... It's not fair, but in defense of the DNC, how can you have a Democrat candidate who is polling as high as Bloomberg and exclude him from the conversation?

Maybe if he participated in a DEBATE or something? I know I whine a lot, but this guy is using his money to create an uber-positive self-image while stepping to the front of the line ahead of some candidates who have actually participated in the process.

You are correct, but one answer would be that they are the results of theories advanced by Herbert Spencer & Charles Darwin.

The voters have the independence to vote for who they choose. They can choose to be influenced by ads on media or go a bit deeper and do research. Candidates prefer the former. The question is how informed is the electorate of issues other than what is being told in 30 seconds sound bites?

Tom Steyer spent $19.2 million in New Hampshire...more than every other candidate combined according to Business Insider (Bernie spent $5.3m) and Steyer got zero delegates and under 4% of the vote. Steyer spent $14.4 million in Iowa and won .3% of "delegate equivalents". It takes more than just money.

Tom Steyer spent $19.2 million in New Hampshire...more than every other candidate combined according to Business Insider (Bernie spent $5.3m) and Steyer got zero delegates and under 4% of the vote. Steyer spent $14.4 million in Iowa and won .3% of "delegate equivalents". It takes more than just money.

Maybe because Steyer has the personality of a small soap dish. You know what gets Votes?...Charisma.

The question is how informed is the electorate of issues other than what is being told in 30 seconds sound bites?

And the answer is: "Not very" Bloomberg is running ads stating no more than what he is going to do with absolutely no inference as to the why, what or how. He is also on this $15 an hour minimum wage train. When do we get to see this "Front runner" on the debate stage?

Holy Moly

The question is how informed is the electorate of issues other than what is being told in 30 seconds sound bites?

And the answer is: "Not very" Bloomberg is running ads stating no more than what he is going to do with absolutely no inference as to the why, what or how.

It worked well for Trump. Unless you are implying that Democrats require more specifics to be elected than Republicans (which is probably true), then it shouldn't matter.

Trump made all kind of promises without details of how he was going to do it (none of which panned out). Some of the most laughable included:

- Mexico paying for the wall
- Eliminating the deficit in 8 years
- Defeating ISIS in 30 days
- Nobody will lose health insurance. It will be less expensive and everybody will be covered.

In truth it’s hardly anything new - an overabundance of promises are made by candidates in most all presidential campaigns - it’s how they are delivered, how realistic they are, & most importantly, how they are presented/portrayed in the media -
that I think is where the “charisma” of a candidate that was mentioned, means votes - moxie, pizzazz, panache, affability, those things

In truth it’s hardly anything new - an overabundance of promises are made by candidates in most all presidential campaigns

agreed. makes me wonder about the sudden nervousness about him. he'll be facing all the tough questions very shortly, so I'll be waiting to form judgments until i hear how he answers under pressure. [Edited on 2/17/2020 by Skydog32103]

I may be way off base, but I don't think his position on issues matters. In 2020, the election is going to be Trump v. Anyone-But-Trump. This is a single issue election - is there anyone who can beat Trump. It's not healthcare, the environment, or tax plans. It's let's stop the autocrat from marginalizing our intelligence/military/justice agencies & attempt to rebuild some credibility w/allies.

Bloomberg has FU money. Everyone needs to get that in their head.

It’s funny to see all the conservative smart-a$$es around here making fun of Democrats for not beating Trump to begin with for the last three years. It’s a clever way to deflect owning the guy, but a cute attempt nonetheless. There’s now a dude with way more money than Trump will ever have who has made it clear that he’s all about beating Trump, that’s all. Now the smart-a$$es want to talk issues? L to the OL.

The post-WWII political world, the arena, the norms we all grew up with, that’s all over. Gone. Poof. Finito. Done.

It absolutely does not matter what political party that Bloomberg belongs to. He’s going for the giant middle, in particular conservatives that don’t like Trump but won’t ever say so out loud. He’s going for moderate liberals that don’t like Bernie but won’t say so out loud. He’s got the money to do it however he wants.

I’m not saying this from a lens of being a Bloomberg supporter. I’m doing it through a lens of the fact that this dude is worth $58 billion effing dollars and people are not at all trying to grasp just how much money that is!

The concept of oligarchy transcends the idea of political party. People have been buying their way into politics and DC for decades. This is the natural progression.

I can hear you right now...”But Bhawk, issues DO matter!”

There was once a time I would have agreed. However, looking around, how many issues over the last 40-50 years have actually been solved? So very few.

if people are truly tired of Trump's destructive ways, then cool and common sense policies will easiliy defeat him.

Common sense according to who? Millions of people sincerely fear ANY solution or position presented by ANY Democrat.

Just over three years in and there’s millions of people who don’t like Trump at all but are rationalizing it one of two ways...

- Hey, at least he’s not a liberal
- He’s a horrible person, but I like his policies and I’m doing fine, so, I’m all good

Don’t ever think that everyone else doesn’t like him as much as you do. That’s one of the most common mistakes people make when it comes to election expectations.

if people are truly tired of Trump's destructive ways, then cool and common sense policies will easiliy defeat him.

Common sense according to who? Millions of people sincerely fear ANY solution or position presented by ANY Democrat.

Just over three years in and there’s millions of people who don’t like Trump at all but are rationalizing it one of two ways...

- Hey, at least he’s not a liberal
- He’s a horrible person, but I like his policies and I’m doing fine, so, I’m all good

Don’t ever think that everyone else doesn’t like him as much as you do. That’s one of the most common mistakes people make when it comes to election expectations.

BOOM!

Common sense according to who? Millions of people sincerely fear ANY solution or position presented by ANY Democrat.

Just over three years in and there’s millions of people who don’t like Trump at all but are rationalizing it one of two ways...

- Hey, at least he’s not a liberal
- He’s a horrible person, but I like his policies and I’m doing fine, so, I’m all good

Don’t ever think that everyone else doesn’t like him as much as you do. That’s one of the most common mistakes people make when it comes to election expectations.

boom indeed. but if we are to believe that Hillary's polarization made the swing votes go to Trump, then i think a moderate rational approach by Bloomberg could get those swing votes, and thus the electorate votes to defeat Trump.....who knows.

Whether you believe it or not, I think Trump's appeal lies in the fact that voters feel he is speaking to them, not at them. Want him out?...Pick a Candidate with a personality at least as big as his. Not a woman "Because it is time" or a man "Who is as wealthy" or a person "Because they are a Minority"....Choose an individual who won't beat people to death with the words "MY plan"..One who does not focus on what the President is doing, tell the Voter what you are going to do and explian it quickly and concisely in a way that does NOT increase taxes...

Trump's appeal lies in the fact that voters feel he is speaking to them...

That explains it. Idiots elected Trump. Analysis of his vocabulary states that he communicates at the fourth grade level, the lowest grade level of the last 15 presidents.

I may be way off base, but I don't think his position on issues matters. In 2020, the election is going to be Trump v. Anyone-But-Trump. This is a single issue election - is there anyone who can beat Trump. It's not healthcare, the environment, or tax plans. It's let's stop the autocrat from marginalizing our intelligence/military/justice agencies & attempt to rebuild some credibility w/allies.

i think they both go hand in hand. if his answers reflect moderate policies, then the swing votes won't be afraid to give their vote to him. but if his answers reflect an extreme position, like Bernie's socialist tag, then that would most definitely trigger the swing voters to stay with Trump, imo. i think the candidate who remains cool under pressure and promotes common sense solutions (Obama), is the one who can beat Trump. Democrats don't need someone like Biden or Warren to challenge Trump on tough talk, and try to win by being tougher. they will be TKO'd in the first round, and look foolish if they try to go that route. if people are truly tired of Trump's destructive ways, then cool and common sense policies will easiliy defeat him.

We already know he's not an extremist. He didn't do anything radical as mayor, he can speak in complete sentences, has a handle on basic civics, and isn't going to run foreign policy on twitter. That's literally all he needs to do. He built a $60B business w/o being born w/a silver spoon. He runs functioning, profitable companies precisely because he thinks, plans, & generally isn't a kneejerk reactionary. No one's interested in an intellectual, a statesman, or a perfectly PC candidate. I'm optimistic that at least for now, the majority of Americans aren't redhats, white supremacists, or anti-semites who'll see the wisdom of having someone other than a "stable genius" who can't "stay cool" under any circumstances in the WH.

Trump's appeal lies in the fact that voters feel he is speaking to them...

That explains it. Idiots elected Trump. Analysis of his vocabulary states that he communicates at the fourth grade level, the lowest grade level of the last 15 presidents.

So, why not blame the electorate?..or the education system?...If he is speaking to an ill educated voting block; all would be well if everyone was as able to be a forward thinking liberal.

Omg.

I may be way off base, but I don't think his position on issues matters. In 2020, the election is going to be Trump v. Anyone-But-Trump. This is a single issue election - is there anyone who can beat Trump. It's not healthcare, the environment, or tax plans. It's let's stop the autocrat from marginalizing our intelligence/military/justice agencies & attempt to rebuild some credibility w/allies.

i think they both go hand in hand. if his answers reflect moderate policies, then the swing votes won't be afraid to give their vote to him. but if his answers reflect an extreme position, like Bernie's socialist tag, then that would most definitely trigger the swing voters to stay with Trump, imo. i think the candidate who remains cool under pressure and promotes common sense solutions (Obama), is the one who can beat Trump. Democrats don't need someone like Biden or Warren to challenge Trump on tough talk, and try to win by being tougher. they will be TKO'd in the first round, and look foolish if they try to go that route. if people are truly tired of Trump's destructive ways, then cool and common sense policies will easiliy defeat him.

We already know he's not an extremist. He didn't do anything radical as mayor, he can speak in complete sentences, has a handle on basic civics, and isn't going to run foreign policy on twitter. That's literally all he needs to do. He built a $60B business w/o being born w/a silver spoon. He runs functioning, profitable companies precisely because he thinks, plans, & generally isn't a kneejerk reactionary. No one's interested in an intellectual, a statesman, or a perfectly PC candidate. I'm optimistic that at least for now, the majority of Americans aren't redhats, white supremacists, or anti-semites who'll see the wisdom of having someone other than a "stable genius" who can't "stay cool" under any circumstances in the WH

How...are YOU worse off with Trump in the White House?

Trump's appeal lies in the fact that voters feel he is speaking to them...

That explains it. Idiots elected Trump. Analysis of his vocabulary states that he communicates at the fourth grade level, the lowest grade level of the last 15 presidents.

What kinda crock of baloney is that anyway - who did this analysis anyway - can just imagine the criteria used to come up with that brilliant conclusion

It’s a total plus for Trumps re-election when we one reads stuff like that

We already know he's not an extremist. He didn't do anything radical as mayor, he can speak in complete sentences, has a handle on basic civics, and isn't going to run foreign policy on twitter. That's literally all he needs to do. He built a $60B business w/o being born w/a silver spoon. He runs functioning, profitable companies precisely because he thinks, plans, & generally isn't a kneejerk reactionary. No one's interested in an intellectual, a statesman, or a perfectly PC candidate. I'm optimistic that at least for now, the majority of Americans aren't redhats, white supremacists, or anti-semites who'll see the wisdom of having someone other than a "stable genius" who can't "stay cool" under any circumstances in the WH

How...are YOU worse off with Trump in the White House?

That's completely irrelevant to the topic of buying the office. I've never been asked a personal question on this forum before and don't plan on answering any.

We already know he's not an extremist. He didn't do anything radical as mayor, he can speak in complete sentences, has a handle on basic civics, and isn't going to run foreign policy on twitter. That's literally all he needs to do. He built a $60B business w/o being born w/a silver spoon. He runs functioning, profitable companies precisely because he thinks, plans, & generally isn't a kneejerk reactionary. No one's interested in an intellectual, a statesman, or a perfectly PC candidate. I'm optimistic that at least for now, the majority of Americans aren't redhats, white supremacists, or anti-semites who'll see the wisdom of having someone other than a "stable genius" who can't "stay cool" under any circumstances in the WH

How...are YOU worse off with Trump in the White House?

That's completely irrelevant to the topic of buying the office. I've never been asked a personal question on this forum before and don't plan on answering any.

That figures. Problems with EVERYTHING the President does and says, you participated in the system by voting and ...lost. Pages and pages of hate on this forum about this and that, integrity, truth and whatever other reason you can muster up and when asked how this "disgusting" non presidential behavior affects you?

Not a peep.

So go ahead and tout the excellence of a candidate who has not even been on the debate stage yet, is a member of the 1% the left says they despise and do it all while espousing that he is the best chance to defeat the incumbent.

Are you serious?

That figures. Problems with EVERYTHING the President does and says, you participated in the system by voting and ...lost. Pages and pages of hate on this forum about this and that, integrity, truth and whatever other reason you can muster up and when asked how this "disgusting" non presidential behavior affects you?

This paragraph is comically non-sensical.

That's completely irrelevant to the topic of buying the office. I've never been asked a personal question on this forum before and don't plan on answering any.

That figures. Problems with EVERYTHING the President does and says, you participated in the system by voting and ...lost. Pages and pages of hate on this forum about this and that, integrity, truth and whatever other reason you can muster up and when asked how this "disgusting" non presidential behavior affects you?

Not a peep.

So go ahead and tout the excellence of a candidate who has not even been on the debate stage yet, is a member of the 1% the left says they despise and do it all while espousing that he is the best chance to defeat the incumbent.

Are you serious?

Are you drunk?

I don't know who you are, but you don't know me so don't make assumptions about my life.

I've never run for office so I've never lost. I've never written pages and pages of hate on this forum. Rather, I started a new impeachment thread when the topic in which I was interested was sidelined by interpersonal squabbling that had nothing to do w/me.

I've said repeatedly that although many enjoy discussing election possibilities 2 years in advance of the nominations is interesting, I don't. I was intrigued by the topic that buying a nomination or election is novel & offered my opinion that in 2020, the question of issues is less important than electability. I've said previously that I haven't watched a debate since JFK/Nixon as a child w/my family. I do live in NYC where Bloomberg was mayor for 3 terms (and Guiliani for 2) so I've experienced his governance.

I've not touted the excellence of any candidate unless you consider a knowledge of civics, coherent speech, & refraining from conducting foreign policy on twitter as "excellence."

My opinion is that the 2020 election will be Trump v. Whoever Isn't Trump. I think you're conflating my comments w/those of other posters & confusing my earlier comments that Bloomberg is considered by career politicians, political scientists, and historians to have the best chance of defeating Trump w/my endorsement of Bloomberg.

There's no excuse for a personal attack on me. Step back.

That figures. Problems with EVERYTHING the President does and says, you participated in the system by voting and ...lost. Pages and pages of hate on this forum about this and that, integrity, truth and whatever other reason you can muster up and when asked how this "disgusting" non presidential behavior affects you?

it's about the country for some people. crazy concept!!!

So go ahead and tout the excellence of a candidate who has not even been on the debate stage yet, is a member of the 1% the left says they despise and do it all while espousing that he is the best chance to defeat the incumbent.

Are you serious?

i'm going to love your meltdowns over Bloomberg. what happened to Hillary?

That had nothing to do w/the conversation but, while unlikely to run, Hilary has been mentioned, according to a post earlier in the thread, as Bloomberg’s VP if he’s elected - still very early, Nebraska is next

Are you drunk?

@cyclone. Pay him no mind - he is a troll - 99% of his posts everywhere on this site, even simple music posts, are confrontational.

Thanks to you & others for commenting that nebish & I tend to behave ourselves. I generally don't engage w/known trolls - especially on a day off.

On another thread - Bill Graham Exhibition - I mentioned the documentary on concert promoters The Show's The Thing: The Legendary Promoters of Rock making the rounds of film fests/concerts in 2018-19. I thought it would be streaming somewhere by now & surely you would know. Gives them props for changing how music gets heard.

That's completely irrelevant to the topic of buying the office. I've never been asked a personal question on this forum before and don't plan on answering any.

That figures. Problems with EVERYTHING the President does and says, you participated in the system by voting and ...lost. Pages and pages of hate on this forum about this and that, integrity, truth and whatever other reason you can muster up and when asked how this "disgusting" non presidential behavior affects you?

Not a peep.

So go ahead and tout the excellence of a candidate who has not even been on the debate stage yet, is a member of the 1% the left says they despise and do it all while espousing that he is the best chance to defeat the incumbent.

Are you serious?

Are you drunk?

I don't know who you are, but you don't know me so don't make assumptions about my life.

I've never run for office so I've never lost. I've never written pages and pages of hate on this forum. Rather, I started a new impeachment thread when the topic in which I was interested was sidelined by interpersonal squabbling that had nothing to do w/me.

I've said repeatedly that although many enjoy discussing election possibilities 2 years in advance of the nominations is interesting, I don't. I was intrigued by the topic that buying a nomination or election is novel & offered my opinion that in 2020, the question of issues is less important than electability. I've said previously that I haven't watched a debate since JFK/Nixon as a child w/my family. I do live in NYC where Bloomberg was mayor for 3 terms (and Guiliani for 2) so I've experienced his governance.

I've not touted the excellence of any candidate unless you consider a knowledge of civics, coherent speech, & refraining from conducting foreign policy on twitter as "excellence."

My opinion is that the 2020 election will be Trump v. Whoever Isn't Trump. I think you're conflating my comments w/those of other posters & confusing my earlier comments that Bloomberg is considered by career politicians, political scientists, and historians to have the best chance of defeating Trump w/my endorsement of Bloomberg.

There's no excuse for a personal attack on me. Step back.

Cyclone, my apologies. I did not intend for the comments to be directed at you in anyway, shape or form, more of swipe at the attitude coming from the masses here. Once again, my apologies, you are correct, I don't know you and in no way was it intended to be personal.

That had nothing to do w/the conversation but, while unlikely to run, Hilary has been mentioned, according to a post earlier in the thread, as Bloomberg’s VP if he’s elected - still very early, Nebraska is next

my point was that he is the current scapegoat. i've asked my friends who support Trump how they could vote for him again after seeing how he is, and they said it depended on who he runs against. it sounds like they are waiting for the next candidate to be announced to give them the good ole Hillary treatment. whatever works i guess. as for me, i don't see the logic in having Hillary be a part of the next Democratic campaign. if there's a strategy there, it's way over my head. i would imagine, whether fair or not, she would only make the swing voters go with Trump again.

Seems like the only ones talking about Hillary are Republicans. It's their dream, as they just can't seem to get past her. Hillary will not be on any presidential bill this year.

Michael Bloomberg Surges in Poll and Qualifies for Democratic Debate in Las Vegas

Looks like cash is king, and in Mike's case might make him king

NPR has him at 19%, 2nd behind Bernie at 31%. RCP says 14%, in 3rd behind a sinking Biden.

A man spends $345 million to get a gig that pays $400,000. The only place in the universe where this makes sense is Washington, D.C.. 😉

Michael Bloomberg Surges in Poll and Qualifies for Democratic Debate in Las Vegas

Looks like cash is king, and in Mike's case might make him king

NPR has him at 19%, 2nd behind Bernie at 31%. RCP says 14%, in 3rd behind a sinking Biden.

Mike has one objective: To defeat trump. this is a good thing whether he becomes president or not.

How do you feel about Bloomberg running and maintaining his business if he wins? Sounds like you are cool with Lil'Mike and his global financial enterprise but worried about corrupting democracy if Trump keeps his hotel rooms?

Michael Bloomberg Surges in Poll and Qualifies for Democratic Debate in Las Vegas

Looks like cash is king, and in Mike's case might make him king

NPR has him at 19%, 2nd behind Bernie at 31%. RCP says 14%, in 3rd behind a sinking Biden.

Mike has one objective: To defeat trump. this is a good thing whether he becomes president or not.

How do you feel about Bloomberg running and maintaining his business if he wins? Sounds like you are cool with Lil'Mike and his global financial enterprise but worried about corrupting democracy if Trump keeps his hotel rooms?

The coming weeks will tell, but I'm hoping that the party rejects his advances. That has nothing to do with him be a greater or lesser opponent for Trump. There's serious dirt out there about his past and his governing style. Will that be used to reject him, or overlooked to propel him into the general? In much the same way the Republicans have changed since Trump won, the Dem's face similar - if not greater - changes should Bloomberg win the nomination.

There's serious dirt out there about his past and governing style

Really dont feel like Bloomberg google search hell, care to drop 25-30 words on this dirt? I know zero about the guy, other than a sense of relief that he appears to be an adult.

Yeah, basically he has a past of questionable racist, misogynist, and homophobic comments and actions. And if you look at some of the things he did as mayor along with causes he's supported since, his authoritarian nature seems pretty well established. He has a string of cases brought by women claiming abuse, and pretty much all have been settled. But the requirement of making them sign an NDA has kept the details silent. Here's a couple of recent stories...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/15/michael-bloomberg-booklet-sexist-remarks-abortion

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/allegations-of-misogynistic-remarks-come-back-to-haunt-bloomberg

https://www.gq.com/story/bloomberg-sexism

There's a ton of articles out there if you look for them. It will be interesting to see what news agencies, reporters, and internet personalities try to make excuses or cover over this past, versus who reports it fairly. Could be an indication of who is benefiting from Mike's money.

There's serious dirt out there about his past and governing style

Really dont feel like Bloomberg google search hell, care to drop 25-30 words on this dirt? I know zero about the guy, other than a sense of relief that he appears to be an adult.

Yeah, basically he has a past of questionable racist, misogynist, and homophobic comments and actions.

"Serious dirt?" This is all old news he doesn't deny. His stop-&-frisk policy as NYC mayor is usually the 2nd sentence after the mention of his name yet he's only 1 of 3 mayors elected to 3 terms (& Guiliani WASN'T one of them.) I've said virtually every time I've mentioned Bloomberg (and I'm not endorsing him) that the entire point of his candidacy is his money & perceived electability against Trump not his policies.

Sanders is a misogynist w/a #metoo problem stemming from his 2016 campaign & Biden has made homophobic & sexist comments in the past.
So far, neither party has turned up a saint since Sunday School teacher Jimmy Carter in 1976 & even he admitted "lusting in his heart" after women other than his wife & questions arose about his "success" as a peanut farmer both before & after his presidency.

BTW, NDAs are standard for settlement agreements to avoid PUBLIC trials so singling out Bloomberg among the dem candidates for his past is rather disingenuous. When any candidate has a CURRENT reputation as a white supremacist, Nazi, Putin "asset," or 1,000 psychiatrists write a letter to Congress that they believe his mental health status prevents him from being president & it is rapidly deteriorating, that's what I'd be consider new & "serious."

Michael Bloomberg Surges in Poll and Qualifies for Democratic Debate in Las Vegas

Looks like cash is king, and in Mike's case might make him king

NPR has him at 19%, 2nd behind Bernie at 31%. RCP says 14%, in 3rd behind a sinking Biden.

Mike has one objective: To defeat trump. this is a good thing whether he becomes president or not.

How do you feel about Bloomberg running and maintaining his business if he wins? Sounds like you are cool with Lil'Mike and his global financial enterprise but worried about corrupting democracy if Trump keeps his hotel rooms?

He stated on Fox News this morning that he will sell his business if elected president to avoid any conflicts of interest.