Bloomberg (combined) have a 70% chance of the nomination on betting markets. It's likely the 2020 will assert the danger of plutocracy, or prove it.

Or 12 (shudder). I think he has made it fairly clear that he's not going to let a thing like term limits stop him from staying in office?

― Deflatormouse, Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:48 PM (four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

at least he's fuckin old!

Republicans don't die before 102

anyone who is not in a group that is in danger of deportation, disenfranchisement or worse I kinda don't want to hear your bullshit about this, there are a number of terrible government actions that would stop, that harm real people in your communities

But he turned my city into Dubai

How franchised do you have too be before you can become disenfranchised

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/02/10/what-you-need-to-know-about-trump-plan-to-deport-hmong-lao-immigrants

yeah and I'll be a pain in his ass during his Presidency to not be a fuck

i would not vote for Bloomberg in the primary of course, but also i'd vote for him over Trump every single time.

Bloomberg sucks but there's nothing he would do that wouldn't be worse and more stupidly under Trump and there are many things that would stop that are actively hurting Americans right now

there are a number of terrible government actions that would stop

Citation needed. His record as mayor indicates that he doesn't have any qualms with violating civil rights and liberties.

i'm voting for trump

― uncrut gems (crüt), Thursday, February 13, 2020 3:14 PM (fifty-six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

not really

― uncrut gems (crüt), Thursday, February 13, 2020 3:14 PM (fifty-six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

roller coaster of emotions you sent me on there

Bloomberg did win the Dixville vote y'know

the literal one vote

If Bloomberg ends up winning the Democratic nomination against Trump, then it is because the voting public in the USA gave that outcome their seal of approval. No matter how awful we may find that, if it happens the preponderance of the nation's adult population made it happen, not just the DNC or RNC or some nefarious cabal. It would be a fairly accurate reflection on where we are politically rn.

And the only viable response would be to swim against that current, continue to work for what you believe in, and organize around making it happen. Because ideas die when people abandon them.

Citation needed. His record as mayor indicates that he doesn't have any qualms with violating civil rights and liberties.

― Greta Van Show Feets BB (milo z), Thursday, February 13, 2020 6:10 PM (one minute ago)

Yeah, I think you are mistaking him for someone way less scary, like Howard Dean.

Bloomberg is not building a stupid fucking wall

neither is Trump

yes, but only one ballot. he's not worth committing fraud for

anyone who is not in a group that is in danger of deportation, disenfranchisement or worse I kinda don't want to hear your bullshit about this, there are a number of terrible government actions that would stop, that harm real people in your communities

― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Thursday, February 13, 2020 6:00 PM (eleven minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

you're right, and i'm being an edgelord imagining he would be identical when it comes to immigration and travel bans. but the thought of the next decade or more following a bloomberg win is enough to make me give up on anything ever getting better than it was before 2016 on a national level. and given his cozy reception from the establishment and the media, i'm worried he could be 80% as bad as trump and get none of the scrutiny. he's branding himself as the heroic anti-trump and he'll be lauded for whatever he does.

none of this would really be so bad if we weren't stuck in a strict unkillable 2-party system but here we are

Congressional Dems would not roll over for a Dem Prez who tries to pull awful shit like the Rs have for Trump

enhhhhhhhhh

I mean they did oust Franken pretty quickly

gillibrand led that, and she was not rewarded for it

Joe Manchin would definitely obstruct Bloomberg's plan to sell poor people as fertilizer.

anyone who is not in a group that is in danger of deportation, disenfranchisement or worse I kinda don't want to hear your bullshit about this, there are a number of terrible government actions that would stop, that harm real people in your communities

― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Thursday, February 13, 2020 6:00 PM (eleven minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

you're right, and i'm being an edgelord imagining he would be identical when it comes to immigration and travel bans. but the thought of the next decade or more following a bloomberg win is enough to make me give up on anything ever getting better than it was before 2016 on a national level. and given his cozy reception from the establishment and the media, i'm worried he could be 80% as bad as trump and get none of the scrutiny. he's branding himself as the heroic anti-trump and he'll be lauded for whatever he does.

― ℺ ☽ ⋠ ⏎ (✖), Thursday, February 13, 2020 6:33 PM (four minutes ago)

I actually very much resent the presumption that I'm in some comfortable or privileged position because I would refuse to vote for Kodos over Kang?

ums - that’s been my thinking about most of the shitty moderate candidates, and in a vacuum, if it was suddenly November and Bloomberg was the candidate, then I guess I could vote for him, certainly if I were in a competitive state. But in the context of this primary, where the reality of Bloomberg becoming the nominee almost certainly has to involve the party intervening and making deals to stop a grassroots movement for a progressive candidate, one who would be far better for endangered communities, well, that’s a tougher vote to cast. Acquiescing to Bloomberg buying the nomination would be the Democratic Party abandoning any principles that it has tried to claim and spitting on its base, and that’s not something I’d want to reward. Maybe I’d hold my nose and vote, but I don’t think I’d have the fortitude to do anything to try to get Bloomberg elected.

Anyway I’m maintaining my perhaps overly optimistic belief that his support will drop when he starts being visible beyond ads and appears in debates, and the party isn’t quite dumb enough to give him the nomination.

actually very much resent the presumption that I'm in some comfortable or privileged position because I would refuse to vote for Kodos over Kang?

are you or members of your community in danger of deportation? if so, I apologise. if not, tough titty

I realize it's just theoretical for me, but if were faced with that decision, there wouldn't be a decision. Unless I lived in New York or Mississippi or some state where the outcome were 100% guaranteed, I'd get out and vote for Bloomberg. (And maybe even if I did live in one of those states.) I can't even begin to imagine what new horrors Trump will move on to if he's validated by reelection. He's just qualitatively different than anybody he'll be facing in November.

"if I were faced"

As usual, ums otm and bringing the real to fronting fools like me. Gotta keep the focus on those with the most skin in the game.

Bloomberg, noted defender of minority rights

don't front like Trump's immigration and deportation policies aren't extreme

oh look this argument again, hurray!

and on a fourth thread!

I mean Bloomberg sucks! if he gets the nomination we're fucked, I honestly think Trump would love to kick the shit out of him

but there's no way Bloomberg would be negotiating with Laos to deport 10K Hmong people who have lived here for 20 years and pretending otherwise is silly

so if I can't hold my nose and fill in an oval with a number two pencil what the fuck good are my progressive values?

In the hypothetical where yer presented w this choice and yr reaction isn't to angrily demand a third option I think you're sort of insane sorry

what good would that do?

In the hypothetical where yer presented w this choice and yr reaction isn't to angrily demand a third option I think you're sort of insane sorry

― bold caucasian eroticism (Simon H.)

how would we angrily demand a third option?

If Bernie ran as a third party in this hypothetical, I probably would vote for him, but in a Trump v. Bloomberg scenario, ums is right: get over ourselves.

o ye of little imagination, you've got actual left-wing reps you can contact now y'know

a third party run by a Dem/indie in 2020 would put Trump in the White House. Do some of you understand American politics?

and some of us have been on weekly (after a period of daily) phone calls to our congressional offices since January 2017, thank you

In this scenario neither party would deserve yr vote ever again IMHO, gotta start from something

in the remote chance as of February 2020 that Bloomberg becomes the nominee,w hen would be the time to angrily demand a third option?

If electing a democratic socialist gets Trump out of the White House, I'd vote for him or her. If electing a moderate Democrat gets Trump out of the White House, I'd vote for him or her. If electing an oligarch and egomaniac with untold billions gets Trump out of the White House, I'd vote for him or her.

I can vote for him or her AND do what you suggest.

I'm personally about 99.9% sure a Mini Mike run would mean four more years of Trump anyway

but, yeah, I know, these threads are meant for performative angst.

If Bernie is the third party nominee against Bloomberg and Trump, will you vote for him in November?

Sorry for all the angst, I think it's the gaping wound where my wisdom tooth used to be.

Folks, if you have babby, insist on getting those fuckers yanked out as early as possible.

https://tenor.com/view/all-about-eve-award-heart-gif-4655126

I think that is a fair argument to make, I just wonder how many people at his rallies also agree with that

― iatee, Thursday, February 13, 2020 3:12 PM (five hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

and judicial nominations, probably the most important factor after foreign policy when I decide whether to vote for a presidential candidate. also, my vote doesn’t really count thanks to the electoral college, which is why like morbs I’ll only be pulling the lever for bernie, out of the remaining candidates who have a chance

mike bloomberg wanted to put fingerprints on every social security card to keep people who are "illegal" from getting jobs so they wouldn't cross the border pic.twitter.com/2B034g05aa

— Matt Binder (@MattBinder) February 14, 2020

On the plus side, he seems...extremely beatable to me

Bruh 😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/qT5q3kIonQ

— Secular Talk (@KyleKulinski) February 14, 2020

I would put it this way: he’s better than Trump, but he’s the absolute worst non-Trump outcome I can imagine, and it’s really depressing.

But I bet a friend he wouldn’t win a single dem primary.

Four weeks ago everybody was lamenting Biden as being the inevitable nominee and now he's just lonely sending pointless "gimme fi' dollah" emails and about to ass out.

Now, everybody on my FB wall suddenly seems convinced Bloomberg has it, and apparently here it's being taken seriously enough that this thread exists. He has a spending advantage out the ass but well as of yet there ain't nothing to react to other than him polling better slightly now and opting out of the early caucus/primaries.

We are always terrible at predicting shit in these threads and have been for over four years so like idk, y'all like constantly being worked up?

It's like every thread pivots from

-remote possibility of thing
-consideration of said thing happening
-becoming convinced it will happen
-getting in huge fights over hypothetical thing that hasn't happened and may never

It's like me talking about my sex life

Well the bet I’ve made so far is that he will flame out once the initial shock and awe ad campaign wears off and the ridiculousness of him as a candidate catches up with him. But he’s spending unprecedented amounts of money.

the ridiculousness of him as a candidate catches up with him.

this argument loses a certain amount of its force when you realize his sharpest competitors for the mushy moderate middle are Fading Former Veep Joe Biden, South Bend Indiana Mayor Pete Butigeig and Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

He’s abysmally bad. Klobuchar and Pete have ten times his charisma.

Where's this idea that Bernie would run third parry coming from? That doesn't seem particularly likely?

Bloomberg on the other hand seems guaranteed to run third party if Bernie gets the nomination

two probably dumb questions:

a) are pundits actually supporting bloomberg specifically now, or is this just people Discoursing several months into the maybe-future; the big story seemed to be that it was 15-year-old memers named @RickAndMortysBalls, and people who are vaguely against bernie but not pro-anyone yet
b) is it at all plausible his reputation is bad enough in new york city that trump might actually win (probably not, but there's this lingering doubt)

today ILX decided which Republican billionaire who has 0 delegates at the moment it would vote for in November

Morbs....otm?

thomas fucking friedman is actually supporting bloomberg iirc. (i don't think his endorsement actually carries any weight with anyone, but)

that column was a lot funnier than this thread

thomas friedman is actually built out of parts recycled from a 1994 bloomberg terminal

bloomberg was a major donor to friedman's wife's new museum opening this spring

man I really backed the wrong horse’s ass in that old ‘Who’s Worst: Brooks, Friedman, or Douthat’ thread

I think we'll all be changing our tune after Bloomberg gets around to donating to our wives' museums and feeding us fancy cheese steak sandwiches.

https://quotefancy.com/media/wallpaper/3840x2160/1393653-Joseph-Delaney-Quote-Everyone-has-a-price.jpg

truly the best of us:

Happy Birthday Dr. Henry Kissinger – a wise statesman and good friend. pic.twitter.com/3jgQB64EVh

— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) May 27, 2015

TBF ol' Kissyface is also close personal friends with Hillz.

so is Kissinger like 4’11”

dealing w/him is 911

bloomberg is standing on kissinger's jabba the hutt-style tail to add extra height

i googled HK's height (1.75m allegedly) and then MB's (1.73m ditto) and beside MB's it says "trending" lol

Yikes.

The degree to which Michael Bloomberg is using his fortune to fundamentally alter & manipulate U.S. politics to his personal advantage extends way beyond ads. I've worked against him, covered him as a journalist & worked with his top aides. Here’s their playbook: (1/17)

— Blake Zeff (@blakezeff) February 13, 2020

This is why it's not just about "voters making choices".

bloomberg is standing on kissinger's jabba the hutt-style tail to add extra height

― Homegrown Georgia speedster Ladd McConkey (bizarro gazzara),

real lol

never thought I'd say this but I miss Howard Schultz

I saw 3 likes for a Bloomberg tweet in my timeline today. I might see if I can get in on some action too

Billionaires are fucking scary.

Look forward to the Bloomberg/Trump debates: Which Form Of Fascism Do You Prefer? Striped Shirt or Pure White? pic.twitter.com/5ziI1nMbBE

— Dennis Perrin (@DennisThePerrin) February 14, 2020

goddamn he is so corny

Never

are you or members of your community in danger of deportation? if so, I apologise. if not, tough titty

― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Thursday, February 13, 2020 7:24 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

'I speak for the most vulnerable, those with the most immediate need, therefore all other viewpoints and concerns are petty and invalid.' This is precisely the line of reasoning that anti-abortion activists use to urge people who detest Donald Trump to vote for him anyway.

I am not going to write a fuckin personal essay here but to clarify, everyone in my immediate and extended family who was born before the mid '80s is a refugee. I have lived in New York City most of my life and Bloomberg was our mayor for more than a third of that time, during which I fit the description of "Male, minorities, 16-25" that he famously ordered xeroxed and handed out to all the cops. Add "Arabic speaking" to that, and infer what you will.

Now, I would be the first to concede that being repeatedly traumatized and violated by NYPD as a youth is but a minor inconvenience next to the imminent threat of deportation, both real and perceived (as a consequence of constant bullying and demonization by the president and his supporters).

But I demand a higher signal-to-noise ratio. What Bloomberg is running is another authoritarian disinformation campaign, keeping direct interaction with voters and other candidates to an absolute minimum minimum and exploiting fear of Donald Trump. You who detest him, he is banking on your willingness to vote for him anyway. I would play the long game by withholding my vote to insist on a future candidate who values democracy. And I don't see this as a privilege but a duty.

By the way, there is a theory floating around that the guy is doing this to keep Warren's wealth tax from his bank account, at a fraction of what that would cost him. I don't buy it but I do suspect he is even more motivated by self-interest than his competitors.

I am pretty sure the instant Trump got the nomination every billionaire in America had a long hard think about it

What do get for the guy who already has five yachts?

so you demand a 'higher signal-to-noise ratio' while also believing that you can send the world a complex signal about your political beliefs by not showing up to the general election in a country where most people don't show up to the general election, in a state where one guy is obviously gonna win.

xp

happy bloomie's birthday everyone

iatee, I think Deflatormouse has earned the privilege of hating Bloomberg and not voting for him under any circumstances, probably many times over. I'm pretty sure he doesn't think that his solitary act of refusal is going to have profound implications for national politics going forward. And if he does, well, let him have his hope.

for what its worth I don't think Trump's election is the death of America or our political system but I am starting to think President Bloomberg might be

we move ever closer to the Zombie Hitler v Zombie Stalin election

who do you vote for?

why, the Democrat

Let's not utter "President Bloomberg" before he has a single delegate

if i capture him does he have to grant me three wishes

I know this is probably by far the least important consideration right now, but I keep getting extremely angry at the thought of Bloomberg winning the primary, losing badly to Trump, and then Bloomberg's supporters once again refusing to acknowledge their mistakes and blaming "berniebros."

this thread on Bloomberg is oof

Anyone even thinking of Mike Bloomberg needs to remember the name Khalief Browder.

Browder was a sixteen year old boy who was imprisoned for three years without trial, tortured, and driven to suicide on the false accusation that he had stolen a backpackhttps://t.co/ZrvgGdG92q

— Molly Crabapple🇵🇷 (@mollycrabapple) February 11, 2020

I know he has no actual delegates yet but the number of Dems unquestioningly declaring total confidence in this guy out of the blue is really alarming. It took many months for voters’ impressions of Biden to change and he didn’t have Bloomberg’s kind of cash. Time and money are both factors.

Then perhaps you haven't noticed that lots of Democrats are oldschool Republicans who pay a little more lip service to social tolerance.

… and what they most often object to about Trump is his incivility.

yeah but Sam Donaldson: https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/14/opinions/michael-bloomberg-democratic-candidate-endorsement-donaldson/index.html

well, first i got angry that the question is even being asked. that's not milo's fault, though... it's bloomberg's. moving on from that... no.

none of the candidates running are good enough for me, because i believe the problems that exist today are beyond what can be solved by any one person, no matter how princpled, charismatic, or talented. i also believe that the fairness and transparency of democracy in america has fallen below a standard whereby i can honestly describe elections, on a national level, be described as fair, free, and open.

i continue to vote, not because i believe my vote matters, but because voting is important to me as an act of radical intersectional solidarity.

the people i would be supporting by voting bloomberg are not, fundamentally, people i trust to have as allies. i believe there is a minimum standard of fitness to lead that must be met before i can, in good conscience, vote for someone. i do not believe that is a high standard, but i believe that standard is higher than "not donald trump". i do not believe bloomberg meets that standard.

i do not believe that my unwillingness to vote for bloomberg carries with it any commensurate personal responsibility for any actions that may or may not be undertaken by whoever is in power in february 2021. i remain willing to engage in positive acts of political change as opportunities may arise.

Skip Gates hurts.

Among all the candidates, the person who I believe could stand toe-to-toe, strongest and longest with Donald Trump is Mike Bloomberg.

Why? Who do you think his constituency is?

I know Mike Bloomberg socially. Every summer I go to a dinner on Martha’s Vineyard with Mike Bloomberg. I’ve argued with him about policies that I didn’t like. He is enormously intelligent and capable. When he was mayor, I watched him. He could wear it lightly. It’s not like Jimmy Carter with the weight of the world on him. I think that he’s tough, and I think he could take on the bully Donald Trump. Very few people can stand up to a bully. Mike’s got some bully in him. I think he’s good.

As someone who has basically trusted the Democratic establishment (or at least its "progressive" wing) for much of my adult life, I'm finding the contrasting attitude of elites toward Sanders and Bloomberg to be plainly revealing of their skewed priorities and incentives. That probably makes me sound naive, but I do wonder about the potentially radicalizing effects of this moment.

apparently dinner on Martha's Vineyard is the place to be

I will put the man who sexually harassed my mom in power before I'll let poor people get healthcare pic.twitter.com/W5aYlGAiXy

— Amy Klobuchar is a Cop (@blunted215) February 14, 2020

I voted yes in the poll but after thinking about it for more than ten seconds I’m actually closer to Morbius. Nobody running as the Dem nominee needs my DC-dwelling help in the general, and I ain’t ticking the box for this asshole. Sadly I’ll still probably have to go stand in line for local races.

As someone who has basically trusted the Democratic establishment (or at least its "progressive" wing) for much of my adult life, I'm finding the contrasting attitude of elites toward Sanders and Bloomberg to be plainly revealing of their skewed priorities and incentives. That probably makes me sound naive, but I do wonder about the potentially radicalizing effects of this moment.

― jaymc

i would say i have certainly been radicalized. i don't trust bernie - no, that's not right, i do trust bernie, i don't trust a lot of bernie's _supporters_ - and i don't think bernie has a hope in hell of accomplishing the stuff he says he'll do, but at this point politics is openly about personal allegiance, not policy, and every time some liberal elite goes out of their way to disparage bernie or his proposals i am more and more convinced that i am going to vote for him. (go ahead and try a "not so different" response comparing me to a trump voter. i fucking dare you.)

as far as bloomberg goes? you cannot fucking shame me into voting for mike bloomberg. full stop.

If the Democratic Party's nominee fails in their primary obligation to earn your vote by offering some identifiable, positive reason for you to support them, write in the name of someone you would be happy to see win. Not voting is another option, but I think it's less satisfying than casting a positive vote. It may be just as ineffective in the practical dimension, but not in the psychological one.

NO.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8007521/Mike-Bloomberg-wants-Hillary-Clinton-running-mate-say-sources.html?fbclid=IwAR057JISGvPfeJd0GcsWbXY693n7keekV5b3--azo6JAXbQzWgO2sUUblpg

(I voted "no" just now, but would've voted no even before this news emerged.)

I'm not fond of Pete or Joe but I'd pull the lever for either of them in a heartbeat over Mike.

I voted no, but I’m not sure where I’d come down with a gun to my head between Pete or Mike. The things that are bad about them (most of it) are pretty equally bad?

And as for the things that might be good, eg believing climate change is actually real, maybe Mike would be better suited for pushing through his agenda?

(which, for all the fanfare he gets as a Republican who believes in climate change would probably still suck out loud)

Joe is a whole other kettle of brain worms

I would say that I aspire to a kind of "zoomed-out" perspective that I have imagined people with a lot more education than I have, or far more knowledge of history, political science and sociology might attain... but which probably requires oracular levels of foresight, actually.
And I do feel quite powerless, not because I live in a state where one guy is going to win, but most of my hopes are tempered by a sense of inevitability on this ridiculously grand scale. I tend to want to limit my influence, rather than further it anyway, because I don't think I'm really smart enough to predict the consequences of what I might be inclined to do (though I do realize this is going to go down like a lead ballon).

I probably prioritize the preservation of American democracy over other issues at the moment, which is to say that I do believe it's under threat. I have tended increasingly to place "protest votes" for longshot candidates far to the left of "Establishment" Democrats in local, statewide and national elections, perhaps moronically. But I do not think I've been radicalized and do not even consider myself to be liberal, honestly. My very limited understanding is that in order to prevent the erosion of democracy, I should hope for leaders to be elected who do not regularly violate political norms. Both Donald Trump and Michael Bloomberg have shown a frightening willingness to violate them and in my view, present a serious threat. I also prioritize political stability and for this reason favor incrimental progress, or for progressive changes to establish a secure foothold, over revolutionary action that threatens the stability of a government or political system. That's a pretty big deal, and it's something that I think most people in this country take for granted.

My refusal to vote for Bloomberg is not based primarily or exclusively on desired ideals, individual needs or personal experience. I worry that American voters are willing to give up the forest for the trees, but I also recognize a very real need to localize my own perspective and come down to earth a bit. Or a lot.

glad we got this out the way, let's relitigate this again at the DNC

i will def be voting Bernie in the FL primary in a few weeks.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/15/us/politics/michael-bloomberg-spending.html

It was during his 12 years at City Hall that Mr. Bloomberg wrote the playbook for propping up allies and co-opting opponents with a mix of political and charitable giving. Even as he spent $268 million on his three campaigns and made $23 million in campaign contributions to others, his philanthropy gave away $2.8 billion, much of it to civic and cultural groups around New York.

In all, by his own accounting, Mr. Bloomberg has given away nearly $9.5 billion since 1997, at an annual rate that has increased more than a hundredfold. In 2018, the year before he announced for president, he spent nearly $770 million. Last year’s $3.3 billion figure probably included a $1.8 billion donation to his alma mater, Johns Hopkins University, announced in November 2018. Even without it, his charitable giving roughly doubled.

Asshole

Voted no. I’m in a real immanentize the eschaton mood this weekend!

I have absolutely no idea, but if I don’t vote for the person who gets the democratic nomination, I’m still showing up to vote for every candidate on the rest of the ticket

That could be the worst effect of a terrible pick for the presidential candidate nomination, suppressing turnout on house and senate elections.

‘Orientalizing’ Bloomberg with the epithet ‘oligarch’ is what’s really going on here.

— Jeff Stein (@SpyTalker) February 15, 2020

Othering Bloomberg

I still haven't seen anybody actually endorse Mike Bloomberg besides Mike Bloomberg, @FuckJerry/@KaleSalad/etc, and Barbra Streisand apparently

Lucy McBath.

https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/politics/8550216/john-mellencamp-mike-bloomberg-endorsement

I guess the thrill of living was gone

Anyway, yes. I live in a swing state. Bernie or Mike, Liz or Pete, Joe or Amy, I don't care, I will sprain my wrist pulling the lever for them.

*ominous voiceover*
"BERNIE SANDERS"
*unflattering picture of Bernie*
"HE SAYS HE'S NOT DONALD TRUMP. BUT HAVE YOU EVER SEEN HIM IN THE SAME ROOM WITH DONALD TRUMP?"
*music mood change/picture of Michael Bloomberg golfing with Trump*
"Michael Bloomberg is the only candidate we can be sure is not Donald Trump."
*Michael Bloomberg facing the camera*
"Hi, I'm Michael Bloomberg. And I'm the best candidate to take on Donald Trump. Because I'm the only candidate who is definitely not Donald Trump."

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Mind boggling some people are willing to take % of risk towards another four years of Trump.

again this question is premature

but as a 'solution' to Trump, this is mindboggling

on immigration, criminal justice reform, and foreign policy, bloomberg might be a more competent trump as president

its a moot pt bc this shriveled piece of shit will not win the nomination

El Tomboto wd also be more competent

The single most bizarre thing Bloomberg did is get the city charter changed so that he — but only he — could run for a third term, with the previous two-term limit coming back once his twelve years were done.

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) February 16, 2020

It's crazy and worrisome to see the universal meltdown over Bloomberg. I choose to be optimistic and take it as a sign that his sudden rise is a flash in the pan and that voters are primed to vote against him. But if he can buy his way to a nomination, the Democratic party will truly be broken.

its a moot pt bc this shriveled piece of shit will not win the nomination

― majority whip, majority nae nae (m bison), Sunday, February 16, 2020 7:50 PM (six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Said this a lot in 2016

I can get over being outvoted by a real rival candidate. But out of all outcomes I can’t abide some Republican waltzing in and buying the party off.

If it makes you feel better, Republicans don't think he's a Republican and never did

If no one can beat a shitty old billionaire in the primaries maybe no one was apt to beat the even worse shitty old billionaire in the general.

Well they’ve been allowed to drive most of the political messaging in this country, might as well let them assign party membership.

republicans also think they're not racist, what republicans think doesn't matter

its a moot pt bc this shriveled piece of shit will not win the nomination

― majority whip, majority nae nae (m bison), Sunday, February 16, 2020 7:50 PM (six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Said this a lot in 2016

― ℺ ☽ ⋠ ⏎ (✖), Sunday, February 16, 2020 6:57 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

sure, the difference is that trump led in the polls non-stop within 2 months of announcing by appealing directly to the gop base and getting a boatload of "earned" media coverage. bloomberg punted on the early states and is hoping to win big on super tuesday by blitzing the airwaves where he is polling 3rd or 4th in every state, and he's facing a headwind of negative oppo research that alienates the dem base. im not saying its impossible, its just come on...

i'm less concerned about potential the effect on the 2020 election than about the longer-term effect of the example bloomberg is setting to anyone who still believes that electoral democracy is a form of government worth pursuing.

I still haven't seen anybody actually endorse Mike Bloomberg besides Mike Bloomberg, @FuckJerry/@KaleSalad/etc, and Barbra Streisand apparently

― like, I’m eating an elephant head (katherine), Saturday, February 15, 2020 8:00 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-endorsements/democratic-primary/#MichaelBloomberg

If George W Bush is the Democratic nominee, will you vote for him in November

Also Kirk Douglas on his deathbed: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/michael-douglas-claims-kirk-douglas-last-words-backed-mike-bloomberg-2020/

booming thread:

I'm about to head off to Spain, to promote "Contra los zombis," the Spanish edition of "Arguing with zombies." And I realized that this is an occasion to talk about walking dead ideas about the housing crisis, like this one 1/ https://t.co/uSKxysQYrN

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) February 16, 2020

Yes. Because the alternative is Donald Trump
And two-three conservative Justices and countless federal justices.

Yes. Because the alternative is Donald Trump
And two-three conservative Justices and countless federal justices.

what on earth are you talking about

Dubya was worse than Trump on the whole tbf

Bloomberg at best would probably appoint justices in the mold of Anthony Kennedy. You won’t get any liberals.

How do you know for certain?

bc he’s a republican

Exactly.

Dubya was worse than Trump on the whole tbf

Depends on the metric. Dubya directly responsible for more loss of human life, but Trump & Co. are wrecking the norms we live by.

Dubya is worse as of now because of what he did, Trump has created the potential for things to be persistently worse for well after he's gone.

I really want the Presidency to shrink in power

hard to imagine Bloomberg nominating a judge who had the slightest chance of voting with the conservatives on 2nd amendment cases

Or alienating the part of congress he will need the most.

If George W Bush is the Democratic nominee, will you vote for him in November

Won't happen, but honestly, yeah, I would!

Though I would much prefer Bloomberg.

I would consider voting for Donald Trump over W (assuming he came with Cheney and the same pack of advisers and policies)

T/s: norms vs lives

voting for Dubya over Trump is complete insanity

Sunday is Torture Porn Night at ILX.

T/s: norms vs lives

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive), Sunday, February 16, 2020 9:55 PM (four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

yeah I did a double take at that one

as to "it doesn't matter he won't win" - sure, probably not, but it's worth worrying about a zillionaire's ability to buy off the media, other politicians (ie mayors) and the party apparatus

If it wasn't someone as immediately repulsive as Bloomberg - say, Bill Gates - are you more worried?

so we're forgetting how many people probably died in PR due to Trump and his own FEMA's abandonment?. like, no, he hasn't remotely approximated the death toll of the post 9/11 wars, but he does have blood on his hands, his actions have lead many more people to be deported or has prevented people needing asylum from coming here, and his court also has upheld terrible state-level abortion legislation with the potential to go further once they rule on the right appeal.

this isn't just "lol he didn't respect the way we do things" or most of us would sleep better at night. plus, it seems fairly silly to keep comparing a President who completed 8 years to one who hasn't even finished his first term.

"man, Rob Deer has nowhere near the strikeouts he usually has this season, granted, he's only played half the year thus far..."

i don't know what benefit these recurring rhetorical exercises bring us, but have at it if you wanna...

They are of no benefit

voting for Dubya over Trump is complete insanity

I don't know why I'm still taking this counterfactual seriously, but I honestly think 2020-24 Donald Trump is more likely to start a big stupid war that kills hundreds of thousands of people than 2020-24 George W. Bush even though (or perhaps because) George W. Bush did start a big stupid war that killed hundreds of thousands of people and Trump so far has not.

like you can't attribute it all to Trump, but authoritarian behavior combined with actually eroding the checks and balances that do exist have the potential to lead to a lot more potential destruction that will long out-survive Trump. imagine if a future hawk President manages to ram through a bloodier war than Iraq with half the effort Dubya had to put in, simply by deciding he doesn't need Congress's permission, and his own party refuses to hold him accountable for declaring war without their authority.

xxpost Shakey otm

Also Kirk Douglas on his deathbed: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/michael-douglas-claims-kirk-douglas-last-words-backed-mike-bloomberg-2020/

― symsymsym

only man i trust is walt disney, on his deathbed he endorsed kurt russell for president

Ronald Reagan endorsed Kurtis Blow for president on his deathbed iirc

presidency canon-building is even worse than rock canon-building

i don't even care whether donald trump is "worse" than gwb, they both fucking suck, mike bloomberg sucks, people endlessly rambling on in political threads about how if they were hitler they'd annex the sudetenland suck, everything sucks except for the new tricot album which is pretty ok

https://media.tenor.com/images/d257d6eb6b4ba142f0c5122a575466f8/tenor.gif

Depends on the metric. Dubya directly responsible for more loss of human life, but Trump & Co. are wrecking the norms we live by.

Just needed to marvel at this sentence one more time

the 'gotcha'ing is also getting tired. i suspect JF wasn't merely saying "Trump sucks because I get in more fights on FB now"

if we're goin body counts, Truman wins

If George W Bush is the Democratic nominee, will you vote for him in November?

Hell, no. This ridiculous hypothetical is not just "a bridge too far", but an uncrossable abyss.

will you vote for Benito Mussolini if he agrees to punch Richard Spencer in the face

you know what this thread's problem is? insufficiently queer. here, i'll try to help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIQA74Ehnes

so we're forgetting how many people probably died in PR due to Trump and his own FEMA's abandonment?. like, no, he hasn't remotely approximated the death toll of the post 9/11 wars, but he does have blood on his hands

I don't think anyone suggested that he doesn't "have blood on his hands," but until Iraq 2: Electric Boogaloo it will be all but impossible for a President to be as evil as Dubya.

in a world where george w. bush could legally run for a third term none of this would have happened because barack obama would already be serving his third term as president

I really want the Presidency to shrink in power

Electing Warren or Sanders should work, as Republicans would suddenly discover that they now oppose the notion of an unchecked (and uncheckable) unitary executive

How does Truman win?

Hiroshima / Nagasaki presumably?

Don't we usually say Iraq killed, like, ten times that?

korea

Seriously?

"It has been sometimes referred to in the English-speaking world as "The Forgotten War" or "The Unknown War" because of the lack of public attention it received both during and after the war, relative to the global scale of World War II, which preceded it, and the subsequent angst of the Vietnam War, which succeeded it.[65][66]"

But it can't be blamed on Truman anymore than WWI can be blamed on Wilson or WWII on Roosevelt. So I still don't get it. The ones with real blood on their hands, the war- and coupmongerers, at least since WWII, would be Eisenhower, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, W Bush in my view.

Today, big mike is sad that people are mean to him online

we may never have a billionaire prez who handles criticism well

thread has gotten even stupider in last 24 hours, kudos

Like any good billionaire, I assume his attitude wrt most things on earth (including, say, the presidency) is 'that thing is basically mine because I've decided I want to have it'. Encountering any kind of resistance from within that contextual bubble would be enough to set anyone's bottom lip a-quivering. 'B-but...don't you understand? I waaaant it!'

Bloomberg 2020: DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?!

"Berniebros ratioing Bloomberg" - politics really has sunk into the gutter.

look if we've established that money is political speech then we must accept that, actually, the online poors have no right to point out that mike bloomberg is a total piece of shit

yeah i fully support bullying the rich and powerful online. it's unlikely to get you arrested and appears to actually get to (some of) them. it's not much, but until further notice, it's m/l all we got.

This anti-Berniebro ad really is ridiculous, though. Not quite Willie Horton/Daisy material.

I fully support pairing the rich with some fava beans and a nice chianti but that's slightly more likely to get you arrested.

never forget: these people are, or at least move in the same circles as the people who lament safe spaces and perceived fragility as the number one threat to our constitutional republic

there's part of me that takes a certain grim satisfaction in bloomberg's concerted attempt to torch that entire wing of the democratic party

of course that attempt will never be as fully successful as i'd like it to be

the 'gotcha'ing is also getting tired. i suspect JF wasn't merely saying "Trump sucks because I get in more fights on FB now"

― sorry for butt rockin (Neanderthal), Sunday, February 16, 2020 10:45 PM bookmarkflaglink

Thank you. Yes! I wasn't talking about small ball shit. I was talking about America creating a new international adversary every week, about bible beaters occupying the judicial branch at every level, about creating concentration camps on our own soil, about the office of the presidency acquiring unbridled power because the congress lays down. I'm talking about America becoming a failed state. I think that's a rather significant and credible worry.

What is it about "data nerd" in his Twitter bio that is making me want to die?

xp -- again, were you conscious during the W years?

Dubya's era was full of many evils even beyond the death count, yes, not least nominating John Ashcroft, or signing into law the Patriot Act, but he also did keep Karl Rove out of the NSC meetings and also didn't attack the free press daily (even after journalists were murdered), blew enough racist dogwhistles that the KKK and other white supremacist factions felt confident enough to return to the mainstream and violently intimidate minorities, as well as protesters, not to mention rolling back protections for the LGBTQ community. he has used the Judiciary branch of government to go after his enemies (like Nixon) as well as obstruct investigations into his own crimes.

like, nobody is arguing that Dubya wasn't a nightmare to live through (I more than remember the misery, it was just about my entire 20s), and I don't think anybody here is doing that stupid Twitter revisionism that Dubya "wasn't that bad". but there is a stark difference between the 'norms' that Dubya changed and Trump actively inspiring racial violence.

i don't see why it's a big deal to say "hey guys maybe we shouldn't undersell the whole fact that Trump is wildly expediting the destruction of our democracy".

but I'm done yammering about this, because like Shakey said, these rhetorical debates aren't helping anything. if anything they make us think Trump's admin isn't *that bad*

anyone whose takeaway from the "aberration vs. culmination" debate is to say that "culmination" means that trump is basically ok is hereby strongly urged to reconsider that interpretation

like maybe "our democracy" wasn't never what you thought it was.

Most definitely a data nerd. BS in EE, head of system development at Salomon in the 70s. In finance, "the bloomberg" terminal has become as much a synecdoche as Kleenex or Xerox. Even the competing Thomson Reuters terminal is sometimes called "the bloomberg".

https://shop.mikebloomberg.com/collections/apparel/products/in-god-we-trust-unisex-womens-salt-tee

gag

"The Bloomberg Terminal" -- every where I've worked, it's had its own tiny office, almost like a little shrine. "The Bloomberg Terminal" is said with a certain hint of reverence.

it's a dumb, anachronistic machine that looks like it hasn't updated its interface since War Games came out, complete with a deliberately confusing typewriter

xp: At $24,000 / yr ($20 K in multiples), it certainly earns more than the interns and probably the cleaning staff.

What is it about "data nerd" in his Twitter bio that is making me want to die?

I sort of feel that way about anyone who self-describes as a "nerd" tbh. Like, you are one of the 10 richest people in the world, not a bullied middle schooler.

If currently bullied middle schoolers want to reclaim "nerd", they have my support otoh.

I really get annoyed that nowadays when you say you're a nerd the first question is "oh cool what comix u liek?"

yesterday i gave my spouse an impromptu and unrequested hour-long lecture on uk telerecording practices of the 1960s, if you want to argue that i somehow don't qualify as whatever a "nerd" is supposed to be go for it but i'm not going to stop self-describing as one

This shit seems so overblown to me. He'd need Biden to drop out before Super Tuesday to even have a prayer.

Shitty Bloomberg fact of the day seems like a feature that's going to keep going for a while

Rush, ime, the qualifications mostly came down to being unpopular. I realize it's 100% my own issue but it was an insult I hated (maybe it's not this anymore idk) and I just feel a little cringey about the way people re-embrace that framing as a cute self-descriptor, but far more so when they are humblebragging billionaires. Obv self-describe how you want; lots of things make me cringe.

This shit seems so overblown to me

otm

but social media is one giant catastrophizing brain

Rush, ime, the qualifications mostly came down to being unpopular. I realize it's 100% my own issue but it was an insult I hated (maybe it's not this anymore idk) and I just feel a little cringey about the way people re-embrace that framing as a cute self-descriptor, but far more so when they are humblebragging billionaires. Obv self-describe how you want; lots of things make me cringe.

― With considerable charm, you still have made a choice (Sund4r)

so kind of a politics of slur-reclaiming thing? i can get that. personally i'm happy to reclaim that particular slur, but i respect that not everybody feels that way about it.

The problem with 'nerd' is the same as wrapping your entire identity up in any one thing - like building a sports bar in your basement so you can watch the game without your kids being in your presence or becoming that guy who flies to Vegas for the porn convention ever year.

lol

but social media is one giant catastrophizing brain

― american bradass (BradNelson), Monday, February 17, 2020 5:17 PM (six minutes ago)

very otm wrt political opinions

I'm not taking Bloomberg seriously (yet) just because the Beltway press needs a Biden replacement.

Seriously fuck this Bloomberg shit. I’m not giving that guy any free advertising. Not that anyone cares what I say but no.

otm

Bloomberg has the same negatives as Biden (old, conservative, bad public speaker), maybe it's wishful thinking but I feel like his numbers are at their peak right now. everyone I know who's taking him seriously knows virtually nothing about him, only that he pisses Trump off

The problem with 'nerd' is the same as wrapping your entire identity up in any one thing

― Greta Van Show Feets BB (milo z)

hi, have i mentioned i'm trans? :)

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

as ILX goes, so goes the nation

Can a million videos of a man saying awful, racist, sexist things compete with a billion dollar ad buy and donations to every mayoral slush fund?
Let's find out!

anyone whose takeaway from the "aberration vs. culmination" debate is to say that "culmination" means that trump is basically ok is hereby strongly urged to reconsider that interpretation

^votm

If it comes down to that I’m going to look forward to my next colonoscopy more than I would voting Bloomberg. At least I’m unconscious for the former.

it's only twilight anesthesia, the same I'd hope to receive during the entire Bloomberg presidency

I'd liek if I could nap 10 years and still be the same age

There a leftist theorist quote (I forget whose) about how being asked "but what is to be done?" when you offer a critique has the air of "being asked for your papers." That's exactly how I feel when someone asks me if I'll vote for Bloomberg if he's the nominee.

I never watch Trevor Noah but I thought this was quite beautifully explained

This @Trevornoah clip is very Baldwin-esque. So much truth. Here is your 4 minute weekend viewing. pic.twitter.com/FqcfPsWzB2

— Bakari Sellers (@Bakari_Sellers) February 15, 2020

Yeah, that was great.

I haven't really watched it much but the general consensus seems to be that Trevor Noah has gotten way better this last year or so

umm

https://preview.redd.it/hjkm5kyv6oh41.jpg?width=531&auto=webp&s=54396b08cc7f01b87150bb85d1e017229d7aea7b

https://www.instagram.com/p/B8rWRtPHIrJ/?igshid=17cxr5bf8dkpa (second image in this gallery, very cool)

I'd eat it tbh

uh yikes

would eat of shame

The humble swastika rarely has a place in traditional fine dining. But for many top chefs, it’s one of the food world’s greatest guilty pleasures.

this clown is 78 years old?

why don't these fucks just retire, enjoy their old age, get a hobby like woodworking. long walks in the city, occasional slurpees, do crossword puzzles, make love, take baths, maybe join ilx

because you don't get to be an billionaire authoritarianism enthusiast by having any chill whatsoever

Put on your best brown shirt and come on down to Bloomberg's for a burger!

The real scoop here is: there are more than 100 ILXors???

stet's decision to outsource polls to acronym inc. is looking even more ill-advised now

Baldwin-esque

James, not Alec btw

There's always one of these these days, isn't there?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERAahPZW4AAxPOV?format=jpg&name=small

Or two:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERAa3vpX0AAIz5Y?format=jpg&name=900x900

Possibility: Bloomberg peaks now and then starts to fall after the debate tomorrow. Sanders and Warren have participated in dozens of these debates now. To the extent that Bloomberg has support, it seems to be about the idea of him (he’s rich so he ALSO doesn’t have to worry about financing his campaign! And he’s a REAL New York rich guy, not a fake one like Trump!) rather than who he actually is

Biggest kudos I can give Bloomberg is that he has been a real leader on climate change. My hope is that the others on stage will nullify that advantage

'Mr. Bloomberg, your critics have denied your ability to do so time and time again, but I ask you here tonight: are you able to say the words 'stop and frisk'?'
'Of course, stop and friiiaahh, shaddupayouface.'

Some real chef's kiss energy here

White liberals stop doing this challenge pic.twitter.com/TPjamquLgY

— pokey pup (@Whatapityonyou) February 18, 2020

this years PUMAs are going to be wild as hell

if joe dolce is the democratic nominee, will you vote for him in november?

everyone I know who's taking him seriously knows virtually nothing about him, only that he pisses Trump off

ie all that matters

im only voting for what i know will piss off trump, which is why i'm supporting a toilet for president.

Low-flow Toilet / Unnamed Immigrant '20!

I'm on board.

Has this been posted? I'm not reading this whole thing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERA3G0WWkAEjggJ?format=jpg&name=large

itt: pictures of dinosaurs gazing haplessly at the arriving meteor

that meteor's name? senator bernard sanders

Where's Bloomberg's cane?

He's rich enough to afford the invisible one.

#MyBloombergStory @CornelWest shares his story being arrested under #RacistBloomberg pic.twitter.com/i9niKxOPUe

— Dont ask me to vote for Racists (@berniebabee) February 14, 2020

worst marry/fuck/kill ever

Kissinger is always ‘kill’

@MikeBloomberg and @Mike2020 have barbs at the ready for everyone on the debate stage on Wednesday:

For @BernieSanders: “Your approach to everything is ‘pie-in-the-sky’ - it’s as if you are seeking to become the new lead singer of #Nirvana, not President of the United States.”

— Arick Wierson (@ArickWierson) February 18, 2020

wat

fuck bernie's done

I'm trying to wrap my head around what that would even mean. The only way I can make sense of it is if he is confusing Nirvana with the John Lennon of "Imagine" or something.

Nirvana = paradise

har har

'The more voters hear about Bernie's policies, the more likely they are to declare that they 'don't want no scrubs', much like the lyrics of the a popular song by singing group the TLCs.'

before we go far down this road,

how does he know that bloomberg has prepared barbs? his twitter bio says "former media hack for mayor bloomberg". the tweet has 5 likes and 1 retweet. is he just joking?

oh wait, nevermind - it's on twitter, it's gotta be true

get dave and krist in the phone, let’s make this fuckin happen

FWIW I assumed out of the gate that the tweet was bullshit but when the walls between fiction and reality have collapsed completely literally anything is possible.

many people are saying that bloomberg has prepared barbs for everyone onstage at the debate tomorrow and has promised to say them out loud. they are all about #nirvana

oh wait whatever, nevermind

Nirvana = paradise

I tried to consider the original meaning of Nirvana too but "it's like you're promising the extinction of material attachments and escape from the cycle of rebirth" didn't really scan either. But, yeah, surely bs.

One might say his barbs are in bloom(berg)

Lol

https://www.eater.com/platform/amp/2020/2/18/21140518/mike-bloomberg-campaign-spending-free-food-voting-democrat-primary?

Hey, you rich piece of shit, if you have this much money to piss away on food-for-votes, why not hang up this futile ego stroke you're currently engaged in and, oh I don't know, feed a whole lotta fuckin' people who actually need yr food. Or maybe just go die.

If he died today, his will would just be structured to protect his estate from estate taxes, so there'd be some bullshit new 'charitable' foundation handing out grants to organizations that Mike Bloomberg would heartily approve of, which also begged for money with the appropriate deference to his wishes. The board of the foundation would be crammed with billionaires and ex-presidents and the CEO would be paid $15 million/year.

I'd eat the food and drink the wine tbh

They'll be here with flamethrowerssss

bread and caucuses

this feels like the most blackpilled shit ever

I voted yes in this but, as time goes on, I don't think I can justify that vote.

It really feels like an experiment, like how low can we go and still not be as bad as Trump. I'm struggling with it.

tulsi gabbard vs mike bloomberg

love to go to the polls to choose between a racist billionaire rapist democrat who used be a republican and a racist billionaire rapist republican who used to be a democrat

Wait, I had not heard rape allegations against Bloomberg

Sexism and discrimination allegations, yes

AFAIK that's inferred from his presence in the Epstein flight logs.

tulsi gabbard vs mike bloomberg

― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Tuesday, February 18, 2020 9:28 PM (twenty-three minutes ago)

i'm actually not sure who i'd pick in that poll -- they're both horrible for completely different reasons

true but it's Gabbard without a second thought

I might take Jeb Bush over Bloomberg

Good Eric Levitz piece:

Maybe Bloomberg’s money can bend our political system to his will; or maybe no amount of advertisements can convince Rust Belt swing voters to support a historically uncharismatic candidate who disdains their “gray matter.” Maybe president Bloomberg would use his awesome, unaccountable financial power to get sweeping climate legislation through the Senate; or maybe he’ll use it to gut the social safety net. Maybe casting our lot with our team’s racist, misogynist, instinctually authoritarian billionaire will save our democracy by keeping the ethnonationalist right out of power just long enough for its voting base to die off; or maybe doing so will extinguish the possibility of achieving genuine popular self-rule in the United States, as Bloomberg’s success inspires a series of super-rich imitators until we all become the subjects of Supreme Leader Bezos.

All we know is that we do not know. And if rallying behind the better of two plutocrats isn’t even guaranteed to “work,” on its own terms — if, to the contrary, there are many reasons to believe it would fail — why on Earth would we make that bet? Why roll the dice on beneficent oligarchy when social democracy looks like (at least) as safe a gamble?

If Jeb! is the Democratic nominee, will you vote for him in November?

would clap

This is bad. Why couldn’t the center rally around kamala or someone?

They should resurrect one of those zombie candidates if they need to oppose bernie so bad.

If he died today

Keep going, I need happy thoughts today.

I think they’ll end up rallying around Pete, once people have an opportunity to see and hear Bloomberg, rather than just the commercial versions of him that he’s been able to push up until now

Beto probably doesn't have anything going on, I bet they could pull him out of his jam room.

But then again, man people make really bad decisions, so who tf knows

i see we're at the hurry up and panic about something that hasn't happened yet stage of the primary... again

y'all are gonna have such whiplash by november

You fucking people watch Chris Matthews or some shit

...nuh uh

i don't have the strength

https://i.ibb.co/zQpLhFC/bloom.png

the creepy thing is how uniform the reasoning is with every bloomberg person i've encountered in the wild - 100% of the time it's "I'm not crazy about the guy but the fact is Bloomberg is the ONLY person who can beat Trump," and then maybe a "the dems need to unite to get the Cheeto out of the White House" and maybe a "Bloomberg has so much money he's going to carpetbomb America with ads" and almost always a "he's richer than Trump and knows how to get under his skin"

afaict it's not bots. i don't live in a super tuesday state so i haven't seen a single ad for him. i'm convinced there's some josie and the pussycats (2001) style subliminal messaging ensuring that every resistance dem on twitter repeats these statements ad nauseam

"know how to get under Trump's skin"

indeed, a secret known only to rare few

if only someone could figure out how to make Donald Trump mad

You fucking people watch Chris Matthews or some shit

― TikTok to the (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, February 18, 2020 5:54 PM (forty minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I think you're the only person on this thread who repeatedly references watching MSNBC?

(I just read Twitter too much.)

afaict it's not bots.

― ℺ ☽ ⋠ ⏎ (✖)

afaict most human beings these days would probably fail a turing test.

The very notion of 'a Bloomberg person' existing makes my brain hemorrhage and then I die. I just flat-out die. And so now I'm dead. Hope you're happy.

I think you're the only person on this thread who repeatedly references watching MSNBC?

(I just read Twitter too much.)

― jaymc, Tuesday, February 18, 2020 7:40 PM (twenty-eight minutes ago)

It's shorthand. MSNBC and certain parts of the Twitter hinterland are synonymous. I don't get freaking out about Bloomberg -- yet.

bloomberg is obv a horrific person but I’m not terribly concerned with him winning the nomination. He just doesn’t have a constituency. I think whatever polling numbers he’s pulling down right now which places him at best a distant second is probably his ceiling.

this weekend Nevada votes and he’s not even competing there. Then South Carolina. Then super Tuesday. What is his best case scenario after that? Hope that all the moderates drop out and he becomes the only choice for the anti-Bernie wing?

If he can run a close second and Bernie fails to win an outright majority, he might end up the consensus choice in a brokered convention. That seems more likely if Biden continues to underperform.

viral clip today shows Blooms calling an abstract trans person "it"

at one point he also says "progressive, whatever that is"

his best case is hoping the DNC gives him good boy points in a brokered convention (good boy points can be purchased at the main menu if you don't feel like doing the daily quests)

xps

if brokered-convention scenario unfolds look at the bright side: Democratic Party, done

Brokered convention that chooses a squishy moderate instead of Bernie or Warren would justify however many billions he spends in two years without a wealth tax.

yeah it'll be great. we'll all get super unified and build a new party from the ashes of the old dysfunctional one, and we'll agree with one another on all the essentials and become an efficiently functioning progressive party. should be super smooth

xp

couldn't be worse and i'm not even kidding a lil bit

It would be the first brokered Dem convention since we switched to the primary system, but sure, maybe fox news is right

I don't think it'll happen unless they need one to fuck Bernie over

That seems to be Trump's view.

538 still has it at 40% chance

Silver needs clicks.

Should I find myself depressed/worried about how lockstep I am with Morbs right now Y/N?

a little

An issue with Bloomberg is he has resources to outlast the other candidates in the moderate lane (Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar). Between Sanders and Warren, there aren't enough voters in the progressive lane for a party majority, unless some of the moderates endorse them over Bloomberg.

yeah it'll be great. we'll all get super unified and build a new party from the ashes of the old dysfunctional one, and we'll agree with one another on all the essentials and become an efficiently functioning progressive party. should be super smooth

xp

anyone who thinks our issues here can ultimately be reduced to ‘the Democratic Party’ is secretly a huge optimist

Also let’s ensure that none of people who voted in the primaries back when we had an old party get to vote in the primaries for the new party, because they did the wrong thing when it was the old party

― iatee, Tuesday, February 18, 2020 9:53 PM (three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

is this referring to something that happened somewhere or are you just making up scenarios to get angry about

isn't making up scenarios to get angry about the point of this thread

otm

or to imagine scenarios requiring Richard Nixon's mordant commentary.

idk 3/5 national polls released today have him #2, he's the only centrist with momentum right now, leading in several ST states, has infinite money

i don't think he'll end up with the nom but eyes shouldn't be rolled at the prospect like they have been itt

sorry for rolling my eyes at the long-weekend-long catastrophizing of this thread and every other politics thread on this board and the wider internet

Butts

he might end up the consensus choice in a brokered convention.

imo, this is probably his best chance, unless lightning strikes several of the remaining candidates. He's pretty clearly hoping to be the leading 'moderate' when the convention rolls around, and Bernie has a low enough delegate count he can leverage Bernie's weakness into his own nomination in a brokered convention.

iow, he's an elderly multi-billionaire playing a long shot, but he can't think of anything else his money could buy him that he'd like better than being president, so he's pushing a mass of chips on the table and letting the wheel spin. after all, what could he lose, besides money he doesn't need for anything that's more important to him?

You don’t have to be concerned about one specific bad scenario, there are actually lots of them. I think the increasing chances of this going to convention are good reason to be pretty pessimistic of our shot in November regardless. I don’t think it matters who actually gets the nomination after a convention, there’s not gonna be party unity behind the winner.

oh for god's sake, "brokered conventions", this isn't even political discussion anymore you fuckers are writing fanfic. if you're going to insist on this sort of crap then i'm going to start posting my bloomberg/biden ship fic in this thread

that would be an improvement

Then Joe, innocently running his sinewy cords of love gently up the side of Mike's calloused neck, coyly asked for $5

I don’t think it matters who actually gets the nomination after a convention, there’s not gonna be party unity behind the winner.

― iatee, Tuesday, February 18, 2020 10:00 PM (fifteen minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

this feels unnecessarily pessimistic to me. i think most dems will be happy to have a candidate to beat trump with.

also if bernie's the nominee, the bros will be in the tent pissing out for a change

oh for god's sake, "brokered conventions", this isn't even political discussion anymore you fuckers are writing fanfic.

Bloomberg's strategy obviously has very little to do with practical presidential politics, as defined by any kind of politics that has succeeded in the past century, yet he is spending hundreds of millions of dollars out of his own pocket pursuing that strategy.

Personally, I have no belief his current strategy will succeed in securing the nomination for himself, but there doesn't seem to me to be any viable path he could pursue to arrive at the convention with the nomination sewn up (other than those lightning strikes I mentioned), so what do you think he's up to, if not playing a long shot for a brokered convention? Or does he have no strategy at all besides spending carloads of money and crossing his fingers for luck?

I don’t think it matters who actually gets the nomination after a convention, there’s not gonna be party unity behind the winner.

― iatee, Tuesday, February 18, 2020 10:00 PM (fifteen minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

this feels unnecessarily pessimistic to me. i think most dems will be happy to have a candidate to beat trump with.

THE BROS!

LOOK OUT OH NOES ITS THE BROS!

i still feel like bloomberg's relative surge in the polls is reflective of the massive ad blitz sans any scrutiny of him or his record. it's probably not sustainable now that there's a target on him. harris (max 15%), buttigieg (max 12%), and to a greater degree warren (max 28%) have all had brief surges in the national polls only to regress back to some mean.

this reminds me some of 2012 as various challengers to romney enjoyed some time as more conservative alternative to willard. romney's support was pretty steady through 2011, but rick perry had some time then he couldnt remember stuff at that debate, then hermain cain had his 9-9-9 thing, then gingrich played some 90s greatest hits, then santorum actually won iowa, and then romney ran with it from march onward (ron paul on bckd vox). it was like the gop kept asking themselves, is this really our best option? and so they tried different outfits on and just said fuck it, navy suit red tie again.

this is kinda what's happening for moderate dems who are trying out these fatally flawed candidates and trying to talk themselves into them. biden was the lorem ipsum placeholder text until people actually voted and now moderate voters are left grasping for someone they think will beat trump/restore america to its pre-2016 operating system.

otm

the bros are not that big a bloc

if sanders doesn’t have majority support by then it means there was a meaningful ceiling to his support, and if anyone else gets it the bros are gonna def be pissing into the tent for the rest of the year
― iatee, Tuesday, February 18, 2020 10:34 PM (twenty-four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

a ceiling of support that maxes out at plurality doesnt mean that the people voting the 150 other candidates wouldnt vote for bernard over trump. it def looks like 60% of dems wants some brand of moderate! but they cant collectively decide which one and the candidates are not going to voluntarily give up their shot at the presidency in the name of centrist solidarity.

in 2016, rubio+kasich+cruz's combined natl polling numbers continued to outpace trump until May 2016, even when rubio dropped. up to that point, HRC had a double-digit lead on trump in h2h polls. by the end of may when he pulled away with the nomination (with less than majority gop voter support), he had closed that natl polling gap with hrc entirely. i think dems will coalesce the winner of the nomination bc they fear trump's reelection.

anyway how the fuck is bloomberg gonna win as he pisses off every constituent group in the democratic party?

I think tomorrow will be pretty revealing. Sanders and Warren have no reason to hold back and if Bloomie’s first moment on the national stage is a disaster, I think the ‘this dude has no charisma’ narrative is gonna be hard for him to ever break. But if he does well-to-okay, the media is also going to amplify that story.

yeah im actually kinda eager to watch this debate, and i have skipped most of the televised events so far this election

in 2016, rubio+kasich+cruz's combined natl polling numbers continued to outpace trump until May 2016, even when rubio dropped. up to that point, HRC had a double-digit lead on trump in h2h polls. by the end of may when he pulled away with the nomination (with less than majority gop voter support), he had closed that natl polling gap with hrc entirely. i think dems will coalesce the winner of the nomination bc they fear trump's reelection.

anyway how the fuck is bloomberg gonna win as he pisses off every constituent group in the democratic party?

His entire campaign is "have you seen the other guy?!"

i'll concede that, but i dont think we're dealing with PUMAs this time. 08HRC dead-enders were more ideologically comfortable with mccain in a way that moderate dems in 2020 will not be with trump.

i mean throw this analysis out the window if bloomberg runs third party i guess.

xp to iatee

yeah but those nominees still won cleanly. I think there’s no way a brokered convention isn’t a shitshow w/ much deeper grudges and conspiracy theories that don’t go away.

brokered convention wd def be Bad Optics and shd be avoided by supporting bernie imo.

the cleanliness of the win for trump in 2016 was not a function of popular will so much as it was the winner-take-all delegation award system. and 2008 was not clean either! hrc might've had more popular votes than obama (depending on what you include in the totals) and they fought all the way until fuckin june!

sry for cussin but im v passionate abt being correct all the time

Bloomberg's strategy obviously has very little to do with practical presidential politics, as defined by any kind of politics that has succeeded in the past century, yet he is spending hundreds of millions of dollars out of his own pocket pursuing that strategy.

Personally, I have no belief his current strategy will succeed in securing the nomination for himself, but there doesn't seem to me to be any viable path he could pursue to arrive at the convention with the nomination sewn up (other than those lightning strikes I mentioned), so what do you think he's up to, if not playing a long shot for a brokered convention? Or does he have no strategy at all besides spending carloads of money and crossing his fingers for luck?

― A is for (Aimless)

i am not sure why i would or should care about the answers to the questions you've asked? so much political discussion seems to boil down to this, "yeah but what are they THINKING", people apparently still do this with trump for some reason and now we're doing it with bloomberg too? i don't give a shit, he's another goddamn amoral rich asshole, what or how or where he thinks is of no interest to me whatsoever, if i'm especially dumb it's because it takes me a week on average to bail out of these goddamn political threads.

the bros are not that big a bloc

Perhaps not yet, but they may obtain some...

Wait for it...

bromentum

brokered convention wd def be Bad Optics and shd be avoided by supporting bernie imo.

^^^

Yeah, if Bernie has the most delegates entering the convention, regardless of whether he has enough to "win" and he is not the nominee, it will be the moderate wing of the party that is responsible for what happens, not some fictional bullshit bernie bros narrative.

comma comma

this thread IS worse than the campaign, w/ iatee as Tulsi Gabbard

If Bernie has 30% of delegates and 65% of delegates want another nominee, it's how democracy is supposed to work.

But Bernie will have a majority, or very very close to it, so moderates can't do it.

you dirty motherfuckers, i woke up at 3 am (not this thread's fault, i'm not sleeping for shit last couple weeks because of personal crap) and wrote a bloomberg/biden brokered convention slashfic. that's not the problem. the problem is that 1) it's actually pretty good/hot and 2) it's more insightful than any of the other bullshit y'all assholes have been talking about w/r/t a "brokered convention"

i'm not posting it here because you assholes don't deserve it

:(

#ReleasetheBidenbergSlash

Mods, please fucking close this thread.

aww, just as it was getting good

Every June during Pride, Bloomberg’s NYPD picked a gay bar to flood with cops and shut down. Sure, they’d give them a few fines, but the main thing was chasing business out and showing the fags who was boss. When gay marriage passed in NY they shut the Eagle down within the hour. https://t.co/KbPIMv9Lel

— badcrumble (@gomjabroni) February 19, 2020

bro-brokered

MMM THAT'S SOME GOOD DISCOURSE

Impeached president says what? https://t.co/Sf2gXXppZO

— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) February 19, 2020

Okay so yesterday's tweet about Bloomberg's deeply lame talking points was, if anything, wildly overstating his game.

Michael Bloomberg thinks you should vote for Donald Trump...NOT!

bloomberg tells trump 'you fight like a cow!' in SCORCHING new campaign ad

we truly have the discourse digital utopians always promised us

the sheer fucking gall of this asshole:

https://www.axios.com/bernie-sanders-mike-bloomberg-delegate-race-bee5b692-a0ca-449a-a714-4c212ad15010.html

the sheer fucking gall of this asshole, beseeching other candidates to drop out of a race in which he hasn't even appeared on a ballot yet. i'm no Mayor Pete fan and obviously he's got a tough road to hoe but he's got the most fucking delegates right now!

Forget siphoning votes from Bloomberg, what about the votes that Sanders is siphoning away from ME (forgot to mention, just inherited $8 billion, declaring my candidacy next week, everybody gets a sandwich with as many toppings as you like with a max of three toppings).

Offer a pickle on the side and you've got my vote

fwiw Bloomps entering the race is kinda good for Bernie

Obviously Bloomberg could see his #'s keep growing, or they could shrink, but the scenario where he stalls out at ~16%, enough to make Biden's fall much worse and to blunt momentum for Buttigieg, but without coming particularly close to Sanders, is a really good one for Bernie.

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) February 19, 2020

^i wouldn't go so far to say that it's "good" yet - there are a lot of different ways this could go - but the scenario silver describes seems like the most likely one to me. hopefully he'll fall on his face (or get pushed) in the debate tonight

it seems pretty apparent to me that Bernie's path to the nom is similar to Trump's in 2016 and another bad centrist jumping in the race is more likely to help him

obviously I've been eating crow on political matters a lot lately but I still don't see how Bloomberg develops any sort of constituency. he's gonna suck in this debate

I hope Bloomberg's rise is based on the media/electorate being bored with the field like the clown cars of past GOP primaries. Assume Steyer has his turn coming up soon.

re frogbs' last point

I wrote this in November 2018. pic.twitter.com/KqT9rWLdmK

— corey robin (@CoreyRobin) February 18, 2020

I expect the moderators will be very friendly to Bloomberg and very harsh to Bernie tonight. That's his best hope, because otherwise he's walking into a buzzsaw.

A lot going on here. https://t.co/MaCSxi0wLi pic.twitter.com/StfoPNEqqE

— Matt Pearce 🦅 (@mattdpearce) February 19, 2020

Statler & Waldorf are my 2nd and 3rd choices btw

I'm expecting lots of 'I'd like to answer your question...with a personal check' responses.

I know no one agrees with me but Warren is temperamentally a moderate and ideologically a progressive and SHE is who all the people dissatisfied with the choice of Biden, Buttigieg, Bloomberg should coalesce around, because for most Dem voters ideology doesn't mean much and they are trying to choose the KIND of person who they want to be President. I'm not saying it's likely to happen but all I'm saying is it's immensely frustrating to see the entire political class wringing itself dripping over "WHY isn't there a candidate who's NOT BERNIE and DOESN'T HAVE ALL THESE NEGATIVES" -- she's *right there*!

otm

right, she has different negatives

boobs iirc

i've said it before but i think people have just absolutely pundit-brained themselves into being convinced she can't beat Trump.

If Elizabeth Warren is so great, why hasn't she plied me with craft beer and a panini?

but she will take a selfieeeeeeeee

anecdotal evidence - recently learned one of my cousins is a Pete supporter. His concerns about Warren were based on her not being capable to run a campaign effectively against Trump (exhibits a and b: taking the bait on the Pocahantas thing, and the clumsy "leak" about Bernie saying a woman couldn't be President).

I agree on the latter point, although am baffled at how he thinks Pete would run a better campaign against Trump or be a better President.

xps

Anybody that's not a campaign manager or a DNC officer should quit worrying about "electability". Esp given how bad we all are at gauging it. The last polyp-pants that both parties thought was unelectable is smearing BK Chicken Fry grease on White House paintings.

Just vote who you want rn.

I mean at this point i feel like the electability rubric being used is "lol yr zing game needs work"

I'm waiting to decide between Bernie and Warren based on what happens in NV and SC

Warren's campaign tanking is her and her team's fault, the same way Bernie not winning last time was his and his team's fault. You can whinge all you like but her numbers were in decline long before any "erasure" set in, and it's not like the Bernie campaign suffered from the lack of coverage/hilariously skewed headlines. and I mostly like Warren.

So what you're saying is it's a DNC conspiracy?

Booker and I even daresay Beto were somewhat more palatable than some of the losers we're still stuck with, but that's how it goes on this bitch of an earth.

inclined to agree w Simon tbh, I just don't think she's run a good campaign (Harris' was even worse - peaked early/confused plays for both the middle and the left etc.)

After being gaslit about the lack of coverage of Bernie for roughly 1.5 election cycles, I have less than zero sympathy for people claiming "erasure" of Warren. She consistently got OVERPLAYED compared to Bernie until his lead on her and consistent lead in overall national polls became so clear that they couldn't ignore it anymore. She's losing, tough shit.

And I, too, like Warren herself. She's my second choice and far above any other.

xpost I would say pretty much all of the candidates were preferable to Bloomberg

yup

even Williamson?

or Gabbard?

williamson, maybe. gabbard, probably not.

williamson just for ~vibes~

forgot about gabbard, don't know how much worse she could be that bloomie? though ppl on Twitter say she's a Russian bot

someone tell me bernie is definitely not picking gabbard for vp, please

bernie is definitely not picking gabbard for vp

thank u

longtime caller, first time listener (man alive)
Posted: February 19, 2020 at 1:11:36 PM
After being gaslit about the lack of coverage of Bernie for roughly 1.5 election cycles, I have less than zero sympathy for people claiming "erasure" of Warren. She consistently got OVERPLAYED compared to Bernie until his lead on her and consistent lead in overall national polls became so clear that they couldn't ignore it anymore. She's losing, tough shit.

I think is pretty demonstrably untrue! A quick glance at the big papers shows Bloomberg, Buttigieg, and Bernie hogging the headlines daily since December. Even Klobuchar’s ‘momentum’ is a bigger story.

Bernie hogging the headlines daily since December

citation needed

I know no one agrees with me but Warren is temperamentally a moderate and ideologically a progressive and SHE is who all the people dissatisfied with the choice of Biden, Buttigieg, Bloomberg should coalesce around, because for most Dem voters ideology doesn't mean much and they are trying to choose the KIND of person who they want to be President. I'm not saying it's likely to happen but all I'm saying is it's immensely frustrating to see the entire political class wringing itself dripping over "WHY isn't there a candidate who's NOT BERNIE and DOESN'T HAVE ALL THESE NEGATIVES" -- she's *right there*!

yeah, but she would try to implement a big tax on people with more than $50 million! she can't do that! because that would...i mean she just can't do that, it's too extreme!

The thing is that the media funnily enough wants to write stories about exciting things. Bernie being mostly steady was never a good story, Warren falling, but not crashing like Biden, isn't really a good story either.

Fun fact: It took until four days ago for Bernie to beat Warrens peak back in mid-October in the 538 polling average. She ran a good campaign, imo, it just didn't work. I read a review of Pikettys new book that he dubs 'Brahmins' those liberals who are okay with most leftist policy, just not higher taxes. I think what happened with Warren kinda proves him right on that.

I think is pretty demonstrably untrue! A quick glance at the big papers shows Bloomberg, Buttigieg, and Bernie hogging the headlines daily since December. Even Klobuchar’s ‘momentum’ is a bigger story.

think he might have meant 'warren was all over the news that I consume'

I really, really don't think Warren's campaign failing was down to policy.

Me neither

(sorry if using the past tense there upsets anyone but I really don't see a comeback in her future)

if it was about policy it was about having to defend sanders’ policy positions on stage, again and again

Her wealth tax meant she was never acceptable as a compromise candidate. But that's as much a failure of strategy as it's policy, I guess.

imo her failure is down to a) being an older woman, b) some foolish campaign gambles (noted above), c) lingering bad blood in DNC/Obama circles, and d) having a more entertainingly uncompromising champion of many of her policies already running to her left

i think we should see how she does the next few weeks (through super tuesday) before pronouncing her campaign dead

warren's campaign was not very savvy and she was starting from a disadvantage as a good chunk of the progressive base was already attached to bernie from 2016

taxing rich people is popular, easy to explain and defend. implementation strategies for universal health care are not easy to explain or defend, which is why sanders (smartly) just does the magic hand wave. warren got mired in the details when the details never actually mattered.

i think her lack of success largely comes from the fact that she's the only candidate that's a serious alternative to sanders for those on the left. and when it comes down to just sanders and warren, there's a lot of people who would vote for either of them, but would lean toward sanders if they had to choose between them. a lot of his supporters are the same people who were on the bernie train back in 2016, which makes sense. given a choice between sanders/warren, they'll go with sanders. (no judgment - that pretty much describes me)

in other words, in an alternative universe with no sanders, i think most of his supporters would be with warren, and she'd be the one with 30%+ support right now as the favored option over all these moderate dipshits.

The implementation strategies discussed for Obamacare in his campaign bore little resemblance to what came out of the sausage factory.

lol @ the transparent presumption and bitchiness here:

Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg's campaign warned in a memo released on Wednesday that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will be "all but impossible to defeat" after Super Tuesday if he wins with their projected delegate lead.

The campaign's state of the race memo said that if the race's moderate candidates remain in the race despite not having a path to victory, they will end up taking votes away from the former New York City mayor.

"If Biden, Buttigieg, and Klobuchar remain in the race despite having no path to appreciably collecting delegates on Super Tuesday (and beyond), they will propel Sanders to a seemingly insurmountable delegate lead by siphoning votes away from [Bloomberg]," the memo read.

The campaign's current Super Tuesday projection shows Sanders moving past Super Tuesday with a 404 delegate lead, which they said would make it "all but impossible" to stop the progressive senator from garnering a plurality of the pledged delegates.

It's amazing how that's actually a very good argument for Bloomberg to have never entered the race at all

yeah morbs I look forward to your newfound dedication to the future compromises president sanders will make w/ moderate dems

you moderates, lay the rose petals on Bloombito's path to victory

in an alternative universe with no sanders

Um I hesitate to say this but he's a 78-year-old man with heart trouble; it doesn't really require alternate-universe theory for him not to exist (I hasten to note that no person of good will wants this)

fwiw every even vaguely committed american leftist I know is committed to 1. getting bernie in and then 2. relentlessly attacking him from the left should he fall short / when he falls short

you're lucky actually, the fact that we won't win the senate means you won't even have to suffer watching any major bill get passed

"moderate" "electability"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYP1OBZfFK0

Bloomberg memo writer knows what's up.

it's funny how much it gives the game away

also file "we" "our" = Democrats under Slowly I Turn

I think Sean McElwee is depressingly OTM re Warren:

"The problem that Warren has is all of the Bernie people think she's a neoliberal shill and all of the centrists think she's a raging Maoist," said Sean McElwee, a left-wing organizer and analyst at Data For Progress whose work has been cited by the Warren campaign. "The people who want 'Medicare for All' don't believe she wants it, and the people who don’t want Medicare for All do believe she wants it."

Yeah, I mean I think that's hyperbole but somewhat right. For Bernie people, she's, at best, watered-down Bernie. But for people who truly fear "the left" she's nearly as scary as Bernie.

Harris was in a similar bind - leftists didn't believe she was a leftist, centrists were pissed at her for making overtures to leftists

well, Harris wasn't a leftist at all

I mean, even Bloomberg's current platform/website make some concessions toward the left compared to where he used to stand. It's just the way the wind is blowing.

he's letting us keep our memes, i think that's all though.

The moral of the story is that running in a crowded field of candidates is very difficult and it helps immensely if you ran a fairly successful one-on-one campaign in the previous election cycle, so that you enter the race with a large ready-made base of loyal voters, plus better name recognition than all but one other candidate (who, lucky for you, happens to be a lousy campaigner).

^^^

Yeah, in all honesty, even saying her campaign is a failure is quite weird. Most people running for president fail, she has had one of the 2-3 best campaigns this cycle. She is well situated to run again in four years.

for a bad campaigner she sure does bring a lot of people out to her rallies

but still, again, compared to bernie, not as much.

i'm not sure if there are stats on average crowd sizes at primary events, but my wild ass guess is that it would be something like

bernie
warren
pete?
biden
klobuchar
...
bloomberg (does he even hold events?)

bloomberg does hold events yes

cannot attest whether or not all attendees were bribed formally or informally

to be clear in case anyone misunderstood me, biden was the highest name recognition candidate in this field.

plus there's the vibe of each candidate's base:

bernie(youth, earnest, left)
warren (family game night, earnest, cautiously optimistic)
pete? (people who look forward to going to work)
biden (old, don't follow politics)
klobuchar (say "dooncha" on a daily basis)
...
bloomberg (people who are actively swayed by advertisements)

biden (old, don't follow politics)

let me revise this to old, and follow politics but haven't updated views in 10-20 years

(people who are actively swayed by advertisementsfree food)

I don't think Bloomberg has yet fed ~17% of the US voting population. Maybe the unfed ones are just anticipating the nice, big catered buffet to come.

What it comes down to for me is reluctance to vote for a 78-yr-old white man with a heart condition, no matter whom he picks for veep. And I tend to think his WH staff would suck.

if jesus could feed 5000 with a couple fish and some bread, than bloomberg can easily feed 17% of america by peeling off $600M of his fortune to give them a $10 coupon to taco bell

His WH staff would definitely suck. If he gets the nom I hope (I expect) that Bernie demolishes Trump, but I also expect a disappointingly similar disregard for career officials from a Sanders OMB/NSC/Cabinet

I know no one agrees with me but Warren is temperamentally a moderate and ideologically a progressive and SHE is who all the people dissatisfied with the choice of Biden, Buttigieg, Bloomberg should coalesce around, because for most Dem voters ideology doesn't mean much and they are trying to choose the KIND of person who they want to be President. I'm not saying it's likely to happen but all I'm saying is it's immensely frustrating to see the entire political class wringing itself dripping over "WHY isn't there a candidate who's NOT BERNIE and DOESN'T HAVE ALL THESE NEGATIVES" -- she's *right there*!

― Guayaquil (eephus!), Wednesday, February 19, 2020 12:49 PM (two hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

yeah I don’t vote based on who I’d most want to have a beer with

reluctance to vote for a 78-yr-old white man with a heart condition, no matter whom he picks for veep

I suspect that if he had arrived at the point where he'd announced his pick for veep, your reluctance to vote for him would be overborne by circumstance.

need another poll for which candidate you'd most want to have a beer with

what if we don't like beer?

then you have to vote for mitt romney or donald trump

you're not required to drink the beer

more to the point, what if one doesn't like forced intimacy with strangers?

I would have a beer with 1980s bernie, nowadays it's likely against doctor's orders

The first anti-Bloomberg TV ad I can recall is coming from ... Tom Steyer. Steyer's campaign said it is spending "seven figures" in Super Tuesday states, and that this ad hitting Bloomberg over stop and frisk and more will start airing Monday https://t.co/fT48xICgHx

— Zach Montellaro (@ZachMontellaro) February 19, 2020

I am ordering you to have a nice vermont beer with bernie

these questions aren't supposed to have pleasant answers, this is the Bloomberg thread