Well now Ms. Gay of the NYT Editorial Board how forgiving
or errors are YOU Ms Gay....; think about this because being
so so right is not very smart.
Bloomberg admits a error and you want to judge;
Judge not Ms Gay; and you will not be judged.
Think about this...I am very proud of the good acts of the
former Mayor of New York Ciry...because he admits fault.
2
So what exactly are you saying, or avoiding saying, Ms Gay? This column is an exercise in equivocation. Finally, after years of defending this scurrilous policy, he is convinced that he cannot win the primary without black voters, and he has an epiphany--he was wrong, and he's sorry. I would like to say how stupid do you think the American people are, but then I remember that Trump is president, so maybe it will work.
2
Michael Bloomberg is not a racist. His Stop and Frisk policy was dead wrong but I don't believe he instituted it with racism in his heart.
It's up to the Black community to forgive him or not, which will likely be a difficult decision. Charles Blow urged Black voters to reject Bloomberg in two separate columns. Pretty strong stuff.
Clearly Trump hasn't earned their vote and no matter what drivel he spews he's a racist beginning with his refusal to rent apartments to Black people.
Joe Biden carries the baggage of locking up tens of thousands of young Black men who didn't turn out en masse to vote for Hillary for the same reason.
1
Michael Attvenarti, 2020
If an ordinary person stopped and frisked black and brown people without consent, what would be the appropriate penalties?
As a mayor, Bloomberg imposed such a policy, expecting to get away with it. We should never accept the Nazi defense that it was legal at the time.
Mike Bloomberg deserves prison time for each offense, as well as the cops who perpetrated this non-consensual aggression. The ends do not justify the means.
3
Bloomberg is not sincere and Black and Brown Americans are not gullible pawns on a politician’s chess board.
BLM
3
And to get a full view of Bloomberg’s arrogant character, see NYT article: Bloomberg’s Team Calls His Crude Remarks on Women ‘Wrong’ Nov. 14.
Quote:
“…. his history of crude remarks is likely to draw scrutiny. His team said some were “disrespectful.”
One remark attributed to Mr. Bloomberg went like this: “If women wanted to be appreciated for their brains, they’d go to the library instead of to Bloomingdale’s.”
Another line, purportedly Mr. Bloomberg’s sales pitch for his eponymous computer terminal, said the machine will “do everything,” including oral sex, although a cruder term was used.
“I guess,” Mr. Bloomberg was quoted as saying, “that puts a lot of you girls out of business.”
Wow, this sounds like Trump talk. He shows similar contempt for people.
And article says Bloomie “told a pregnant woman employee to 'kill' the baby….before grumbling about the number of pregnant women at his company.”
Also—NYT --- “Warren Would Take Billionaires Down a Few Billion Pegs.” By Patricia Cohen Nov 10.
Quote: "If Warren’s wealth tax had been in effect since 1982, then “Michael Bloomberg would have had $12.3 billion instead of $51.8 billion."
One wonders....would he be just as arrogant with only 12.3 billion as he is with 51.8?
2
This guy should be in a geriatric care facility, not allowed to flounder about.
1
One suspects thatformer NY City Mayor Michael Bloomberg sincerely means for us to believe in his sincerity when he apologizes for exercising his police powers to racially harass black and brown New Yorker males and females. Now that he’s prospecting for support in the Democratic Presidential Primary, he asks for forgiveness, If the racial harassment in his Stop and Frisk policy hurt black feelings. He asks for forgiveness now, because obviously he has forgiven himself. So what’s the matter with you, in effect, he’s asking, who are you going to believe, my past actions or my words? Even Candidate Trump running for black votes in 2016 asked “What have you got to lose?” Bloomberg is merely saying he’s very sorry. Sigh.
1
Great. Apologize now when you think you want to be president; at the last minute. This is the same man who changed the term limits so he could be mayor a 3rd term.
It seems to me too many white people are always so sure it doesn’t mean anything to black people when it doesn’t mean anything to them.
They think how they see something (like stop and frisk aka stop and humiliate) well, everyone else including blacks should also see it that way. (It’s saving lives!)
That’s part of the blindness they get from their whiteness always making them the “norm” in our society I think.
It wouldn’t be so big a deal if we blacks weren’t the ones constantly being thrown under the bus while the disadvantages of black people become the source of advantages for white people.
If you are powerful and white take a moment and listen to the intelligent people who understand how race affects our society.
They are out there constantly talking and writing very clearly.
God bless.
3
Ms. Gay. Trump is worse than Bloomberg. Please don't do the Republican's bidding by persuading voters to not vote for Mr. Bloomberg or any other potential Democratic nominee. Mayor Bloomberg has apologized for asking police to frisk citizens in an ill-advised attempt to reduce crime. President Trump has bragged on tape for frisking women for against their will, because he could.
1
I haven't heard him apologize to the Muslim community for his policy of surveillance of their places of worship, and members of their communities. Perhaps that will come next?
1
So, we can relax over Warren's fade to center, since we have some crazy old man doing doughnuts down Broadway?
1
The effrontery of Bloomberg is as boundless as his wealth. He bought 3 mayoral elections for $268,000,000 after promising to abide by a 2 term limit mandate. Now he thinks he can buy the targets of his racist law enforcement policies with a long-delayed apology and crocodile tears. I'm surprised he didn't start handing out cash to the congregants. The great Joseph Welch has been regularly and rightly resurrected in the Times as of late, and here's another occasion to ask his famous question, "have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last have you no sense of decency?" Who needs decency when you have $51,000,000?
2
How can anyone really take him seriously on this?
1
Too much money, not enough empathy.
Too much hubris, not enough humility.
Too many sins, not enough transformation.
3
If your neighbors saw you or your offspring being stopped by police on a regular basis how do you think it might affect your life?
1
Bloomberg engaged in this unconscionable violation of the constitutional rights of US citizens for a very simple reason: It was politically feasible!! I.e., because the targets of his stop and frisk policy were overwhelmingly members of minority communities in NYC, overwhelmingly people of color, it was politically feasible for him to do so. Who cares about people of color, right?
Now imagine a Bloomberg presidency. The man hasn't changed, his principals haven't changed, his mindset hasn't changed, his class hasn't changed. So, in the Bloomberg presidency, whose rights will be unconstitutionally violated this time? Yours? Mine?
Best hope you're not in a class of people it's politically feasible to disregard.
To paraphrase Martin Niemoller,
"First they came for the minorities of color in NYC, but I did not speak out because I was not a minority of color."
2
"I didn't realize the affect that Stop and Frisk was having on black and brown people at the time."
Nonsense! So many people were screaming about the affect, while he was dismissing them.
1
Too little, too late.
2
If nothing else, it will prove entertaining watching Bloomberg make the rounds on his apology tour. I've already had a few good belly laughs. The timing is just too priceless. It should provide rich SNL material.
1
I'm confused by the headline of this piece. Is it supposed to be an ironic bait-and-switch? The content belies the headline as does the author's previous writing on the subject.
Or maybe I'm missing something.
1
Bloomberg's 'Stop and Frisk' program shows that he knew nothing about policing and the 4Th Amendment. He didn't care that many teenages would be constantly harassed and given criminal records for having a tiny amount of marijuana in their pockets.
He appointed a lawyer who knew nothing about eduction as chancellor, Joel Klein. He then appointed a magazine publisher as chancellor who knew even less about teaching.
Bloomberg is completely unqualified to be President because he has shown himself to be an arrogant person with a Napoleon complex.
1
It is tempting to think that Mr. Bloomberg’s interest in becoming the president stems from his inner sense of ethics and a moral imperative to unseat the dangerous, unguided missile of the corrupt and disgusting imbecile, Trump. Indeed, we need a reluctant leader because those who are drawn to politics and “public service” are almost always self-serving, power hungry sociopaths. But since Bloomberg already has vast wealth and, hence, tremendous power, we can only hope that his interest in throwing his hat into the ring of the Democratic hopefuls is born out of a true, selfless motive to jettison the current dangerous “president” and course correct our national and the global sociopolitical trajectory.
2
People here are forgetting how much violent crime plagued NY before stop and frisk was instituted by Giuliani (before Bloomberg).
It’s easy to make judgments in hindsight. At the time, people were being killed and hurt regularly.
BTW, I don’t remember Dinkins apologizing for letting a pogrom run it’s course in Brooklyn so that people could “let off steam.” Nevertheless, monuments are adorned with his name. I suggest, everyone show more humility.
3
No apology needed as Blacks and Latinos have moved on and will not vote for Bloomberg. His past actions show he does not deserve their future vote.
1
I just have one question - how stupid does Michael Bloomberg think black and brown people are? I had moved away by the time this policy took effect but I followed its impact very closely and I clearly recall his reaction to the anger and frustration of men of color (the overwhelming victims of this policy) who took issue with him. He was rude, arrogant, intractable, and wholly unconcerned. For him to apologize NOW that he NEEDS our votes? In the words of the man he hopes to unseat - SAD!
1
Deval Patrick is the new, "moderate" candidate with more experience with key issues (real civil rights work, enacting health care reform) than Bloomberg can begin to claim and without the bagge. With any luck, Bloomberg's candidacy quietly sinks beneath the waves.
This has to be one of the most ruthlessly calculated, unbelievable "confessions" by any politician. I know politics are dirty, but this lie is right up there in the Trumpian range.
2
He is still light years ahead of Trump.
1
Sorry Mike, not feeling your sincerity. You could start your campaign by apologizing to every person who was “stopped and frisked.” Just saying.
1
I put this apology alongside the Prince Andrew interview/sort of apology.
1
It's okay as long as this was done to those folks living over there in that neighborough. Its is disingenuous to apologize once the deed is done. A day late and a dollar short.
2
If he had given that apology a few years ago I would believe him now, but right before he starts his campaign for president presents itself as audacious, hypocritical and obviously fake.
Okay. So vote this time.
What does bother me in all of this, is Bloomberg’s call to Sharpton. Whatever your view of Bloomberg’s conduct until today, he enjoyed a strong presumption that his action were rooted in principles. That was true of everything from stop and frisk to big sodas. You could think he was dead wrong, but he was acting in what he thought was the community’s best interest.
Sharpton is a charlatan profiteering off of his supposed ability to protect white politicians from charges of racism. He should be shunned, not solicited.
1
Wow, how convenient. Con men and preachers, it's becoming harder and harder to distinguish one from the other.
A decade later its dawned on Bloomberg that this was wrong to arbitrarily stop Black men? Stop and frisk, violated the Constitutional rights of these men.The bottom line, Mr. Bloomberg support of "Stop & Frisk" is in keeping with US Supreme Court 1857 Dred Scott decision.
Bloomberg is play acting. Black folks need to stopped being duped by a grin and an apology. Good grief, can't forget a favor and can't remember a wrong. Yet, we are still being killed: Shot in our homes, traffic stops, on the side of the highway, walking and eating skittles, and wrongfully imprisoned.
What is it that black people don't get? When are Black men going get tired of being humiliated?
What Bloomberg really said, 'Because I know I can't win the Democratic Nomination without the support of the Black community, I'm willing to apologize for violating your Constitutional rights. Let's bygones be bygones, group hug.'
Mara, are you aware that you get frisked every time you decide to get on an airplane?
People lined up to hate Bloomberg for this policy, and they’re lining up again to hate him for apologizing for it. What would make you happy? Should he just commit suicide? Bloomberg was trying to fight crime, something that would have benefitted minority communities, and he got it wrong. Let’s move on.
Unfortunately, I see this apology backfiring on Bloomberg much the way Hillary hurt herself by apologizing for “superpredators.”
2
Stop and frisk works.
2
Who remembers Bloomberg calling Biden and Beto's campaign an "apology tour"? "Joe Biden went out and apologized for being male, over 50, white."
Yuck. When will this Republican go away, we're not voting for you!
Have fun with Trump 2020 and Jr 2024
1
Like the Clinton crime bill which blacks used as an excuse for not voting for Hillary in 2016, stop-and-frisk may be unappetizing to young activists today but it was a godsend to their grandparents who had to to live in the poor neighborhoods of New York in the 90s-00s. Thank Bloomberg for making your city safer than Baltimore so you can sit around and complain about him today.
2
Let's hear the bright side of stop-and-frisk from folks who experienced it in Scarsdale, on upper Knob Hill, and Pacific Palisades.
2
Easy to say now.
Mayor Mike was a better Mayor and would be a better President than you are as a writer.
1
Well, it’s a day late and a dollar short as they used to say. I wish Mr. Bloomberg would buy Fox with his billions. That would help whoever runs against Trump.
Stop-and-risk was designed to get illegal guns off the street. So much for gun control.
3
Whether Bloomberg's apology is sincere, it's a good first step.
If you stopped and frisked black and brown persons without consent, what penalties would you get? Bloomberg did so expecting to get away with it, and get political benefits.
This warrants some jail time for each offense.
The former Mayor can earn back trust by supporting the Democratic candidate, both financially and otherwise, that the voters decide is the right one for the country and the times we live in.
We all get stopped and frisked every time we fly.
If it helps to prevent violent crime
where is the problem ?
3
Very glad to hear he apologized. It takes a big man to do that. Perhaps now he can also reflect on his treatment of women and his awful treatment of pregnant women.
Black voters should demand that Bloomberg release all e-mails, written strategy materials, internal notes, etc. between him and his presidential campaign advisors having to do with the pivotal “stop and frisk” issue. Let people see whether this dramatic mea culpa by him is mere cynical electoral manipulation or an entirely sincere gesture. Put the burden of proof squarely upon him. Let’s see if Bloomberg embraces transparency, or not.
I’m sick and tired of hearing from billionaires whose only claim to fame is the money they extracted from a broken taxation system.
If Jesus came down from the heavens and became a billionaire in the US today, I would not vote for him.
Why among a population 320 million should I choose a leader from the core of a class of hoarders? They shut the door behind them to everyone else.
Don’t believe it? Believe OECD reports that show for socio-economic mobility, the US has consistently come last for the past decade.
"Bloomberg Apologizes for Stop and Frisk"
Please apologize for entering the 2020 election.
- We don't need another billionaire, like Tom Steyer or Howard Schultz. We already see that Trump's oligarchs are clueless about governance.
- We don't need a politician who ran 3x as a Republican mayor to suddenly revert back to being a Democrat.
- Trump will beat you because swing don't see you bringing anything to the table - except arrogance.
1
I am a white voter who has no interest in putting a self-serving Billionaire in the White House. The fact that he failed to understand how his policies would affect poor brown people in his city shows his utter lack of sensitivity to average people of any color. Why doesn't he run against the current Pootus. They may differ on somethings but tax cuts for the richest would probably not be on that list.
1
Stop and frisk involves the police stopping those whom they reasonably suspect are law breakers. It is consistent with the Fourth Amendment if carried out responsibly. But it is widely abused. The abuse is worst in those neighborhoods of NYC, LA, and any other cities that have a large law-abiding black population.
The police tend to stop minorities disproportionately. And that sometimes makes sense for obvious reasons. (Facts is facts.) But blacks who aren't poor are like whites who aren't poor -- the overwhelming majority are law-abiding. And stop and frisk generally turns unacceptably racist where there are many law-abiding blacks.
The situation is different, however. in poor black neighborhoods. There is a lot of crime. And the good black people in those neighborhoods don't get enough police protection. Those people generally trust blacks. But they well know when someone is suspicious, and they would like the police to be there for them.
If the police are present in poor black neighborhoods, which is not the case far too often, everybody in the neighborhood would appreciate a weapons frisk of those who are suspicious. Stop and frisk is a valuable law enforcement tool in the right places if carried out properly.
The coreect position for Bloomberg and everybody else to take is that racist stop and frisk has got to go. But legitimate stop and frisk is a service to under-served poor black communities that are in need of more police attention.
1
That's great Mike. But is that it? An apology? What are you going to do about a policy that failed in its main goals, terrorized 10's of thousands, left police-community relations in tatters, and leaves many in the community, including me, a 60-year old white male, suspicious and afraid of police?
1
I can't tell on what side of the question Ms. Gay lands. Is Bloomberg's apology a hollow recognition of the concerns of the Democratic Party base or a genuine re-evaluation of a policy he defended a week ago?
I tend toward the former and got the impression the writer agreed exactly half of the time I read this.
Isn't it funny how he just now figured it out? This is a remarkable coincidence given his newly announced presidential campaign.
1
Exactly what he needed to do. Good start. We'll see . . .
Bloomberg could drop a billion dollars on voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives and all but assure a democratic victory in 2020.
Tom Steyer, for that matter, could do the same.
Instead, we’ll get embarrassing, egotistical, wasteful, campaigns.
Typical billionaires.
1
I don't understand why the black community most of them churchgoers would not forgive Bloomberg. Isn't forgiveness the basis of their religion?
Having said that, nobody is perfect and no one who has ever held an elected office would ever satisfy all groups unless, the person spent his/her entire career talking like Sanders. Even Bernie Sanders was a gun enthousiast in the past.
Maybe Democrats should ask Jesus Christ to run for president, they will never find a perfect candidate, because there is none. Even former president Obama would have a hard time running as a Democrat in 2020. There are videos of him, advocating strong enforcement at the border, the type of enforcement that Trump is doing now( check on YouTube if you don't believe me).
Back in March, I contacted Me. Bloomberg office asking him to run, for I believed back then and still do that he is the best candidate. With him on top of the ticket, Democrats could take back control of the Senate and keep the House which will be the only way to tackle issues like climate change, that are vital for the future of the planet.
2
It's too little, too late. Now that he realizes the only way he stands a chance to get the nomination is that he has to have black support, he's suddenly sorry.
It's that tires trope of white politicians coming to church, promising the world, apologizing for past wrongs, only to forget their words when they get elected. It's gotta stop.
“When the two men met for breakfast this summer, Mr. Canada said he brought up the issue, as usual, and Mr. Bloomberg surprised him. “He said, ‘You know, I’m going to really have to potentially rethink this,’” Mr. Canada recalled.”
In 2019, after five years of declining crime in the absence of stop and frisk, Mr. Bloomberg decided “I’m going to really have to POTENTIALLY rethink this?”
No, he is in no way sincere. He is an utter opportunist.
Is he rethinking the mass arrests at the 2004 Republican Convention, for which the city paid many settlements for those arrests’ illegality? He is as hostile to the freedom of assembly and redress of grievances clauses of the first amendment as he is to the fourth amendment. Is he rethinking his strongly worded endorsement then of Junior Bush and his Iraq fiasco?
1
Suppose it's true that Bloomberg made a serious mistake with stop-and-risk -- one for which he's finally and unambiguously apologized. Those commenting here who say "too little / too late"; that it was racist, violent, demeaning, inexcusable, etc. might want to consider the bigger picture.
We currently have an illiterate bullying incurious raving narcissist in the White House who has a serious chance of extending his occupancy there for 4 more years next November. If Bloomberg is the Democratic nominee, he offers the best chance by far of preventing that from happening.
Bloomberg or Trump. Pick one. The former may have erred a few times during his 12 years as mayor but is fully qualified to be the next president. That latter, a national and international joke, isn't even remotely qualified for that position. Failing to tone down criticism of Bloomberg and failing to support his candidacy will only get us four more years of you-know-who. Why isn't this decision a no-brainer?
1
Did Bloomberg target African American and Latino people for over policing to cause them to lose any chance of prospering by stigmatizing them with criminal convictions? That is the issue, is it not? The deliberate oppression of these racial minorities. If it was actually was intended to reduce violence by interdiction, all those stopped and frisked would be convicted of illegally carrying firearms and the demographics would exactly correspond to the demographics of the whole population? Is not that true?
Even the Police Benevolent Society says that the police were complaining about how Stop and Frisk was a destructive policy at the time.
This apology just shows that Bloomberg is an arrogant billionaire that doesn't care what the people who actually do the work say. His treatment of teachers was the same.
Bloomberg says, "I didn't realize..." that Stop and Frisk was a disaster, until he needs black votes to get elected.
And Republicans will call Bloomberg a socialist anyway, and talk about nothing but his attempts to ban large sodas.
1
I'll try this again. Saying he apologizes at "just the right time" is an absurd statement. He's apologizing because his ego-centric mind fixates on his greatness, and he thinks he can just put it all behind him. No more New Yorkers on the ballot. Trump is enough.
"He defiantly defended the policy even last year..." Sorry, too late, too predictable. Even the crocodile tears.
1
Bloomberg should not be running as a Democrat. He’s not a Democrat.
And politically convenient apologies are worthless.
Politicians always seem to apologize for their racist decisions and actions in the past. Yes, people make mistakes but why do we always have to forgive politicians when we, citizens don't get the same consideration.
In most cities, if you don't pay a parking ticket even if you are unemployed and can't afford to, they will double or triple your fine, then add fines on top of that so a $25.00 ticket might rise to $100 or more. Instead of forgiving you for being unemployed or saddled with major medical bills, instead of putting a "hold" on the fines and extra fees, they suspend your driver's license so you can't get to a job or interview. Where is the forgiveness? Yet, we were expected to forgive Hillary for her referring to black boys as "Superpredators". Then we had to forgive Biden for the Crime Bill, the Credit Card Bill. Now it's Bloomberg for not just supporting the Apartied like Stop & Frisk but escalating it. I don't think so.
I have always thought stop and frisk as so totally unconstitutional. When I first heard about it, I couldn't believe it was actually happening in this country! They can just stop you for no reason and go through your pockets? what? I doubt they were checking people's pockets down on wall street! Bloomberg can be as sorry as he wants NOW for "stop and frisk" but it would have been far more meaningful if he could say that HE was the one who finally ended it. Now he's looking for possible black and Latino votes if he runs, so his sincerity is kind of questionable.
1
"Bloomberg Apologizes for Stop and Frisk at Just the Right Time"
No, Bloomberg apologizes at the opportune, the politic, the typical time.
Like those hard-bitten Republicans finally speaking the truth about Trump and his misbegotten administration...after they announce their intention not to run.
Bloomberg's an OK guy, probably. I wouldn't know. But he did some dastardly and some stupid things in his life as mayor, and did them with will and a conviction and in a way that ruined lives.
So, here he is intruding into a campaign in order to rescue the interests of his fellow richies, trying to find some kind of base among the poorer element that would allow him a win.
Of course he's apologizing. Who wouldn't? Only a fool would take him at his word.
How is it, for example, he didn't apologize 6 months, a year, five years ago?
Thanks for the apology, Mike. Now prove it.
It’s sad that so many more people care more about people being harassed than getting guns off the street and saving lives.
The police didn’t choose neighborhoods to patrol based on race. They chose them based on the violent crime and murder rate.
With this attitude, people of color will continue to be gunned down in the streets.
2
Didn't Mr. Bloomberg as mayor of NYC move the "homeless", persons without regular housing out of Manhattan proper to somewhere else? 65,000 families (the source is THIS newspaper) and maybe countless others share such homelessness status n the NYC.
How about a couple billion to help them be housed, fed, schooled, and employed, instead of using it to jump leap frog over the other average income Democrats, Mr. Bloomberg?
One billion dollars - that's 1 thousand million dollars. About $15K to each family might get them somewhere, into an apartment, clearly more than 100 miles from NYC but into a dwelling. Just one of your one billion dollars could help those 65,000 men, women, and children out in the cold.
The NYC area homeless did not have a chance to voice, vote, object, or now register their experiences of suffering.
That along with Mr. Bloomberg's stop and frisk, and no stopping it, even after the violations by the NYC police were reported, give me pause, when thinking I might vote for him as a Democratic Presidential candidate in the primaries.
Money also can't buy the good will of white voters who are repelled by Bloomberg's sending police into minority n. hoods to meet S/F quotas. Residential segregation made this so convenient. Did he reconsider after a judge ruled this unconstitutional?
Mayor Bill DeBlasio on CNN spoke about the destructive psychological effects of excessive Stop and Frisk on a generation of minority men, especially youth, and also their families, and their anxiety for safety from police abuse.
CNN article--- "De Blasio on Bloomberg's apology: People aren't stupid"
"We all appealed to him for years to reconsider and ...he was very dismissive," de Blasio said. "This was part of a pattern of being insensitive to the need to balance safety and fairness and being unwilling to listen to community voices."
He said Bloomberg could have gotten away with his backtrack if he had done it a few years after he left office.
"But to wait six whole years and only when it is a matter of need, I think that raises eyebrows," he said. This is a death bed conversion ……Bloomberg is only doing an about face because his previous position is wholly out of step with the Democratic electorate.”
Bloomberg will see plenty of backlash against his backtrack.
He may not even understand it.
“I can’t change history,” former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg said regarding the stop and frisk policy police continued under his watch.
No one is asking Mr. Bloomberg to pull off such a feat. But it is reasonable to ask that he place himself at the sidelines of history and allow the Democratic Party select a candidate who can champion the needs and aspirations of the middle class, the working poor, and the growing underclass of citizens who have been relegated to sidelines for far too long.
14
I am black, for the last 78 years, and nothing has changed in my lifetime when rich white men all of a sudden decide they need the support from a people they take pride in diminishing. Their apologies for their misdeeds not withstanding, nothing can be more evident of their disrespect and disregard for the humanity of people whom they think unworthy than to assume we are ignorant of common sense as to not see their magnanimous effort to include us in their inner circle because they need something we have, our vote.
17
First, Bloomberg is a Republican. He ignored all the data on the demographics of who was being stopped by Stop and Frisk while he was in office. He then ignored all that data as he was leaving office. Now, he apologizes because he needs the community most victimized by Stop and Frisk to vote for him in a presidential election. That timeline shows you who and what is important to Mike. Who woulda thought this was all about Mike?
10
So, given how strongly you felt about stop-and-frisk back then, how do we know you won't make another big "mistake" if you were president? Stop-and-frisk wasn't just a mistake, it was a tragedy. No second chance for you, Mike.
10
He's a billionaire authoritarian with no respect for constitutional rights.
2
It is a sad day when a presidential candidate has to apologize for a common sense policy that made the NYC safer.
6
I grew up in Brooklyn's East New York 75th Precinct in the pre-Bloomberg era, only to depart Brooklyn once married, while my parents continued to resided there until well into the 1980's. I can personally attest that East New York was dangerous place to live. Fights, theft, assaults with a knife to your throat, menacing with hand-guns were a real part of life, that I and my family had the first-hand opportunity to experience, there. Crime did not discriminate, victims and criminals came from all races.
More than a decade later mayor Mike Bloomberg transformed NYC into a safe, clean, functional metropolis by holding its municipal workers, residents, and both would-be, and actual criminals accountable. Hard love policies like stop-and-frisk worked. (All-be-it not perfectly.) Property was protected and more importantly lives were spared. I can only wish now that Mike Bloomberg would have run for mayor years earlier.
Currently the state of governmental affairs in our nation's capital resembles the once broken state of NYC. Mike Bloomberg positively transformed New York City. Mike is a moderate with the executive skill-set, and the keen sense of public service desperately needed in our next president, whose main task will be to restore our functional democracy.
7
@Robert P. Iovino
Please excuse I intended to type "by holding its municipal works, administrators, and both would-be, and actual criminals accountable."
I would like to know Bloomberg's positions on the following:
$15 minimum wage. HRC opposed.
Reinstating the Glass Steagall separation of commercial from investment banking. HRC opposed.
Raising the salary cap on wages subject to the SS payroll tax. HRC opposed.
Bloomberg has gone on record saying he wants to reform "entitlements" which means reducing Social Security and Medicare benefits to pay down a debt neither program caused. Why not instead raise revenues by raising the SS salary wage cap.
The Dems lost in 2016 with a conservative candidate like HRC.
They should not nominate a conservative like Bloomberg and they should not nominate an extreme left candidate like Bernie.
I understand and share Mr. Blow's concerns about stop and frisk but there are other issues [particularly economic ones] that should also be of concern
3
Let's see, 685,000 were stopped at the program's max. How many were not stopped? How many would you stop if you stopped everyone? And why is it that 88% did not yield an arrest considered a failure? Now I am not a New Yorker or crime specialist, but it is hard to call the program unreasonable, stop and frisk is definitely a deterrent to those thinking of carrying on the street and not a huge burden on those behaving legally. We need to stop giving excuses why crimes are not enforced.
4
The one candidate who would surely destroy Trump in the general election hasn't passed the purity test. So it's looking like instead we'll have to settle on some totally shaky gamble, like Warren or Biden or Buttigieg, or I guess, more likely, Donald Trump will just have to be good enough. Hope y'all are happy.
5
When Michael Bloomberg announced his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, I immediately embraced his candidacy, but predicted that his mayoral policy of having police stop and search young black and brown men needed to be addressed.
As an older white man, I found himself in New York City frequently during the Bloomberg years on both business and pleasure, and I appreciated the improved sense of security on the streets of Manhattan.
As a lawyer, I knew the stop and frisk tactic was overused and probably violated the Constitution, because of the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures and because the tactic was used disproportionately on young men of color.
Bloomberg did the right thing by apologizing at a black church in Brooklyn. It was necessary politically, but more importantly the apology was morally correct. I am convinced that Michael Bloomberg is sincerely sorry.
Decent people evolve and become more sensitive to how our fellow citizens on the receiving end of well-intended law enforcement decisions are harmed. I feel fairly sure that Donald Trump would not come to feel such empathy, and I am certain he would never apologize publicly like Michael Bloomberg.
1
I think he handled it wrong. An apology now is not very sincere, one could say it’s self serving
If he truly feels it was a mistake he needs to cite evidence why the program was a failure or why the benefits from the program (if any) did not out-way the cost of denying US citizens their civil liberties.
2
If he really reflected on it, and he was really sorry, he would have apologized much sooner. If not while he was mayor, then in the following years when it became clear that ending stop-and-frisk didn’t cause a surge in crime. Not now at the outset of a presidential campaign. I’m not buying it.
1
Given that Bloomberg is worth 53 billion dollars -- and would likely be hit pretty hard by either Warren or Sanders' proposed tax policies -- it's hard not to feel like he hired expensive consultants to tell him exactly what to say so that he can win the presidency and keep more of his money.
2
Most comments not accepting the apology seem to come from the very people that would be asking for the apology if he didn't provide it.
7
If Bloomberg is sincere in his apology, he should make reparations, which he can certainly afford. Reparations are probably impossible to individuals, but he can donate significant sums to the communities which were burdened by stop-and-frisk. Without that, I see no reason to believe him now, or to look forward to honesty from a Bloomberg presidency.
3
This apology is about 15 years late. If he wants my vote, I'll consider it 15 years from now.
4
No doubt Mr Bloomberg is a smart guy, but last minute conversions are held with contempt among many Christians. They refer to it as fire insurance.
The timing of his mea culpa with the launch of a vanity bid for the Democratic nomination is just a little too much to accept. Another thing widely accepted among Christians is that Tigers do not change their stripes to spots, so I doubt that he got much traction from the faithful.
Works, not words, Mr. Mayor. 3 terms of a harsh policy and just now you are figuring it out? Not buying it.
6
And here I thought that people who spend most of the day on Sundays preaching redemption actually believed in it.
4
Mayor Bloomberg needs to, like all Democratic candidates, define specific policy goals that are focused and appealing to all parts of the American electorate. From the West Coast, Bloomberg and Duval Patrick do not have a lot of name recognition. I stand to be corrected, of course.
2
I was once a supporter of stop-and-frisk, and also I feel it is an effective tool at bringing down crime in the city, and possibly to prevent terrorists. Now I understand, that even though its effective, it is wrong and immoral. I lived in NYC for 30 years and I have never been stopped by cops. As you can imagine it would not have entered into my mind that it was overused. In fact, if you are not part of a targeted groups, you could've easily dismissed the problem as overblown. I believe Bloomberg's apology, unless you give this issue the time and thought, it is difficult to take a potentially life saving tool from cops, when it looked like its been working for him and his predecessor.
2
Could you give us one actual example, other than "personal belief", when a stop-and-frisk resulted in prevention of a terrorist attack?
When the safety belt was first enforced, many cops checked whether people in the car are buckled or not very rigorously. But, these days most of the people automatically use it and police are rarely concerned about it. Even new drivers these days have solid habit of using it, because they are used to it by following their parents since they were very young. Using safety belt in the car becomes rock solid culture with the help of temporary but intrusive government enforcement and it saves lives of so many people.
Shock treatment works for many cases. But, shock shouldn’t last too long. Mr Bloomberg’s fault is not the introduction of the extreme measures, but preservation of it for too long.
4
Although it is impossible to prove, but it seems very logical that Bloomberg's stop and frisk program saved lives. Thousands of guns were confiscated. That has to mean someone who would have been shot by an angry young man wasn't, because that angry young man had been relieved of his gun.
10
Please reread the column and review the small amount of data it includes. 88 percent, no arrest. Of the remaining 12 percent, a handful involved guns. Crime continued to decline when the program stopped. The program was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge. Its overwhelming effect was to alienate and humiliate young black and Latino men. Everyone but the stubborn Bloomberg recognizes it was a failure.
1
@Lee Elliott You mean confiscated guns manufactured and sold by Stephen Feinberg’s Cerberus Capital? All Bloomberg had to do was ask his friend to stop manufacturing and distributing guns that are destroying this country. Instead, like Stephen Miller, he attacked and racialized a specific group of people. Why?
I was stopped and frisked by Dallas Texas police back in 1984, when the Republican National Convention was in town. They thought that a suit-wearing lawyer with a big briefcase was a potential security threat to those in the vicinity of the convention hall. They were not especially polite about it, and mussed up my clothes and dented my pride for a bit, but I eventually shrugged it off and had a great story to tell over dinner that evening. Not the same thing as the stop-and-frisk policy described here, but now I get to tell the story again.
4
You are a lawyer who got roughed up by cops, and you think it's a great story to tell? Do you like being humiliated?
Just to point out the obvious - If he had come to such an understanding, he should have apologized for this policy years ago. He should even have considered doing so on Yom Kippur when he is supposed to have atoned for his past sins.
To apologize now just shows that he is motivated only by expediency. He's just another billionaire trying to buy his way to the presidency. Sound familiar?
15
The question is did stop and frisk work while it was operational policy. I believe it did work and made the city safer. Yes, some people were intimidated and made uncomfortable , but it could be argued that this was a worthwhile price to pay for the greater good .
9
I don’t know the statistics about stop and frisk and if it really made New Yorker’s safer. As someone who road the subways and saw multiple young men of color pulled over by the police, I won’t tell you that I felt safer, but I did feel angry. Sorry non—New Yorkers it was a violation of peoples rights.
14
A police officer has the right to pat down someone they have stopped under the guise of “ officer safety” ( Terry vs. Ohio) but needs “reasonable suspicion” in order to detain that individual . So you need to connect the dots to a possible crime and not just randomly select those who might look the part . Very nebulous and surely used ( or abused) more than what’s really justified by the letter of the law
I speak as one who was born and raised in Manhattan and then went on to become a Policeman as my community service in the 70s and 80s in Southern California
1
@Mike Patlin
And slavery made rich white people's lives easier, that doesn't mean denying the rights of human beings based on the colour of their skin is a reasonable price to pay, especially if you're not even the one paying the price.
The present Mayor of New York won because he vowed to stop Stop and Frisk. Not only should Bloomberg apologize for Stop and Frisk he owes us an apology for helping our current mayor win.
7
Do I understand this correctly? The Mayor is apologizing for enacting a process that made NYC safer. Not safer for White NYC residents, but every New Yorker.
Some people, probably a significant number of minorities were stopped and frisked, but, released. Did they not also benefit from SaF?
I doubt the good Mayor will get any where near the top 5 positions, but, it won't be because he successfully made NYC safer for everyone.
8
Yes crime it may have become less street crime-prone. So are most dictatorships.
No non-white with any dignity would voluntarily place themselves in a place where they will be automatically stopped and searched on suspicion due to their skin color or nose shape. Nor should anyone with any respect for their fellow man accept that for others.
I for one have put NYC on my no-go list for the past ten years because of this. It may not matter for the undignified and disrespectful, but that city did not get my support precisely because of this policy.
9
Well, he always could insist that it was a right policy. You are not suggesting that he apologies only because he needs the votes, right? Otherwise, why would we need another hypocrite in the WH?
The impact of stop-and-frisk will live for a few more decades. There is nothing Bloomberg can do wishing it will all be forgotten or forgiven. He is going to have to do social service for the rest of his life but not as an elected official.
3
I am sorry he apologized.
We were drowning in guns and crime, and the stop-and-frisk policy had gangs intimidated. Was it discouraging to law-abiding black men? No doubt.
Now we have begun to intimidate the cops and to tell them to ignore certain types of bad and formerly illegal behavior. Quality-of-life crimes abound, we are releasing felons back onto the streets, and those of us who remember the late 1960s are getting a bit of deja vu.
New airport security scanners keep thinking I am hiding something on my person. Twice now I've been pulled aside. I do not like being frisked, but I understand why it needs to happen.
I appreciate what Mike Bloomberg did for New York City and continues to do in regard to gun control, the environment, women's rights, and job creation (yes, for black men); but not for a moment did I think he had a chance to be president.
This apology seals it. Many well say good riddance, of course.
10
Apparently, he is not sure your vote gets him nomination, and he is not sure that black and Latino folks will be so understanding as you
Michael Bloomberg apology and politically convenient and lacks any real sincerity. The only reason he's doing it now is because he knows the policy is indefensible if he wants any support at all from black voters.
It's the perfectly example of a politician sticking is finding up to the winds or voter sentiment and responding in the most advantageous way possible to promote his interest.
4
@Carl Say what you will about President Trump, he would have apologized if he had NYC a better place.
And I doubt he will apologize for making America a better place.
5 years from now. Or, ever.
Apology can be a very cheap trip in my view. I see many times where a person has left heavy tread marks over others and then apologies. The new message is all that matters? Apology does not abolve of or remove all the damage inflicted. Making amends is due in my view. Reforming drunks get it, making amends.
The press particularly routinely inserts the line, ... apologized, and then writes with an all-damage-and-wrongness-forgotten perspective. That is too easy. Repairs are due.
Bloomberg's stop and frisk could well have harmed some people for life. He did much more than accidentally step on a toe. His related apology counts for about nothing in my view. A program of corrective action might show a sincere reversal of view or conduct.
11
"In 88% of the stops, no arrest was made." The converse, that 1 in 12 people had a reason to be arrested (drugs? a weapon?), is a pretty high number, it seems to me. Stop and frisk is a bludgeon, certainly, and deeply offensive to those innocents who were stopped, but the crime numbers indicate that it did have a significant beneficial effect.
9
Except that when we discontinued stop and frisk, crime continued to decrease, not increase.
18
Bloomberg supported this policy for years, and now offers a politically based apology (did he do it BEFORE his anticipated run for President?), and all is forgiven?
Democrats and liberals are desperate.
6
More than anything else, Michael Bloomberg is a mix of numbers, data, and his strong personal opinions. He does not seemed especially concerned about popular opinion beyond his ability to mold it. As mayor of NYC, he knew he could win without the African American vote, no matter how outraged African Americans were over stop and frisk policy. As a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, the opposite is true: there are not enough otherwise socially moderate whites Democrats comfortable with his history of stop and frisk policy to counteract black voters deeply offended by his stance. Given these facts, it is hard to see his apology for supporting stop and frisk as anything but political expediency.
13
I would give Bloomberg the benefit of the doubt, since the statistics over about a decade are in by now and it has turned out that even as the last tool in the tool box, it didn't fix much. He didn't use this policy without consultation, there were many people that were essentially hostages to criminal elements in their own housing complexes and many of them implored him to even take it up a few notches (which he never did). Bottom line, you can look at any one of these candidates and find some dent in their armor, where under today's standards their policies or behaviors from the past aren't in step with current thinking. If they are viable candidates and capable of beating Trump it might be prudent to hold back on the public witch trials, unless saving Trump strategists a lot of time and money shooting down all the Democratic candidates is the aim.
6
Bloomberg apologizing now makes him look like a Mitt Romney, willing to say or do anything to get elected. And it reminds me of Zuckerberg, claiming to care now, glossing over the fact that everyone told him it was wrong literally years ago.
8
To be fair, the UK tried the same thing with its notorious “suss” (suspicion) laws.
When crime is shocking, sometimes we try shocking things that turn out to be a really bad idea, in order to protect the innocent and potential victims. Excuse? No. Just what happens. We learn.
2
Mr. Bloomberg:
You said you're willing to spend any amount of money to ensure Trump is not reelected. Do that. Don't run for president. This belated mea culpa is too obviously a ploy for entering the campaign for the Democratic nominee for president. Don't enter. Decide which of the candidates you want to support and do so. Decide which Senate candidates you want to support and do so. Put aside your ego; do the right thing. Don't run. Support the best of those who are running. Thank you.
21
Too little, too late.
The damage was done, and now we hear he made a mistake? So during the process it was, in his mind, a good thing?
Let’s just think of the plethora of existing federal items he would keep in force.
Since Bush II, the electorate has voted for change, (yes, even Trump), now we have another billionaire unable to think out side his billionaire box.
3
How come these politicians only come forward to apologize when they are running for a new important office?
Why should anyone trust this guy?
21
I may disagree with Trump calling Mr. Bloomberg "Little Michael" (just like I disagree with almost everything Trump does or says), but I wouldn't disagree with Trump or anybody else calling this a little apology.
Uttered on the brink of a last minute entry into the Democratic primary, the apology does little, as the article notes, to help those who were harassed, humiliated, and in many cases probably genuinely traumatized
be the practice.
But this characterization of insufficiency goes not nearly far enough. When you're already in a precarious circumstance, harassment in a significant number of cases will lead to snowballing chain reactions: job applications derailed, high stakes test performance undermined from the anguish and turmoil; humiliated on a date during which one was planning to propose, and the engagement never pursued. These events can be catastrophic in their reverberations. Now Mr. Bloomberg offers an "Oops, I'm so very sorry for my 'mistake."
Not good enough. Too little, way too late.
The fact that he didn't even word the apology in terms approximating these, acknowledging the impact, shows his billions have cloistered his conscience from reality. He is too remote from the people he claims to want to serve. Now as ever.
12
In addition to stop and frisk I am very concerned about Bloomberg's economic policies.
He wants to reduce Social Security and Medicare benefits so he can steal those programs' payroll tax dollars to pay down a debt these programs did not cause.
11
How come no one has pegged Bloomberg as being opportunistic? Look how his wealth increased all the time he was busy being mayor versus the rate it has increased since and you will be left to wonder is there weren't decisions that "fell his way" while in office. I don't want him making more such decisions on a national basis. I doubt his conveniently timed apology to be sincere.
6
Who’s “no one?” You mean “everyone?”
The credibility of this apology ought to be of obvious concern as far as timing relative to Mr Bloomberg’s recently awakened political ambition. Not to say that Mr Bloomberg is not a generally sincere person, but he’s a politician ... which occasionally causes sacrifice of principle for the sake of voter appeal, even with the best of them. It would be interesting for him to document exactly why he now realizes the error of his past on “stop and frisk” as well as what caused him not to realize this then.
As a very content Trump voter who will gladly vote again for him I am thrilled the NYT is attacked the one Dem who could beat Trump.
2
@Reader In Wash, DC
Your post is based on two fallacies:
Michael Bloomberg isn't the only candidate that can be Trump. Polls show that several candidate currently out poll Trump on a head to head basis.
Michael Bloomberg will never defeat Trump because he won't win the Democratic nomination.
It’s so tempting to be cynical — to dismiss apologies for damaging policies and behavior as insincere. I think it’s very important to receive and honor the apologies. We have to acknowledge that we are all shaped by the culture of our time. Today some of the behaviors/attitudes that seemed acceptable from 1980 to 2010 strike us as totally unacceptable. It’s like, as a woman I thought being diminished and intimidated in meetings was just something I had to put up with. I was wrong to put up with it. Today, although some still resort to cowardly tactics, pretty much everyone recognizes it for what it is. That’s new and quite wonderful. Anyway, as far as Mr. Bloomberg is concerned, one doesn’t have to vote for him — but I hope people can appreciate and honor his apology. Because if we can’t accept apologies in good faith we’ll never ever get out of the mess we’re in. Cheers. PS. I’m thinking — Churchill would have a heck of a lot to apologize for. JFK too...
1
This apology is not targeted towards winning the AA votes, but a play for the progressive white votes.
6
A telling feature of Stop and Frisk, as I recall, is that contraband was found on a greater percentage of white people stopped than on minorities, even though whites were stopped in much smaller numbers. And yet the racial profiling, and the program, continued. And the stuff discovered pretty much didn't turn out to make much difference. Mayor Mike, your apology: too little, too late.
BTW you lost me when you allowed peaceful protesters to be arrested en masse at the Republican convention. Sure I'd vote for you if you're the nominee, but I suspect that won't happen.
18
I find it inexcusable that Bloomberg feels he has to apologize for a good program that made New York safer. Many of those frisked had weapons on them.
4
read the article. very few of these stops led to arrests and crime in NYC decrrased AFTER the policy was ended.
@Judy Weller, nope. Weapons were found on a very small percentage of people who were stopped.
Ask yourselves this - Would Bloomberg apologize if he wasn't running for President?
15
My father is a well dressed elderly black man with a noticeable physical disability, he was stopped and frisked no less than 7 times. Your apology means nothing. It is way too little and way too late.
26
That does seem a bit much. In terms of stop and frisk, I am in favor of what Mr. de Blasio is now calling "targeted policing," that is, going after gang members (also known as profiling).
Elderly black gentlemen, though -- one shakes one's head.
I am also getting on in age; but airport security, with its new scanners, keeps nabbing me and the agents keep frisking me. Seems absurd. Of course, there's a psychological difference between a machine's singling one out and a police officer's doing so.
2
@B. So true! I got TSA precheck for me and my family. It’s a totally different experience. You are correct I don’t think anyone minds policy based on actions of subjects and actionable info. But targeting people based on race is less than useless.
1
Too late. Much too late.
Lives were terribly altered. Trust in the American justice system was destroyed.
Hillary paid the price for Bill’s crime bill. Bloomberg needs to realize “sorry” for a “sorry (blank)” policy years after the fact will also have consequences.
Democrats need to understand that if they want to pursue policies that can be used to discriminate, there will be a price to pay. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but someday.
6
Has it ever occurred to anyone that this might be the reason crime rates dropped in NY?
3
Since crime dropped even further when stop and frisk was rolled back, it's pretty hard to make the case that the policy is responsible for any drop in crime.
12
Crime in NYC decreased before, during and after Bloomberg's massive use of stop and frisk. It had no measurable impact on crime in NYC.
Why would he apologize? It worked.
3
His audience seemed to believe him, and I guess I put some evidential weight on the perceptions of the people he was talking to. And while I understand that it's important to take these things with grains of salt, I'm also uncomfortable with the implicit suggestion that his apology was SO obviously self-serving that his black audience was foolish to miss it.
The world is run by corrupt men, mostly white. We can only hope that changes as quickly as possible.
Maybe he should have tried issuing an apology when a presidential run wasn't in question, then he might have been believable.
8
"The world is run by corrupt men, mostly white."
Except in Africa, the Middle East, and China, of course.
Now that he has apologized for stop and frisk, can he also apologize for thanking George W Bush for "leading the global was on terrorism" - leadership that used lies to bring about the deaths of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.
4
Mayor Bloomberg, when you stand in front of a white audience will you say to them "I want to be the President of all Americans. As New York's mayor I made a terrible mistake. It was called stop and frisk. This policy was racially based and aimed at citizens of color. The great majority of those stopped were innocent of any crime and in fact had done nothing suspicious. There is no place for such biased policies in America. White Americans, Black Americans, Brown Americans: We all stand together as brothers and sisters."
7
“I didn’t understand back then the full impact that stops were having on the black and Latino.”
How about the impact it had on the police? What did they learn from these ten years?
3
His apology is absurd. Bloomberg said when he was mayor, that New York City was a luxury item which is exactly how he governed. If you were black, Latino, poor, working class, he could care less about you.
If you want good health care, good education for your children, the last thing in the wide world one would want would be this man as President.
10
Hindsight will always be 20/20 while foresight can never be guaranteed. Would Bloomberg have apologized if he weren't running for another office? On the other hand, how many perfectly perfect candidates are there out there who can definitely defeat Trump? Regardless, Bloomberg's an odds on favorite to support causes he feels are right and necessary for the future of this country and, I hope, would certainly add his influence to any Democratic candidate.
Stop and frisk -- some 780,000 in its last year 2011 -- may be Bloomberg's worst mistake, but I suspect it shares the podium with the utterly undemocratic maneuvering that he and Quinn manipulated to get himself a third term. The voters had made their position clear on term limits twice before and they would reiterate their overwhelming approval of such limits in the exit polls for Bloomberg's third term.
Bloomberg knew he would never get approval through a referendum. He didn't care, and bulldozed his way through the City Council. Quinn, rightfully so, paid a big price for that betrayal of the voters, now it's Bloomberg's turn.
3
I'm sorry, I can't let this slide. Real New Yorkers know why crime is down under de Blasio, it's because the police are fearful of doing their job and are not making arrests. Criminals are walking free and the city is starting to feel like the good old days of the 1970's.
10
as a new yorker i know that this is not true.
I can see this apology being accepted by the older Black church going voters, as they value forgiveness. The younger people may be more suspicious as the the wounds are still fresh. They would not take it as lightly, as they shouldn't. Supporting stop and frisk is not just a character flaw.
I don't quite understand how people can think that Bloomberg is the most viable candidate. If you look at it from a technical sharing of the Dem and GOP votes in the general, well, maybe, but he is nowhere near my first choice, and probably not many other's either. He would need to get over the hump of the Democratic primary, and unless it comes to a second vote and Bloomberg can bring in all his accumulated superdelegate "insiders", then it's highly unlikely he will be the candidate. Do we want a president based on this? I know I know, anything is better than trump...and if by some weird chance he is the candidate, then we will all have to don our Groucho glasses and go vote for him. And this means everyone who who doesn't want another 4 years, minorities included. There is still a ways to go to get an idea how it will play out.
2
There isn’t a reader of the N.Y. Times who hasn’t made a mistake but there are many who haven’t apologized for doing so once recognized. We should accept his apology and move on.
He’s the country’s and the Democratic party’s best and only chance of preventing 4 more years of Donald Trump.
These are historic times for our country and for the world. I’m a lifelong Republican but would vote for Mike in a heartbeat. I can’t say that about many of the other candidates. I’ve never made a political contribution, and even though Mike hardly needs my money, I’m apt to contribute to his campaign.
Think about the endgame.
6
When people sincerely apologize we must forgive and move forward. But that does not mean we should make them president.
9
And "just the right time" also includes the time of the week. I'm not smart enough to explain why this is so, but it seems to me that a Sunday morning is the best time of week to maximize positive press coverage and minimize negative coverage. I'm not being cynical, just noting that unlike the current guy in the White House Mayor Bloomberg is a very sharp guy who gets these things right, which is why he will be a very effective candidate and maybe a very effective president.
And of course he also aced the test on the right setting and audience--a giant mainly African-American church in his own New York City. So this was the exact opposite of trying to address an important issue by sending out a tweet. Instead, he bravely got up before a potentially hostile audience--again, something our current president NEVER does. And it seems to have worked.
So last year ending stop and frisk leads to more minority deaths. This year he apologizes for what, minimizing black and minority deaths?
He’s selling you the Brooklyn Bridge.
2
Jesus my accept his confession but few mortals will do the same. Will we go on to confess to his abject neglect of public housing, the rising number of poor people during his administration and his disrespectful remarks about women?
3
While living in Berkeley back in the early 1970's, my wife and I (Caucasians) had a number of African American acquaintances in the Bay Area, including members of the Black Panthers. Then came the "Zebra" racially motivated, random murders & related attacks, committed by a group of Black Muslim serial killers in San Francisco, from October 1973 to April 1974. These murderers killed fifteen people and wounded eight others; all of the victims were white.
The murders caused widespread panic in San Francisco. In an attempt to slow the death rate and catch the perpetrators, law agencies around the Bay Area initiated "stop and frisk" rules targeting African Americans driving at night.
My wife and I, as whites, took comfort in the policy at the time. Our black acquaintances did not. We argued the causes and effects for many months. In the end, we went our separate ways. The apprehension of the murderers was caused by one of the perpetrators going to the police. The stop and frisk policy had zero success, except as a way to alienate a class of citizens, as it did for us, and our black friends.
1
Glad he is apologizing, but it rings a little hollow at this point.
Too little too late.
8
I would say this is 50% altruism, 50% self-serving. It's hard to fess up poor judgement even a decade after the fact, but it's easy when you have an ax to grind.
1
As a gay man, I never believed him when pitched woo to the gay community to gain our votes and I never supported him. I encouraged my African American friends to support his opponent when he paid off the city council to run a third term. Supporting this man for president is absurd. He will use any means to get what he wants. His record on women is as bad or worse than that with stop and frisk. He characterized the diverse members of the TWU as thugs. People don’t change that much. Do we need another Trump with a different American dialect? Not a good choice.
8
Now, all you folks who claim to be Democrats and have spent all your time since Bloomberg announced minimizing or defending stop and frisk, what do you have to say for yourselves?
You have no principles. Bloomberg doesn't either. He's a predator like all billionaires.
2
Stop, question and frisk is portrayed as racist because most of the persons stopped, questioned and sometimes frisked were black or latino.
Well, that's where the crime was, and some statistics show that the stopping was proportionately LESS against black and latinos than others after taking into account the actual crime distribution.
And the neighborhoods that benefited most from SQF and the miraculous drop in crime were the predominantly black and latino neighborhoods. Ms. Gay just skips over that part of the story. You can have some grievance, but where's the thanks?
---
The real racism will be seen as Bloomberg runs - he will be battling this country's ongoing bigotry against Jews. On top of that, he's single, another focus of prejudice.
I hope he makes it. He will be one of the greatest Presidents ever -- smart, knowledgeable, experienced, practical, uncorruptable, superbly organized and with a proven track record of outstanding success as a governmental and political chief executive (in the greatest and most diverse City in human history) and as the creator and CEO of a business from nothing to billions.
-- Who else even comes close?
7
And what has he done to undo the damage he so throughly endorsed? Did he set up a multimillion dollar fund help those targeted and ground up in the justice system.
7
I have been stopped and frisked by the police three times, and once was even handcuffed in a case of mistaken identity. In all cases, I was released with an apology, because I had no contraband on me nor an unlicensed weapon. Guess what? I wasn't humiliated. The police have a very hard job, especially in those sectors of geography where crime rates and violent crime rates are 10 times above average, and where a certain 3% of the overall population is committing 50% of the crime. Yes, stop-and-frisk was overused. But it is a very useful tool, and if you want to get unlicensed handguns off the street, it's one of the best.
151
@Snowball You may well have been treated differently than others, first of all. Have you ever looked into others' interactions?
Second, areas that are over-policed will have higher crime statistics because in neighborhoods where residents have more money and better connections, certain kinds of infractions are dismissed or winked at.
Not to mention that some officers (think LA's Rampart division or Ferguson) fabricate evidence to keep their numbers high or create revenue by fining citizens who can least afford to defend themselves in court.
It would really help if people sought more information in addition to their anecdotes and preconceptions.
50
@Snowball
It may not have humiliated you but it has to other people. It was practiced on a racial basis so if it doesn't bother you so be it. Our current mayor won because he promised to stop it. Stop and Frisk left a bad taste in many New Yorkers.
42
@Snowball Actually, no, it didn't get many guns off the streets. Guns were found in 0.2% of the stops.
The sister policy of Rudy's Bloomberg continued, arresting for misdemeanor offenses rather than giving out tickets, destroyed the lives of 10s of 1000s of young people. An interesting side effect of 20 years of that is all the white folks who now break every single rule on the streets and in the subways. Now we're starting to hand out tickets again and I've actually seen white folks get them. Imagine that.
32
"(I) wish Michael Bloomberg, billionaire alumnus and generous benefactor of Johns Hopkins University, would invest one more billion in Baltimore. Instead of spending it on a presidential campaign, he could buy, renovate and sell at affordable cost up to 10,000 vacant houses and give the city a huge boost."
--- Columnist Dan Rodricks writing in the Baltimore Sun, 11/15/10
3
--- Columnist Dan Rodricks writing in the Baltimore Sun, 11/15/19
1
Short billionaire misogynist Mike Bloomberg will *never* be president, but it's good to see that his lust for power and money was strong enough to get him to apologize for his racist stop-and-frisk policies. He used to be the mayor of NYC. Now he is just sorry, and I for one accept his apology. Now he can go away.
3
@Kenzi would you like him if he were tall? Let's not turn into Trump.
We are better; we must be better.
Or would you insult the height of MLK?
3
White woman from Australia here:While I do think some kind of reflection and recognition of past terrible judgement is important; I really wish he would have done it as an ordinary private citizen with nothing to gain.
I have not experienced the consequences of his policies personally, but I can't imagine any speech can even begin to mitigate the damage his policies caused in poor and minority communities.
2
Re-read Bloomberg's exact words and ask yourself if his potential Republican opponent would utter anything remotely resembling them. Ever.
The policy was inexcusable, but then so is his potential opponent. Assuming Bloomberg's remarks are sincere (time and his future actions will clarify his motives), which is worse: a man who may be sincerely remorseful for a mistake made, and says so, or a man who believes he makes no mistakes ever, and says so...repeatedly.
5
I was going to support him until he apologized.
Stop and Frisk worked. Now I am searching for someone to support.
5
Evidence? Evidence currently available to the majority of us says otherwise.
3
Convenient timing by Bloomberg.
2
20 years too late is not right on time.
7
How incredibly insincere. Since he’s handing out little-too-laters, maybe he could apologize to the teachers he berated and disparaged for so many years. And how about an apology for the multiple messes he created in public education. So many reasons to NOT support this man.
6
Purity tests are going to give us four more years of the tangerine pustule.
Is Bloomberg perfect? Of course not.
Is he better than the throbbing blister currently occupying the Oval Office? Ummm, yeah.
Personally, I'm not thrilled with any Dem candidate, but I absolutely will pull the lever for whoever gets the nod. Considering the speed of Climate Change, it really is a matter of life and death.
Please let's all keep that in mind.
9
His statement is tainted by expediency.
2
A few comments here showcase the vast gulf of experience between poor black Americans and the affluent white readers of the NYT. An experience the blacks know to be fraught with extreme personal danger, the whites take to be trivial or even benign. You would think the whites could figure out that those must be systematically different experiences, distinguished by different police conduct.
6
So all black readers of the Times are poor and all its white readers rich? It is not possible that some blacks have a lot more money than some whites? Or even many whites?
I see.
Bloomberg is self-serving. That alone should disqualify him, and make his "apology" moot.
2
Michael Bloomberg is very sorry that he treated the Black community of the City of New York like dirt. The reason he is very very sorry is because he did not realize at the time that he would need the support of that community that he demonized to get something he genuinely wants which is to be President.Now he understands that and so NOW he is sorry indeed very sorry. He (Bloomberg) definitely would NOT be sorry if he did not want to be President or if he did not need substantial Black voter support in order to become the President. As such this is a really really genuine and heartfelt apology to all the African Americans whom he deprived of their dignity humanity and legal Constitutional rights.If you believe him(Bloomberg) I have a bridge to sell you for a really really good price. No it is not in Brooklyn. I am from Maryland so that bridge runs across the Chesapeake bay. The views are spectacular. At this time I do OWN said bridge. You do believe me right? If you believe this "apology" of Michael Bloomberg you will obviously believe anything.
3
An unrepentant Michael Bloomberg declared that “stop-and-frisk” was the right policy at the time a week ago. This morning’s speech is expedient and cynical. “Stop-and-frisk” was a precursor to Stephen Miller’s immigrant racialization, child caging and family separation that qualifies as “crimes against humanity”. Bloomberg’s silence is implicit acquiescence.
On the eve of the ACA, Bloomberg closed and tore down Greenwich Village’s St Vincent’s Hospital, the “poor people’s hospital,” to make way for a luxury tower: the penthouse went for $50M. Other NYC developer pals got rich by laundering dirty money from foreign wealthy who purchased luxury apartments - 30% are unoccupied. Yet, there’s a shortage of affordable housing. Consistent with cleansing Manhattan of working families. No wonder he left behind the most segregated public school system in the country!!!
Bloomberg attacked Democracy by forcing an illegal third term against NYC’s two-term Mayoral limit. A registered Democrat, Republican, Independent and back again; Bloomberg’s neither a Democrat, nor guardian of democracy. Americans don’t want his money or presence.
9
Bloomberg had years to apologize. Unseemly, self-serving and disingenuous to apologize now!!!!
Same as Biden waiting all those years. Never apologizing until, oh I get it, he runs for President.
3
Bloomberg would be a far better president than Trump.That is obvious. Almost anyone would be better than Trump.However his apology to the Black community reeks of political opportunism and seems too little too late. That does not mean he could not get the nomination and win the election. Black Americans like most Americans (except for Trump’s rally goers) are appalled and embarrassed by Trump’s corruption of the White House. Voters of all races and religions and varied countries of origin will say loudly to Trump. Enough! Out! And will shout together. Vote him out!
Money can’t buy forgiveness, but an opportunistic half hearted apology fir political expediency will gain him the votes of black folk?
What kind of crazy world are we living in?
Bloomberg apologizes because he needed to not that he genuinely feels remorse, anyone who believes different, I have a bridge to sell you.
1
trump had a stop and frisk policy for women he craved.
4
The statistic of 88% of stop & frisk incidents resulted in no arrest is a staggering figure. Considering that the 4th amendment of the Constitution states clearly that the police can't conduct searches without probable cause or a search warrant, yet NYC police routinely targeted people of color, primarily using racial profiling as their justification. The fact that a billionaire would become mayor and endorse this type of crime fighting technique is appalling and clearly provides a glimpse into how he would govern if elected President.
Under Bloomberg's reign as mayor, NC increasingly became stereotyped as a playground for the rich. Gentrification was glorified, much like the current Opportunity Zones which allow the wealthy developers to reap billions while the former residents are priced out of their own neighborhoods.
Income inequality flourished under Bloomberg as he took a personal interest in redeveloping NYC allowing wealthy homeowner's properties to skyrocket in value while neglecting the poor & homeless. In fact, homelessness spiked during his tenure. Yet now he wants to ride into the pres. race on a white horse believing that simple apologies will pacify his detractors. I predict that Dems will reject his willingness to use part of his fortune to buy the race & instead be steadfast in supporting Democrats who speak about reducing income inequality & express a willingness to rewrite the current tax system which heavily favors billionaires like Bloomberg.
4
@Dunca
OK - now please discuss the other 12%.
1
@znlgznlg - According to Wikipedia, stop & frisk was part of the NYC Broken Windows strategies belief that cleaning up neighborhoods & focusing on low level criminals would prevent more serious crimes from occurring. So, many of the 12% arrests were for low level crimes like urinating in public, public drinking or smoking marijuana, fare evasion, graffiti & "squeegee men" or beggars. If there was a weapon found, compare that to stopping & frisking men in open carry states like Texas & it is probable that more than 12% would be carrying a weapon although many would argue they were only defending themselves or "stand your ground" rather than planning a murder or robbery. In fact, the Washington Post fact-checkers, the claim that stop & frisk lowered the NYC crime rate is unsubstantiated. A 2016 study by Jeffrey Fagan of Columbia University concluded that leaving crime reduction up to police officer's hunches has almost no effect on crime rates. Another study found that neighborhoods in which stop & frisk techniques were utilized experienced lower property rates as a result. One 2017 study did find a modest decrease in the crime rate although warned of drawing too much of a causal relationship between the policy and the overall reduction of crime.
Therefore, it's likely that racial profiling led to increasing alienation between the communities of color & their more affluent neighbors in other parts of the city thus serving to exacerbate existing tensions rather than unity.
1
Michael Bloomberg wasn’t perfect, but thank God he also wasn’t Rudolph Giuliani to four years in New York and beyond has been a diabolical presence first in New York, and now in national politics. The fact that Michael Bloomberg is willing to apologize sincerely for a mistake made is an improvement over characters like Trump and Giuliani who have never in their lives publicly apologized for anything.
Whether Bloomberg can win the nomination is another story altogether but he can actually help by continuing to expose Donald Trump and his lapdogs .
3
Dear Mara Gay,
I understand your skepticism regarding Mr Bloomberg's apology re: stop & frisk, and you state: "Money can’t buy the good will of a crucial Democratic constituency, black voters, ahead of likely presidential bid."
Unfortunately, you did not refer to the You-Tube video of Bloomberg's apology. It is a must see. To cynics this might appear a would-be candidate's pre-campaign event. But when you watch closely, even critically, Bloomberg offered words of apology that appeared sincere and were appreciated by so many, notably the women, in the audience; some men looked more skeptical. There was much applause, several times, when Bloomberg stood by his initiatives against the NRA, the gun violence in the nation and his many programs to help communities. He also referred to the strong reduction of stop&frisk in the waning years of being mayor, down to a stunning 94% reduction. Did you know that? He gave a lot of money to anti-gun candidates and very much helped the Dems to win the house in 2018.
Bloomberg is a stark (and welcome) contrast to the failing and corrupt occupier of the WH. I wish Bloomberg good luck not only winning over the congregation of the CCC church in Brooklyn, but many in this country who want a decent, honest, and trustworthy leader to replace the present disgrace in the highest place.
Hopefully you'll bring a follow up re: the audience appreciating the apology and applauding so many of Bloomberg's key initiatives and appreciation a sincere person
5
There are often those people who argue 'hey, stop and frisk might not be pleasant or necessarily fair to those who are totally innocent of any wrongdoing...but if they've nothing to be guilty about then what's the big deal anyway?...and, at least stop and frisk has helped to catch lots of people who WERE found to have an illegal weapon...or who WERE (later) found to have had a warrant out for their arrest etc. So I'm all for it.'
You hear this refrain, often from those groups of people who are not typically affected by stop & frisk. To which I'd say, maybe all middle-aged high-income white men should have their private bank accounts, and the offices of their accountants/lawyers randomly 'frisked' by the FBI, to check for potential white collar crime cover-ups. Maybe the offices of all banking and finance companies should be subject to random, UNANNOUNCED visits by industry regulators, to be sure everything they are doing is above board.
10
perhaps that would be good policy indeed. This argument against privacy laws- they’re not needed if you don’t break the law and just behave like a decent person- is valid. Part of the reason why there is such widespread support for laws protecting privacy is the sheer number of people who commit petty crimes (like tax evasion) and are in fact monsters hiding behind a respectable facade.
Obviously there is the question, why should one population be exposed through stop and frisk while the rest of the city can break laws willy-nilly? Maybe it should have been city-wide and encompassed many other areas of crime (such as white-collar)
He’s right. He can’t change history. He must live with it. Stop and Frisk is Bloomberg’s legacy. Regardless.
6
I can understand the logic.
So it was an unintended consequence. And it may also have had some life-saving effects.
Apology Comes Way Too Late.
7
There's 'stop and frisk' and there's racial profiling. If the 'stop and frisk' numbers reflected the overall demographics of the areas then that's one thing. If in a neighborhood where Blacks and Hispanics made up 20% of the population but 80% of the 'stop and frisks' then that is simply wrong. However, when Blacks and Hispanics in certain areas are responsible for 80% of the crime, then how does a police officer compute that into the Constitution.
3
I think Bloomberg had/has the best intentions when it comes to public service, though is tone deaf when it comes to race and socio-economic status. I was grateful that he ended smoking in restaurants and made the public more aware of nutrition. What he didn't get right was his preference for charter schools as well as his mixing failing schools with better schools in the same building (again, with the good intention of not shutting down schools). Education and safety don't benefit from a bandaid approach, but from an overhaul based on the community needs. It seems he wanted to better serve NYers, but never really trusted communities to know what would work. Please let qualified individuals run and help us get the word out.
2
The good news to me is that in the last 24 hours Bloomberg has admitted he is wrong more times than Trump has in his entire life. The ability to admit you are wrong is a critical life skill that I teach my children and Trump's inability to do so is one of the greatest of my many issues with him.
That being said, as a Democrat who actually thought stop and frisk was a good idea, I actually don't like that Bloomberg caved on this. Guess what - the majority of crimes happened in neighborhoods that had lots of minority residences. Turning around the cited statistic, it isn't that 88% of the stops didn't end up in arrests, it is that 12% did - that is actually pretty impressive to me. And who knows how many crimes this deterred.
Crime stats under deBlasio are absolutely meaningless because many ordinary "crimes" are being completely ignored (in an over-reaction to people thinking that Bloomberg over-policed). So who knows if crime really is down now or not.
This apology might help Bloomberg a bit in the primary, but it could actually end up hurting him in the general election. And I have no idea why he felt the need to seek Sharpton's approval - he has been irrelevant for years.
4
@NYC BD - It depends on what type of crimes are being investigated. Are they low level crimes of carrying small amounts of illegal drugs or much more serious type including carrying weapons? It would've been interesting if Bloomberg extended his crime fighting passion with open up similar stop & frisk investigation into white collar crimes starting with investigating NYC real estate developers like Donald Trump who had shady lawyers like Michael Cohen & connections to mob bosses. If he approached white collar crimes in NYC with the same passion as those targeting minority & low income neighborhoods, he probably could've stopped the Wall Street crimes that led up to the 2009 crash although instead chose to focus on the inner city racial profiling techniques that would be easy for police to bully around since they couldn't afford lawyers like Michael Cohen to defend their clients & potentially sue NYC for breaking the 4th amendment of the Constitution, namely illegal search & seizures without a warrant or probable cause.
2
Surely, the “right time” would have been years ago. Waiting until a presidential campaign is clearly a political ploy and not a personal conviction.
6
Kind of like Warren refusing to endorse the progressive platform last election, but she’s all about it now, when it suits her, personally...?
3
I wonder when this convenient epiphany happened to him?
How long ago did it occur to Mayor Bloomberg that the Stop and Frisk policy was wrong?
Was it, as I suspect, fairly recently - perhaps to coincide with his decision to run for President?
11
"I didn’t understand back then, the full impact that stops were having on the black and Latino communities.”
But he didn't, and shouldn't, apologize for instituting the policy in the first place. It was motivated by the sincere desire to bring down the crime rate, and by a genuine belief that it would, and by not anticipating that it would have a terrible impact on the black and Latino communities. I can't blame him for attributing the drop in crime to the policy, given that it did, in fact, drop. Nor can I blame him for believing it was worth the price to save lives. It's only with years of hindsight that it becomes apparent that the crime rate is dropping even without stop-and-frisk. And even so, it's far from clear that a drop in an already low crime rate is caused by the same things that dropped a high crime rate. We may never know whether stop-and-frisk contributed in a very significant way to reduction in the crime of those times, especially in the black and Latino communities, and one must weigh the high cost to those communities against that. It's nice that he apologizes for underestimating that high cost, but it should be recognized that his bottom-line motivation was to help those very communities.
2
Bloomberg at least apologized even though a bit late. Better late than never. If Governor Matt of Kentucky had apologized well in advance of the election to the teachers he offended he would not have learned the lesson from the teachers the hard way from loosing an election by a narrow margin. What is the moral of the lesson for all politicians? Don't mend fences after you have lost the election do it before. When Albert Gore lost the 2000 presidential election he said I will have to mend some fences in his home state of Tennessee which he lost in the 2000 presidential election.
That said what difference will it make now that Bloomberg is apologizing after the harm is done? Not much especially after Deval Patrick , an authentic African American has jumped in the race and will most likely be endorsed by his buddy Barack Obama.
1
Stop and frisk cut the homicide rate to a fraction of its former value. It also reduced the rate of other street crimes by large factors. The streets of New York are safe again.
We owe Bloomberg (and his entire police force) a debt.
5
research has demonstrated that there is NO correlation btwn stop-and-frisk and the decline in the murder rate which has been driven by other factors.
2
Yes, Bloomberg did not show the greatest sensitivity all the time.
Still, it must be noted that the homicide rate in New York City went down 40% during his tenure, even as it shot up in Chicago and other major cities.
The chief beneficiary, or in other words, the group that saw the most lives saved during that period? African-Americans.
5
The timing shows this to be an insincere PR move for political gain. Nobody will vote for him, we know it is selfishly motivated...he just wants to block a tax on billionaires.
9
Mara could have used this occasion to be a bit preachy. Not a bad idea to tell a guy like Bloomberg that any legislation that is designed for selective enforcement greatly advances racial profiling. There are many rules which are probably not written specifically for racial profiling like the ability of police to stop motorists for faulty tail lights, but are routinely used to target the disliked. But stop and frisk was deliberately made to target minorities. People could not be arrested for possessing marijuana but only for publicly displaying it. Stop and Frisk required those stopped to empty their pockets and then they were arrested for public display of marijuana. One has to be deeply invested in racial profliing to support something like stop and frisk. Thats who Bloomberg is.
Do you submit to being frisked at the airport? Of course you do. That's what is needed when you must balance public safety with public freedom. It's a consequence of what happens when the lawless attempt to overtake the lawful.
Mayor Bloomberg did what he had to do at the time. And guess what? Crime fell, not just a little, not by some barely perceptible statistical amount, but precipitously. NYC is a safe place today because of stop and frisk. Had Chicago or Baltimore taken similar steps they would be far safer cities than they are today. But they didn't and you can see, plain as day, the result.
Ms Gay gets to write what she does because of Mr. Bloomberg's policy of stop and frisk. She won't ever say it, but I will:
Thank you, Thank you, Mr. Bloomberg.
8
@Ok Joe
Many years ago soon after the Lockerbie bombing, I was going through a security checkpoint at Heathrow airport. I was singled out for extra questioning and a thorough pat-down.
At first I was surprised and a little insulted since I was an American citizen with an unremarkable passport, and I was traveling on business with my colleagues.
Then it occurred to me that my Irish last name and freckled face made me a potential IRA member.
I was annoyed and a bit angry and embarrassed, but I understood the Brits’ concern. I was actually glad they were so being so diligent to ensure our safe flight. I got over it pretty quickly and went on with my trip.
No hard feelings and no scars. And no apology needed. Just a tale from the road. Cheers!
3
Bloomberg should be disqualified for his poor timing, if nothing else. On the eve of having to corner and reach into the pockets of countless "blue" urbanites, he apologizes for the practice
1
I want a Democratic president in 2020. The rest of the field of current candidates don’t have the ability to win against Trump. Michael Bloomberg does have that ability.
He’s now acknowledged that he was wrong about stop and frisk. Is it sincere? I don’t know.
I agree with Bloomberg on most everything else.
Here’s what I do know: If Trump wins in 2020, everything terrible that he has accomplished will continue. He will replace RBG on the Supreme Court and every federal judge he can. He will trash the EPA, our immigration laws and on and on.
To my fellow Democrats, if you believe the “perfect,” progressive candidate is going to win against Trump because he’s a terrible human being - get ready for 4 more years of despicable behavior and policies under President Trump.
4
Michael Bloomberg is just a sock puppet for the financial industry and the super wealthy. Were he to be nominated he'd function as a huge voter suppression tool to keep minority voters of all kinds from turning out to vote because they just can't bring themselves to care about an old white billionaire. This is not the path to defeating Trump, but it is a reasonable campaign to maintain the general status quo.
8
Bloomberg bought into the reefer madness panic demanded by the 1990s Gingrich-Lott-Barr cabal and enabled by Bill Clinton and Joe Biden. "Saving lives" by arresting someone for a blunt in the pocket. Making them wait three days in jail just to be arraigned.
Bob Barr jumped ship on that lost cause and became a lobbyist for legalizing marijuana after he left Congress.
Bloomberg's apology will not sit with me unless he stands for federal legalization too.
1
Last year he defended that racist and reprehensible policy, now just prior to announcing a run for President he has an epiphany, it was wrong? It might have been easier to accept that apology had it come a year ago, but today it is insulting and disingenuous.
3
"I didn’t understand back then, the full impact that stops were having on the black and Latino communities.”
Well then, you should have read one of the thousands of researched news articles detailing the exact impact of stop and frisk (SaF) on minority communities when you were in office.
Personally, I think that SaF probably had a net benefit for all New Yorkers, and I could support Bloomberg's willingness to try a policy to make the city safer even if it was unpopular.
What I can't support is a person who was either willfully detached from what was happening in his city or is willing to straight up lie to black and Latino people just so he can be President.
We already have a President who is willing to tell outrageous lies to win elections. We don't need another one.
2
"Just the right time"? How gullible can the voters be? He had 6 years since being Mayor to express remorse. That he does it now when launching a bid for the presidency shows the insincerity of it all.
2
He's sincere about not wanting Elizabeth Warren to tax his wealth.
The apology? That's just political expediency in pursuit of avoiding the wealth tax.
11
I thought that, overall, Bloomberg was a very good mayor but I don't think he has any chance of being the Democratic nominee for President. However, he has the opportunity to affect the race by donating his 'campaign funds' to any moderate Dem not named Biden. With his help our 'national nightmare' will be over and isn't that what it's all about?
3
Who are these ‘moderates’ you feel are so important? The largest voting block in the country is Millennials and Independents. We want Bernie. He’s the only one who has never stopped fighting for the same great platform for decades. Bernie’s the leader who understands the absolute urgency of climate change, the destruction of not investing in the next generation, of only the rich being able to afford college. The insanity of going bankrupt because you got sick. This isn’t ‘purity’. It’s trustworthy. It’s leadership. It’s integrity. It’s how to build a civil, just and sustainable country. (It’s not just adopting a platform when it will win him votes, like Warren, et al.)
1
If he runs for the Democratic nomination, he'll be the best candidate in the bunch. By far. President Obama made the point that you can go through anyone's past and find a position to critique and pick apart. Bloomberg is no exception. But he was perhaps the best Mayor I've ever experienced, even if he wasn't perfect, and governing New York is no cake walk. We should think less about perfection and more about putting a candidate on the ticket who will beat Trump and then govern well.
4
Best candidate for whom? Don’t you think the ruling class in this country already have enough power? They need even more?
12
Maybe everybody should run for President. It seems to have this cathartic effect on the soul.
Then again, maybe some thoughtful introspection ought to be possible long before tossing a hat into the ring. That would be a quality to look for in a presidential candidate.
2
Gee, what the lure of the White House will do to make Bloomberg reconsider his actions. Now if he just rethinks his boorish remarks about women, and then goes on to support taxes on the wealthy along the lines that Elizabeth Warren is suggesting, oh and Medicare for all, we might have a candidate we can all get behind. Oh, whoops, at least one more thing... apologies to the people who were rounded up and incarcerated for protesting the Republican convention oh these many years! It takes hard work to molt from an autocrat with some good ideas to a democrat.
3
The US Supreme Court ruled more than five decades ago that stop and frisk by police is constitutionally permissible. The Court succinctly stated the basis of suspicion that is required for the initial stop. Sadly, politicians appear to have no understanding of the law.
1
Didn't Stop and Frisk result in the plummeting of the crime rate? Those who were stopped and frisked and were not engaged in any wrong doing do absolutely deserve apologies but this was a price that was paid to get the crime rate down from which everyone benefitted.
If I was stopped and frisked I wouldn't care.
3
I’m to be presumed to be a criminal and can be stopped and frisked anytime? That isn’t our constitution. Moreover, it was a regression to the police forces that were designed to keep black and brown people “in line.”
Each person should go do their own homework on this issue.There NEVER was a reason for this policy other than systemic racism. The costs so far outweighed the very limited benefits.
Stop & Frisk resulted in numerous black and brown men’s lives ruined for possessing a joint in their pocket or other minor infractions that white people avoided because they weren’t stopped.
It was a huge waste of dollars and resources. It didn’t reduce crime. And somehow the 4th amendment against illegal search and seizure becomes the forgotten amendment. If white men were being stopped and frisked at the same rate conservatives would demand their constitutional right to equal protection under the law be honored. That’s why we can’t go after white supremacists.
You see these types of public policies all the time. A small infraction for a poor person derails a persons entire life, while most white people don’t have the law imposed against them in the first place.
This intentional policy was about criminalizing poverty and melanin. Remember that slavery, Jim Crow, redlining were all LEGAL. So the people who inflicted such harm were never charged with “crimes.”
Pay attention to what you are paying attention.
2
Just like Joe Biden's "apology" for his support of the invasion and occupation of Iraq and like Hillary Clinton's before him, Bloomberg's apology -- though welcomed, I'm sure -- does not show the kind of leadership the nation needs.
I'd rather vote for someone who thinks through the ramifications of what they are proposing and gets it right the first time. Not after so many lives have been affected.
3
OH....PLEASE stop with the apologies. Bloomberg, you did the right thing at the right time. End of story.
5
To those of you who say he did a good job: please consider the amount of abuse he’s expecting a group of people to absorb to make him, (an obscenely wealthy man, who is mentally ill* enough to think he actually .deserves. that much money), look good. (*mentally ill need help, not more power over us or our future)
3
All this saintly righteousness. Watch out for election day backlash, folks. A second Trump term is too frightening to consider.
1
Bloomberg will forever be tarnished with an unfair, ill-timed racially motivated policy that perpetuated awful stereotypes and that catered to the whims of inherent police racism. This is a permanent stain on him, New York and those New Yorkers who supported this nasty official policy.
4
The rich only apologize when they want something and once they get it, suffer from amnesia.
9
Gosh. How very reflective -- the years he spent in silence really speaks to the degree of soul searching he went through.
Please don't see this as a politically expedient, empty gesture designed to further his efforts to purchase the presidency. It's nothing of the sort.
Sincere? Yeah, he sincerely wants to be President. But he was strongly defending stop and frisk just a year ago. What happened in the ensuing year? Elizabeth Warren threatened to tax his billions.
Political expediency meet greed.
I'm sure he's sincere about not wanting that wealth tax.
8
I am and have been a big Bloomberg fan and have wanted him to run. He is the best bet to remove the Trump sulfur odor from the White House.
The "stop and frisk" policy was probably 1) effective at lowering crime 2) unfair to citizens in areas of crime concentration 3) resulted in reduction of loss of lives in those areas.
Somehow those who argue this issue from both sides refuse to accept that all three claims could be true at the same time. It vividly demonstrates human inability at cognitive acceptance of a position with conflicting elements.
Assuming that all three claims are , in fact, true. the harder question is this - was the reduction of harm resulting from this policy offset by harm which it caused to people who were treated unfairly. I think it's fair to say that we can't measure this objectively.
If Bloomberg made an intellectual and moral transition from a position that the reduction of harm caused by the policy exceeded harm caused by the unfair treatment of citizens to position that it did not, you have to respect it.
Because, unlike actions and positions taken by Trump, this one is hard and not black and white.
4
@Yuri Vizitei
The empirical evidence suggests that stop and frisk did almost nothing to lower crime. Nine out of 10 of the people stopped had done nothing wrong. Of the 10% or so who had done something wrong, the vast majority had committed extremely minor offences such as riding their bicycles on the sidewalk.
This was unnecessary harassment of black and brown people.
7
@617to416 I think it's pointless to argue this position in the comment section. Let's just say there are people of good will who are on both sides of this argument. And accusing Bloomberg of racism based on this policy is not warranted.
The main fact today is that he is best positioned to take down Trump. In my opinion, today that is good enough.
1
It's good to recognise one's past mistakes.
It is also important to recognise the mistakes one might be making right now.
Politicians of 65+ years of age have had their day in the political sun. Their job should be using their experience and wisdom to groom the next generation for prime roles.
The Presidency is the toughest most demanding job on Earth, if you take it seriously.
The Senate and House of Representatives should be the training ground for aspiring candidates who should be in their prime when they seek the Presidency.
If Bloomberg is really serious about making a difference then he should consult with all the ageing Democratic dinosaurs and get them to quit the presidential race as should he.
They collectively should throw their support wholeheartedly behind the next generation and especially those who have viable policy platforms and the personal qualities that mean they are capable of defeating Trump.
We need a new Barack Obama to ascend to the US Presidency.
Not someone who may be just a couple of years away from the pearly gates.
4
While inner reflection, years later when it does no good for the victims, yet will benefit solely the apologizer, rings hollow when you are now asking for the victimized communities votes.
4
Since when does *apologizing* for a policy have any value? A policy is planned, studied, and - in this case - defended with ferocity against repeated complaints and criticisms.
Bloomberg once again demonstrates that he has neither understanding of, nor respect for, governance.
6
Sure it's politically expedient and even if sincere, there's an element of "sorry I did this, because it's sure getting in the way of a presidential run, and now I see the light." But, did our current president ever apologize for pushing the birther sham? Or for anything else either? I don't know if Bloomberg has a shot at the nomination, but I don't see the current Democratic frontrunners having much of a shot at the general election.
Biden, ten years younger would be fine, but he seems ready to physically sputter out. So, if Bloomberg can at least make a strong case for rallying centrists, maybe Klobuchar or Bennett can step up. Mayor Pete's helpful that way as well, but I think he's at best VP material this time around.
When and if the number of shootings and murders rise so too will stop and frisk return. The left leaves out how from the 60s until the late 90s gun violence was rising all across the country. There were days when one could not go into Central Park or Washington Square Park. It dropped, continued to fall a great deal under Mayor Bloomberg. It has continued to fall under Mayor DeBlasio. Does anyone know why? If the police cannot really explain why and if drugs return and then murders I wonder how patient the majority will be.
5
@Daniel A. Greenbaum Funny how how certain types of crime follow economic despair. Bloomberg could have used the political leverage his fortune affords to help the most vulnerable but he chose to push them up against the wall instead.
13
@Milo Bloomberg based continued what Koch Dinkins, and Giuliani had done before. The City was seen as out of control. People were leaving the City in droves in part because it was believed it to be dangerous. It is not seen that way any more. In many ways thanks to Bloomberg.
1
Some whom have studied extensively the drop in crime posit two theories.
1. Reducing the amount of heavy minerals/metals in paints and gasoline—especially lead—seems to have made the entire population less violent.
2. Birth control & Roe v. Wade led to women being able to terminate unwanted pregnancies. Fewer unwanted, uncared for children to be abandoned and/or exploited by society simply were not born.
It wasn’t the draconian “stop and frisk” or “broken windows” laws that brought down the crime rate. It was improved access to a legal standard of reproductive healthcare and improved access for all people to living without heavy lead.
Anyone who supports Stop and Frisk supports the denial of constitutional rights to our black and brown citizens. Ever notice that the 2nd amendment has been distilled down to “the right to bear arms will not be infringed” and white men feel they have the right to threaten politicians who might demand background checks, yet stop and frisk was still not deemed to be “unreasonable search and seizure” even though the language of the 4th clearly states that we have the right to be secure in our persons? Are we secure in our persons if the police can stop us at anytime and demand to search us without our having broken any law or doing anything other than existing in a brown skin?
Stop and frisk was just another fetid white supremacist public policy that demanded black and brown peopled DESERVED to be treated as criminals.
Since I'm guessing most don't know specifically what stop and frisk allows or not, here is a brief explanation from another article in today's NYT:
"Stop-and-frisk is a crime-prevention strategy that had been a staple of policing in the United States for more than 30 years before Mr. Bloomberg took office. It allows police officers to detain someone for questioning on the street, in public housing projects or in private buildings where landlords request police patrols.
Officers are required to have reasonable belief that the person is, has been or is about to be involved in a crime. If police officers believe the detainee is armed, an officer can conduct a frisk by passing his hands over the person’s outer garments."
Whether you agree with the use of this policy or not, believe it is racist or not, believe it should be legal or not, let's face simple facts. The main reason (not saying it's the only) the policy affected more blacks and Latinos is because the cops targeted higher-crime areas with this policy, which certainly makes sense.
Again, facts: There are a higher percentage of blacks and Latinos relative to whites in these areas than there are elsewhere.
Again, just facts. I know there are plenty more. Just offering up the basic ones.
4
I think more is needed than just the apology. I'd like Bloomberg to explain how he came to change his opinion, when he was defending stop and frisk just last year. How did he come to understand "the full impact that stops were having on the black and Latino communities"? And, I'd also like to know what he would do differently now that he has this understanding of the impact of the policy.
I think Bloomberg's apology seems politically expedient. As the article states, he was defending the policy as recently as last year. I don't believe he would have apologized if he had not decided to run for president, so I do not think the apology is sincere.
3
@Ms. Pea Bloomberg has come to understand how stop and frisk negatively impacts his ability to become the nominee of the Democratic party.He does not think it was a mistake and is not actually sorry.In fact he was mocking other Democratic candidates who were apologizing on the stump for views they had or policies they implemented.The man is a power hungry phony.
There are three ways to approach past sins when running for president: refuse to acknowledge them, apologize for them, or, as Trump does, argue that up is down and your sins are actually virtues.
Acknowledging your wrongs and apologizing is important, but timing matters. When you refuse to apologize for years and only do so when it is suddenly to your own political benefit, that doesn't say much for your honesty or integrity.
Trump is incapable of admitting guilt. Bloomberg has shown that he is capable of admitting guilt when there's something in it for him. If that's an improvement, it's not much of one.
2
Stop-and-frisk was only one component of Bloomberg's war on poor communities of color. The deterioration of public housing occurred mainly during his three terms while he splashed city money on rich developers for luxury housing. His agencies looked away while landlords illegally harassed tenants in rent-regulated units and illegally evicted many. He closed fire companies like the engine on 125 St. in Harlem.
The whole picture had deep consistency and cannot be erased with a very late apology. Will he apologize to and relieve the residents of public housing? Will he undo the homelessness that he created? Not likely.
8
@Rodrick Wallace
Exactly. Bloomberg's overarching policy was to make life in NYC unaffordable and unbearable for anyone below a certain income level. If he had had his way, the whole city would look like Hudson Yards by now, though we're getting there.
Mr. Bloomberg thought he was doing the right thing but now he understands he was wrong. People make mistakes. I have made thousands of mistakes.
I predict Bloomberg will be our next president, and he will be the best president this country ever had.
3
@BobC I predict that your prediction will NOT come true.
@BobC
This is satire, right? Prefacing your prediction with "I have made thousands of mistakes" is a tell that we should be amused by your comment rather than take it seriously. Be careful, though; readers might not understand it as such.
I think the tone of this article, while appropriately restrained, is too positive. Crocodle tears are what politicians shed when they recognize that they offended some voters they now need. Apologies for stop and frisk have come from many politicians and we know that they do not ring true. I guess that Mara Gay also feels that way, but she held back in this article. If Bloomberg were in power and had a free hand he would certainly reinstate stop and frisk.
9
@WHM You are probably right Ms. Gay seems to be holding back. What Bloomberg did to communities of color almost borders on a war crime. This apology is insincere. However if you want to read an article that does not hold back on Bloomberg. Go read the piece Charles Blow wrote on Bloomberg and stop and frisk also visit Mr.Blow's twitter page.In fact the City of New York was sued over this racist stop and frisk policy you can read what actually happened to the mostly innocent victims of this policy online by perusing those legal documents. This was not some innocuous policy.People had their lives and futures destroyed because of this. I personally agree with Mr. Blow we must never ever vote for Michael Bloomberg.
The problem is that this realization and confession should have come years ago. It isn't as though no one was trying to tell him what this policy was doing for the moral of black and brown men in his city, how it served to alienate neighborhoods against their own police.
Now it comes in concert with an announcement he may run for president and will only succeed if he wins early state primaries with a significant black population.
Maybe these aren't crocodile tears, but how is anyone to know? He's not running for mayor of a small town and we can't know what his motivations are.
101
@alan haigh He wasn't running for President years ago. Now he is. You mentioned a crocodile I would vote for a crocodile over Michael Bloomberg. Crocodiles seem so much more sincere.
5
@alan haigh A man with integrity admits when he is wrong. A lying con man like Trump never;ever admits anything. Which of the two should be President? Ray Sipe
7
Remember, Trump tried to admit that Obama WAS born in the USA
1
I was not a victim of the stop and frisk policy but I do believe Mike’s apology. It’s not easy to apologize for something that has hurt so many people and to do it in a public forum.
I would tend to give his sincerity the benefit of the doubt. I’m not diminishing in anyway the hurt that it caused.
Forgiveness is an individual decision and not an easy one. It’s letting go of wanting the past to be different and that never will be.
60
You can forgive, as a way to personally move on, but still not give the person who is apologizing to benefit himself first, more power over over lives and our future as it would be a huge mistake in this case. We don’t need even more oligarchy.
47
@Jeanne M I do not believe his apology is anything more than housekeeping for his campaign. He to this day doesn't understand or care about Fourth Amendment rights of those he considers "suspicious". He had all the time and legal counsel he needed to conclude long ago he was trampling constitutional rights of the least fortunate New Yorkers.
15
@Jeanne M But it's the timing of his apology, that is hugely suspect. No, I think it's just good P.R., and nothing more.
7
I have no way of knowing whether Bloomberg's apology is sincere or not. Nor do I care. Stop and frisk is unconstitutional on its face and most Americans knew it from the start. But Bloomberg needed a decade and a presidential candidacy to realize his "mistake." In the meantime, millions of our fellow Americans -- predominantly minorities -- had their civil rights stripped from them as they went about their legal, daily lives. Far worse, the possibility of being stopped was top-of-mind for them every time they stepped out their front door and for every second they spent on city streets. How some people think that establishing a police state and terrorizing their neighbors is not so bad, or a price worth paying for other ends, is beyond me. If Bloomberg has repented for his sin, good for him. But it still, and forever, renders him unfit to serve. Having already violated one oath to defend the Constitution, he can never be relied upon to honor another.
228
Genuine regret should mean a lot in judging one's character and future behavior. Whether it is salvific for a political bid depends on the whole set of attending qualifications.
Anyone unconstitutionally stopped and frisked has reason for resentment, but the affront is not egregious, but arguably venial. A true apology should suffice, even if the bad acts were part of a formal government policy. Worse has been done by other candidates and officeholders.
There is an argument based on a straightforward felicific calculus that the policy can withstand scrutiny on a small scale, trading indignation for freedom from bodily injury or death. The problem grows in significance with scale and the type of individual targeted much more according to a statistical analysis. Minorities were that group here and that matters both historically and, shall we say, social psychologically. But, on the other hand, pursuant to the calculus serious bodily injury was prevented. But as the constitutional rule tells us, that is a suspect benefit.
I am informed by two experiences: outrage at the policy by a dear friend, a retired, Latino NYPD homicide detective; and my observance of one stop and frisk on First Avenue one night wherein two plainclothesmen jumped out of an unmarked vehicle and stopped a guy walking with his girlfriend, pulled something out of his back jeans pocket, and left. I was bemused rather than shocked.
Bloomberg passes the smell test on this for me.
1
@Emma Ess : The US Supreme Court ruled a police stop and frisk is constitutionally permissible if police have reasonable suspicion a crime is being committed by a person who possesses a weapon.
1
@Emma Ess
Stop and frisk may have been misguided and unconstitutional, but it was only implemented to reduce crime and save lives. There was no personal gain for Bloomberg other than to help citizens of the city. Compare that to Donald Trump whose every decision is for Donald Trump. If Bloomberg runs and wins the nomination anyone in favor of democracy should vote for him. The alternative is lunacy unchained.
Sorry. Not just at the right time. Ten years too little and too late. To read Judge Scheindlin's Executive Summary of her decision in Floyd v City of New York holding the City's policy of stop and frisk unconstitutional is to read about the savaging of the minority community in New York City by the NYPD for years and years. Let's call it what it was: brutal, unrelenting, racist, violent -- an unconscionable, government-sanctioned abuse of a terrible 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision,Terry v Ohio, which shredded the 4th Amendment protections for minority groups in street stops across America. The stop and frisk statistics regarding stops of black and Hispanic citizens admitted by the City of New York in the Floyd case are unconscionable. I was a Legal Aid Society attorney in Brooklyn a generation ago, and I saw first-hand the damage these stops do to mostly young men of color in the poorest neighborhoods of New York years before stop and frisk blossomed as official Bloomberg policy. I find Bloomberg's sudden conversion on this point of his own creation the absolute apogee of political expedience and as such utterly appalling.
268
@JTS Great comment ! Thanks for sharing your experience. I do not believe he should be president and think he is only running to save billionaires from paying their fair share of taxes. Watching some of they cry and moan and seeing Bill Gates agonizing over possibly having to vote for trump if Warren wins the primary makes me sick. I am sure Mike believes all the lofty stuff about saving the nation, he has not a clue how most people live and thinks we need to be disciplined into shape and the rich have a right to never pay for infrastructure or give their employees a living wage. If only the rest of us would straiten up and stop asking for a level playing field and know our place and admire his wisdom which has no mercy or empathy.
12
@JTS Bloomberg had many years to apologize for his advocacy of stop and frisk.
He is only changing his tune suddenly now because he hopes to buy the Democratic nomination and knows he can’t do so without black voters.
10
@JTS
Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge here. Too many commenters on Bloomberg's tenure as mayor of New York are dismissive of the damage he inflicted on many Black and Latino New Yorkers, either because they don't care or are unknowing of the city's history and racial politics -- which he promulgated.
8
This has to be one of the most cynical apologies, ever. If he "didn't understand" the impact at the time, that's just an admission that he has no capacity for empathy for someone other than himself.
Which other "billionaire" New Yorker does that remind you of?
319
@Thomas
There is no comparison between Bloomberg and Trump. Bloomberg may suffer from the usual conceit of the successful that they are superior human beings, but Trump is not a human being at all.
That said, Bloomberg's conceit makes him unfit to be President. He should atone for his mistake by keeping on spending his money on stopping gun murders. Maybe in ten years he will have earned the right to ask for forgiveness.
32
@Thomas
You mean the guy who said it was just locker room talk?
11
Amen. But, by definition, one can’t amass such obscene amounts of money and not be a horrible person, seriously. What kind of sickness would one need to have to think they should clutch for themselves billions of dollars? No. Not my president. Enough giving mentally ill people power over us and our future. They need help, not power.
25
To all the critics out there, are you actually living mistake free lives? I know I'm not. If you were the mayor of New York do you really think that you could fix the cities issues without making mistakes? The only way a powerful politician can avoid making mistakes is to do nothing.
Whether Mike should run or not is another question but I'm always dazzled by people who avoid examining the entire work output of a political figure. That's exactly how Hillary Clinton who was ineffective ended up with the nomination - people chose to avoid her failures and just looked at her intelligence and background.
9
That’s a lot of abuse to absorb just to make one obscenely rich man look good. (Affluenza is real. You would have to be sick to think you deserve billions. He needs help, not more power.)
3
Too bad Bloomberg had to repent a good policy. When you are dealing with large populations inclined towards crime that is what you do: frisk and search.
8
@n1789
Here's some data. Of the 580,000 stop and frisk events up to 2009, 58,000 resulted in a serious offense.
Do you submit to being frisked at the airport. Of course you do. That's what is needed when the you must balance public safety with public freedom. It's a consequence of what happens when the lawless attempt to overtake the lawful.
3
@Ok Joe They search everyone at the airport. They don't target only people of color.
The effect of being stopped and frisked multiple times in a short period is that you fear and distrust the police. And when a community, especially young people, don't trust the police, the community's law-abiding members are less likely to report crimes, less likely to step forward as witnesses.
There are costs to stop-and-frisk as well as benefits. Most policy decisions involve comparing costs and benefits. And the fact that eliminating stop-and-frisk was followed by a further decrease in crime in New York City suggests that getting rid of it was the right decision.
3
@n1789
“Large populations inclined towards crime” sounds like a biased characterization of those populations, which in this case appears to have been overwhelmingly Black and Latino men in New York.
2
I would enjoy watching this hypocrite stopped and frisked multiple times and relate to all of us all how much he enjoyed it.
How readily people jumped on his bandwagon! This continues to astound me, considering the range of candidates we already have.
It's just Bloomberg's Messiah complex kicking in again. Only he can save us.
Kind of reminds me of another hypocrite we all know and loathe.
10
With this apology I have lost any respect I had for the man.
1
“Inside the church, the former mayor’s apology was met with warm applause. “Once you leave office, you get a chance to reflect on what you did. Amen?” the church’s pastor, the Rev. A.R. Bernard, asked his churchgoers. “Amen,” they replied.”
So, Bloomberg got his “hug” even though he knew at the time that his policy was in effect, that “Stop and Frisk” was an ugly, racist, and morally reprehensible one which demoralized, degraded, inconvenienced, and otherwise damaged the lives of countless Black and Brown people.
“Papers?”
1
Just another entitled rich guy, pretending sudden penitence, so he can get the next shiny object he wants. Sorry, but this fakery is naked - we must adopt a zero-tolerance policy for such nonsense.
21
From ACLU:
“Since at least 2002, the New York City Police Department’s Intelligence Division has engaged in the religious profiling and suspicionless surveillance of Muslims in New York City and beyond.”
“The NYPD’s Intelligence Division has singled out Muslim religious and community leaders, mosques, student associations, organizations, businesses, and individuals for pervasive surveillance that is discriminatory and not conducted against institutions or individuals belonging to any other religious faith, or the public at large.”
“The NYPD’s suspicionless surveillance program has swept up Muslim communities throughout New York City, as well as every mosque within 100 miles of NYC.”
“The NYPD’s surveillance program is based on a false and unconstitutional premise: that Muslim religious belief and practices are a basis for law enforcement scrutiny.”
Under Bloomberg. Program faced multiple lawsuits. Program was dismantled after Bloomberg left. Program was justified after 9/11 terrorist attack and jihadist terrorism - attacks/plots since. So the threat was very real, but the means to address the issue unconstitutional and ineffective. Similar to stop and frisk - addressing real issue of crime, but addressing by stomping on rights of minorities - always minorities. When whites commit terrorism or other crimes, there is never such guilt by association targeting whites.
Muslim American votes don’t matter, so Bloomberg won’t apologize. Black votes matter, so Bloomberg “apologizes.”
8
Biden, Bloomberg, they all see the light after the damage is done and they seek trust after having betrayed the underserved.
You have to be a fool to give it to them.
8
Gee, what convenient timing.
And so sincere.
Sorry Bloomie.
It aint gonna make a bit of difference.
You'll be joining that Starbucks guy in the halls of the Insignificant Club, real soon.
8
OK, he gave the apology.
Next, if he wants the Black vote bad enough, he'll need to convert.
2
Bloomberg's presidential ambitions are a fantasy. No Democrat -- not even a billionaire Democrat -- can with without the backing of African-Americans, and he pushed them away years ago. Buttigieg is another sure loser in the general election. Middle class black folks are overwhelmingly socially conservative and unlikely to support a man with a husband. Those are facts, and even if this comment gets censored through exclusion, those facts won't change.
1
So transparent, and so perfunctory his words. Watch him. Too late. We don’t need more guys who can’t apologize until they absolutely have to. We already have lots of those. Why is it an excuse to say, “He just has trouble saying ‘I’m sorry’”? We already have one of those who can’t admit weakness or error in the White House—enuff.
5
Its sad that now with Big Media/Brother playing Kingmaker in politics that the only Truth or dirt we the readers/people get is when the liberals eat their own....and as Apologizes go for the liberals as we read in yesterday's article on the halloween displays ..ITS Not Enough!
When the day after you announce your candidacy you find yourself apologizing for your policy's, SAVE YOURSELF THE MONEY AND DROP OUT! Bloomberg has about as much a chance as being President as Nancy Pelosi. Clearly the Democrats are panicking, they've finally figured out that radicalization doesn't win elections! Too late, they've dug their hole. The Democrats are no longer referred to as the party of Democrats, they are now know as the Socialist Party. No one will votes for socialism except the illegals.
@Nielson reviewer The Democrats are the "Socialist Party?" Nah, establishment Democrats are owned by oligarchs and corporations, same as the Republicans. Republicans will never get the chance to take on a candidate who espouses socialism, because the Democratic establishment will ensure that Sanders and Warren don't win the primary. Biden and Buttigieg are corporate funded darlings, not socialists.
Trump was a mistake. Will you all make another?
8
Mr. Bloomberg can strengthen proof of his sincerity by putting his money where is mouth is: He should donate hundreds of millions of his fortune, and more, to compensate the people he so recklessly molested. He did a lot of damage even in the face of data that proved his policy wrong, and he needs to make amends. Really make amends.
7
@FilmMD
Why is money always a solution?
2
All politicians want their ideas to be coerced and imposed on you. They are authoritarian narcissists who care little about actual liberty and equal protection. They do not love you. They don't even know you, while pretending to represent you.
Keep your power, the power of the People.
1
Apology accepted. Now prove the conversion is not momentary by speaking out against racism wherever and whenever you encounter it. Might even put some of that money where your mouth is.
PS. Candidacy rejected.
2
When I heard he was speaking at a black church this morning, my first thought was, "will he stop and frisk everyone on the way in."
He had plenty of time to end Giuliani's stop and frisk program, but instead he expanded it.
He had plenty of time to apologize for his stop and frisk program, but he didn't.
Now he is running for president to keep the Wall Street gravy train going.
Now he needs black votes.
So...now he apologizes?
Apology not accepted.
15
Too little, too late.
Next.
19
What's the hype with Bloomberg? He was a horrible mayor who made New Yorker a playground for rich people, and made New York City more segregated than ever. Working people can't afford it anymore. He implemented insensible policies like stop-and-frisk and rezoned neighborhoods to displace entire communities. He only has the interest of billionaires in mind. He has no loyalty to black and latino people. I forgive but I don't forget, and I will certainly not forget when casting my vote in 2020.
5
Now let's see if he apologizes for blaming the financial crisis on crafty poor people who cheated investment bankers.
22
During the "Occupy Wall Street" demonstrations in which regular people stood up for all Americans, the NYPD herded them and abused them instead of sticking up for them. The cops of America always side with those who have money.
Bloomberg called the NYPD, "My Private Army".
So now, what do you think of his likely televised political production?
10
@PATRICK:
"Bloomberg called the NYPD, 'My Private Army'."
Not much different from Trump's "my Generals." Another "I alone can fix it" wolf in sheep's clothing, IMHO.
3
Imagine Donald trump apologizing for anything, even as trivial as a botched weather report.
4
Would he have apologized if not for the absolute need of the Black Vote? Young men going to college,church are wherever were victimized by the police. Bloomberg ignored the pleas of Black Parents about their fear for their sons and he ignored it.If you beat someone up 20 times a day and on the following day you apologize does that take away the pain? Where was his conscious before he wanted the White House? Isn't it ironic that the only times Black Folk see white politicians at thee churches is at election time? I think Bloomberg's attempt at a do over with Black Folk is going to fall flat. I had a son going to law school in the city who was stopped many times coming home after long days in school.Discussing this with fellow law students who shared Bloomberg's skin color none of them were stopped. Bloomberg's penance is many years late.
1
I will never forgive him.
10
A day late and a dollar short.
2
Your insinuation here is that Bloomberg's apology is insincere. My guess is that your contemporary at the times, Charles Blow, would simply state that view straight out (I suspect we might find out).
Biden's crime bill excuse was, "It seemed like a good idea at the time," and, btw, it seemed so for black people too (at the time), and to the Congressional Black Caucus. Here Bloomberg (who I wish wasn't running) is going further, not simply explaining his policy through the prism of history, but *expressing true regret*.
What I find troubling are opinion makers (of which you are one) lecturing me on when I MUST believe someone, and when I must NOT believe someone. What I find troubling is our current incapacity, or lack of appetite, for redemption, and for a change of mind, or of heart.
1
How politically convenient to apologize for this.
1
I've said this before, but I'll say it again: I like what the guy says, but we don't need another billionaire in the White House.
Also, and this may sound a little odd, seeing as I'm a 47 year old white guy, but I don't think we need any more old white guys in the White House.
Can we just try something different again, people? We've done the old white guy thing for 44 of our 45 Presidents. Let's pick a woman, or something.
Sheesh.
1
I guess feelings are more important than having people shot to death.
1
Mike’s feelings, or rather, his narcissistic need to rebrand to be adored?
Do not trust this man.
His enormous ego:
led him to believe that stop and frisk was good policing;
it led him to believe that city workers didn't need contracts (so he didn't negotiate);
it led him to believe that poor people would find somewhere else to live while developers destroyed the skyline;
it led him to believe private/public partnerships would benefit all people equally, and the poor are still wondering why they have open spaces and the rich have tax subsidies;
---and now his ego has led him to believe that he is so so so much better than the rest of the democrats that he can wish away all the harm he caused as mayor with an apology, since he is, after all, destined to become president.
No more billionaires in politics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....let's pass a constitutional amendment. I am sure it would pass in every statehouse in the nation, we are sick of them, and because of them.
9
When will he apologize for dismantling “Occupy Wall Street”.
He is a bully, pure and simple.
9
Fantastic! The first best step ever. People love politicians who can admit to their faults. Now move on and speak about how changed you are towards women. And simultaneously discuss future policies. The debate is diluted, by the multiple points presented, an advantage to confuse the dimwits in the republican party. And yes we might be side lining the womens movement a wee bit, but the alternative is a giant leap backwards, so let's be patient. Plus with so many strong candidates, the republicans will be busy diluting and spreading their vitriol rather thinly. This is a fantastic opportunity for the democrats to throw their weight behind a Bloomberg or Buttigieg and sail to a blue 2020.
Would never vote for this man apology or not.
3
I trained for point-blank, face-to-face weapon confrontations.
In the event of a confrontation with a would-be assailant who possessed a pistol, what must be the moves to defeat that opponent before they drew a pistol out of their pocket or belt?
What would be the consequences if I acted too late?
What would be the consequences if I acted too soon -- and they had only moved their hand in the wrong direction?
If I moved too slow, death or crippling wounds. Too quick, arrest, civil law suit, perhaps prison, perhaps the guilt of blinding and/or crippling a person who, though loud-mouthed and obnoxious, did not deserve a life-changing injury.
Stop-and-frisk was and is bad. Death is worse. Life in a wheelchair and a colostomy bag is worse than a frisk on the street.
I was frisked several times. A metal detecting wand would have been better, less invasive. Once, when I objected to the frisk, I received a light-weight slamming by the officers. It was nothing, I got hit harder than that in training.
Bloomberg should have issued the wands at the time. He himself could have paid for the thousands of devices.
Now? Think of all the young men who lived. Think of all the children down-range who did not suffer a random high-velocity slug that one punk fired at another punk.
Bloomberg made mistakes, young men got angry -- but we lived to demand apology and change.
3
Yes, African Americans, especially African American and Latino men, were routinely "humiliated, harassed and intimidated" by Bloomberg's stop and frisk.Bring stop and frisk together with the mad pot laws, they were also incarcerated in record numbers. Let's be clear: harassment, intimidation, humiliation and mass incarceration of minority communities was the purpose, not an unintended consequence, of the 1994 Criminal Justice Bill , as well as the many iterations of the "broken windows" police strategy which dominated cities in the 90s and 2000s. Bloomberg's apology is an undisguised joke. His candidacy is even a bigger joke. Anyone who thinks he has a chance of winning the nomination or even more, beat Trump, should be immediately stopped and frisked for illicit substances.
3
Bloomberg had many years to apologize for his advocacy of stop and frisk.
He is only changing his tune suddenly now because he hopes to buy the Democratic nomination and knows he can’t do so without black voters.
And what's his plan for all those Americans who abhor his actions on Gun Control? Bloombito might have done a lot of good for this town but he's got too many detractors to be anything other than a distraction.
I suppose Bloomberg has to do this to have a chance, and I'll vote for him with enthusiasm.
But I sense that crime is going up again, and I fear we shall all miss stop, question and frisk.
Ms. Gay writes, as others have written, "In 88 percent of the stops, there was no arrest." That means 12% were arrested. Without stop, question and friskm, that 12% would have remained free to demoralize, frighten, harm and kill in their home communities.
Ms. Gay writes, "An entire generation of black and Latino children had grown up accustomed to getting “tossed” by the police on their way home from school."
But I write this: "An entire generation of black, Latino, white, Chinese, Indian+Pakistani and immigrant children have grown up feeling that their City was relatively safe and interesting for them to explore."
Ms. Gay - why do you not consider that side of the coin?
2
How can this be? True blues have no rite of reconciliation. One must wear the scarlet letter of one's ostensibly racist policy errors to the grave. Bloomberg's lip service is self-service at it's best / worst and you seem to be asking the world to accept that he has been born, er, woke again.
Boosting a globalist multi-billionaire to the nomination belies the hypocrisy of the nominally progressive movement on the left. You never meant what you said back then and you don't really believe it now. Your party's strategy and your candidates' platforms are all about polls, focus groups and fundraising. Join the club.
Sadly, progressives have reverted to the only formula that works today: go with a candidate who can pay their own way.
Bloomberg likes to pose as a technocrat, but being data driven just means you have the numbers at hand to justify whatever your gut tells you to do. Was he "data driven" when he chose Cathie Black, someone whose only qualification was they attended the same cocktail parties, to be Schools Chancellor? How is that any different than Trump being instructed by his gut to pick Betsy DeVos?
1
Apologized at just the right time?
He should have apologized way before it would be a cloud on his fresh presidential ambitions.
This smacks of insincere pandering with this self-serving timing.
And point being, he DID that program, it harassed PoC in NYC horribly
We don't need or want billionaires.
2
We had a great candidate with experience as both a governor and a member of the House of Representatives. He was absolutely committed to solving the climate issue
He is Jay Inslee. But the press pretty much ignored him, despite the number of comments I read by NY Times readers impressed by him.
I think Bloomberg should take his millions and his climate-change commitment and offer to fund Inlee's re-entry into the race.
Then Inslee can win the nomination, convince Tammy Duckworth to be his running mate and trounce the current criminal-in-chief.
That's my cathartic fantasy for today.
2
Great. Now he needs to stand up on a big platform and apologize for women for his pattern of demeaning, sexist comments and attitudes.
Much as I’d like to get rid of Trump, I won’t be cowed into voting for another billionaire on the dubious theory that midwestern supporters of Trump will be swayed to vote for a Democrat billionaire.
At this late date, I find it hard to believe that opinions on Trump are not fully hardened. It won’t matter who is nominated to oppose him. If voters still choose Trump, they are deluded fools and no amount of fact or reason will fix that problem.
Yeah, this will be a problem for Bloomberg. Black voters don't forget. How many times did you see the "superpredators" clip repeated on the internet when Clinton was the candidate, and that was waaaay deeper in the past (and less consequential) than Bloomberg's full-throated defense of stop and frisk.
Better late than never. No, better unnecessary than ever.
Do Better.
How about an apology to veteran teachers for endless assault? How about apologizing to students who graduated with inflated grades and dumbed down Regents exams? How many times did Bloomberg lose in court to lawsuits brought by teachers for unfair treatment and attacks by his administration. What did Bloomberg do when he lost the court cases? He attacked the judges.
Sound familiar?
We don't need another bully billionaire for president.
First for sexual remarks and now "stop and frisk". At this rate, Bloomberg will still be apologizing long after the election is over.
Baloney! Balderdash! Seemingly contrite at a rather convenient time. Please, Mr Bloomberg, save us the false confession. Go out and reveal more of DJT’s lies, obfuscations, gang kingpin behavior. Spend your money on awareness & promote climate change awareness. Those are fine things at which to throw your support. Run if you think you must, but be aware that not everyone thinks you’re the right guy for the job, especially when the idea that you could lose more of your dough if a more progressive candidate should win seems to be your motivation.
Apologies are easy when you want something, especially years after the event. Just ask Joe Biden who is sinking like a rock in the polls about his apology to Anita Hill which was about 30 years late.
Too little, too late. And this comes from a white male not dissimilar in age from Mr Bloomberg. The fact that he had to be ordered to stop by the courts shows to me that this is an apology of convenience. He has had six years to come to the conclusion (based on actual data) that his method was not just. To make his statement now, as he appears to be entering the race, is just hypocritical.
Now he is the one being stopped and frisked.
1
Dear Mayor Bloomberg,
Move to East New York. Learn something more than the financial news of companies.
You have no chance of winning the Democratic nomination without the support of the African American and Latino communities. Don't forget about the public school teacher establishment you will also have to apologize to because of your incorrect support of charter schools.
You want to show courage and beat Trump, do it as a Republican. You don't know Democratic politics. We need a woman.
Bike lanes hasn't made NY a great city.
1
It's not just his racist stop-and-frisk policies that he got wrong. He defended and supported with cash and campaign workers the reelection campaign of the despicable Joe Lieberman.
Lieberman strenuously defended the disastrous invasion of Iraq, and questioned the patriotism of Americans who opposed the war. He was Dick Cheney's "favorite Democrat", which Bloomberg knew when he threw his support behind Lieberman.
So he imposes racist policing strategies, defended Lieberman, and refused to speak out against the disaster that was the Iraq War.
In short, Bloomberg has displayed terrible judgement on too many issues. So to his presidential candidacy, Democratic voters should just say NO.
2
Sure. Now that he's running for office he wants to apologize. Where was that apology when he was mayor and continuously outraged NYC residents with those stop and frisk antics? I agreed with Bloomberg that Trump was a con artist, but what kind of con job is he trying to run with this apology? Bloomberg is a billionaire and a hypocrite, only out for himself – like the majority of the rest of the 1%. Thumbs down for him in the 2020 election.
Right out of the politicians playbook:
Chapter #1.. Apologize for past decisions.
Stop and frisk was a necessary tactic .. Crime was rampant and things needed to get done. It removed hundreds of weapons and bad people from the city streets .. I could care less about the "hurt feelings" of the many people who were swept up in the net-- It was being done to protect and ensure their safety. Something they conveniently like to forget.
2
Come on. He'll say anything to get in the news. Maybe he'll apology for being wealthy next.
If Mr. Bloomberg were truly apologetic about his unconstitutional actions, he would spend his money on fixing the wrong rather than promoting himself.
Help the unconstitutionally jailed out of jail.
Be the only billionaire who promotes justice rather than oneself.
Too little and definitely too late. When the courts ruled against stop & frisk 6 years ago, Bloomberg still defended it. Of course he wasn't running for President then and didn't need Black and Latino votes.
BTW this opinion piece says he got "warm" applause. The news article on his speech says the applause we "tepid" - which seems more likely.
1
Some of the columnists in NYTimes and other pundits wrote in support of Bloomberg, suggesting that he has the has the best chance to beat Trump. This is so wrong!
Black and young voters will not go out to vote for Bloomberg, but they will vote for some of the other progressive candidates. Learn some hard lessons from 2016 about "electability".
Without the black and young voters, we will likely have another four disastrous Trump years.
Apology accepted. Everyone makes mistakes. He seems sincere.
1
Me. Bloomberg- Please atone by giving $50,000 to $100,000 for pain and suffering to each victim of stop and frisk policy. Then, you can ask for their vote and forgiveness.
1
Almost as rich as Warren claiming she’s progressive, after refusing to endorse Bernie, and saving the country from four, (or more), malignant years of this utter tragedy.
1
"At a black church in New York on Sunday, Michael Bloomberg stood before the congregation and repented."
Correction:
At a Black church in New York on Sunday, Michael Bloomberg cynically stood before the congregation and pretended to repent.
It's been almost 40 years and the consequences are ongoing. Now that the tide of progressivism is finally washing over the nation, Bloomberg gets an epiphany? Get outta here!
I'll believe his repentance when he puts his money behind Bernie and Elizabeth and really repents by staying out.
5
Mara Gay,
In this excellent article, you have pointed out the why of why Bloomberg should not be president. He is a dem version of Trump. We do not need another billionaire as president, the fake tax cuts last year prove that.
Too little and far too late for his appology and the impact felt by brown and black populations as you pointed out. Hopefully those populations will NEVER vote for him.
Interesting that read your article on NYT Digital and at that time was another article on the home page that FedEx had zero corporate tax for it's current fiscal year. Yep, the Trump tax cut is working!
Looking forward to your next column.
1
Mr. Bloomberg might indeed be swooping in (at the right moment) and trying to fix his stop and frisk blunder (in the community) shows gumption. Frankly, I'd vote for him tomorrow simply because he is honest, smart and (not Trump). Truthfully however, I'd vote for E.coli bacteria over Trump. Notwithstanding my flaws and inadequacies, Mr. Bloomberg might need to spend a few billion dollars to overcome Russian interference and Trump illegal tactics, ruthless GOP dirty tricks (e.g., hordes of Roger Stones and acolytes with money money money) thereby making him the perfect candidate. Obviously, billionaires are loath to spend their own money and conceivably, Ex Mayor Bloomberg, might be able to raise two or three billion $ in fifteen minutes standing at the Wall Street Newsstand (hat-in-hand and wire instructions). Maybe, this is why Michael Bloomberg is the perfect Democratic Party standard-bearer as the moral earth is hemorrhaging goodness and humanity under Trump.
When is he going to apologize for:
1. Essentially bribing the city council to overturn two votes by the public that instituted term limits. And remember, it was only a one time deal done just for him.
2. Giving money to hire poll watchers to challenge voters in primarily black and Latino districts in his final reelection campaign.
3. Giving funds, when he was a Republican, to Republican candidates who opposed the very issues including gun control and abortion rights he said he favored.
1
If you're willing to forgive Elizabeth Warren for pretending to be a Native American, then you should also be able to forgive Bloomberg for this policy.
1
Apologies are nice. Apologizing before it's politically necessary is better.
1
Bloomberg is a smart guy. Unlike Trump, he knows how to use the power of symbolic words and actions. He's manipulative. And voters are tired of that. If you ask Trump supporters, they'll tell you one of the reasons they like Trump is because he says it is. Trump comes across (wrongly I might add) as "open", that he's not hiding something from you in this verbal interactions. You don't get a sense he is scheming and plotting behind your back - he just does it in the open! And voters hate schemers and plotters.
Another billionaire who uses an empty "I'm sorry". This time, Bloomberg says eh is sorry for making anyone of color fearful that a cop will stop them for walking on the street in New York. Effectively, some people felt terrorized, by Bloomberg's New York City war on crime. A number of innocent people, who weren't doing anything, ended up on Riker's Island.
Now, he thinks an "I'm sorry" is going to put back together damaged lives.
To any one with any common sense, this "apology" is a political stunt. He thinks, like lots of CEOs, and politicians, who do rotten things, that "I'm sorry" fixes everything. It doesn't. Why/ Because their "apology" is not sincere; it is is for improving their tarnished image.
Not buying it, Mr. Billionaire. You want this police state action of yours swept under the rug with the crucible of the (black) South Carolina primary on the horizon. I don’t think so.
You broke it and you bought the result. Forgiveness is one thing. A Democratic Donald Trump is quite another. No thanks.
Bloomberg just surrendered all credibility. He apologized for Stop & Frisk. First, it's a statutory provision not someone's whim. It's been in the CPL for decades so it obviously predates his mayoral term. Second, his police policy based upon that state was not flawed. The execution of it at times by the NYPD may have been but not the policy itself. Another empty suit pandering to the MSM.
We can question the expediency of this reversal by Bloomberg after years of sticking to his guns (pun intended). I’m more than willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and accept his apology as sincere.
Contrast this with trumps long standing insistence the the Central Park Five we’re guilty and should have been executed. This still is his position even after the real person was arrested and convicted. As Roy Cohn pounded into him years ago never apologize, never reverse course.
Ah the Biden Tact:
With a Presidential bid in the offing,
confess and repent.
Bloomberg, as noted, defended the policy until last year.
While not as late as Uncle Joe's "apology" to Anita Hill (never mind an apology to the Nation for Clarence Thomas!),
it appears to be quite a coincidence of timing.
Like Biden: too little
too late.
Evidence of clear poor judgment as the effects of his policies became obvious.
Mr. Bloomberg, if he believed in making the nation better,
would engage in fighting voter suppression,
engage in registration and get out the vote programs,
and renounce his ego project.
New and Improved!
Smart businessmen know when to rebrand.
1
Not last year, but THIS year Mayor Bloomberg was still insisting that stop and frisk was the correct policy.
It is incredible that Hillary Clinton got trashed in this newspaper and elsewhere for policies she supported 20+ years before she ran for President and had apologized for more than a decade earlier, and Mayor Bloomberg gets the benefit of the doubt when he suddenly apologizes for the policy he was still defending a few months ago?
2
Bloomberg is a politician, and it’s never really possible to separate the political from the personal with politicians’ stances at any given moment.
But you know who never apologizes? Donald Trump. Is that unwillingness to eat crow and recant publicly something we want in our leaders? Or can we allow them room to acknowledge that a position they once took, for whatever reason, is no longer defensible and they regret their previous choices?
Forgiving some political cynicism is not as bleak as the alternative.
If 88% of stop and frisk events resulted in no offense that means 12% were. Therefore, of the 580,000 stop and frisk events, 69,600 resulted in a serious offense.
Unquestionably, Mr. Bloomberg made NYC a far more safer place to visit and live in. That's just a fact. That's just the truth.
I don't like being frisked at the airport, but it happens every time I fly. I figure if it makes the flying public safer, then toss me too. That is a fact. That is the truth of it.
Spare me the self-serving moral outrage of Ms Gay. It's not only errant, it's despicable.
Bloomberg was a republican then he switched to the democrats when it suited him.
When "stop and frisk" suited him he was for it, now he is against it.
Bloomberg left the democrat party claiming he was an independent.
Bloomberg rejoined the Democrats party .
Bloomberg is against breaking up the big banks, he says Elizabeth Warren is wrong to want to regulate the banks.
According to MSNBC, Bloomberg could buy Fox News many times over, stopping their dishonest propaganda; yet he would rather weaken the Democratic field.
Bloomberg like Trump is in this race for Bloomberg .
1
I still won’t vote for Bloomberg if he’s the Democratic nominee. He knew Stop and Frisk was wrong and ineffective when he instituted it. And his apology is weak without any offer to make amends. It’s an insult after the injury. Thank goodness his motives are transparent.
1
Amazing how phony capitalists think they can pass for the real deal, esp. when other truly authentic leaders like Warren, Bernie, Yang, and Gabbard have already shown voters they don't have to settle for duplicitous politicians anymore.
Bloomberg is not the worst, but there are so many better, truly moral leaders that did not opportunistically pander. They did the right thing, not the expedient thing, esp. when the right thing was not popular.
1
Ms. Gay, here's my question:
Would Bloomberg have apologized if he wasn't running for President of the United States?
The right time would have been for Bloomberg to apologize to minorities when he was still mayor.
This is an example of pure cyncism and contempt for voters. The same contempt he had for those who voted for 2 lawful referendums requiring term limits that Bloomberg circumvented to get a third term and subsequently buying it for more than 85 million dollars - barely defeating his democratic rival, an African-American who took issue with Bloomberg's police policies and had no where near that kind of money.
I ask one question to you Ms. Gay:
Why didn't Bloomberg apologize to minorities about supporting stop and frisk throughout his mayoralty?
That's the question to ask at this "right time."
1
It’s funny how they always see the light when it’s time to beg for our votes... So much sincerity.
He’s not fooling anyone.
1
What has changed the billionaire's mind? His heart? Has his philosophy about innocent people and the power of government changed, or is he just as isolated from the lives of day to day people as ever? Which facts changed his mind? When did he learn those facts? Why didn't he apologize when he learned them? Etc.
"I was wrong" is not enough and doesn't provide any assurance that would justify trusting this man with the awesome power of the presidency.
1
Sorry Mr. Money Bags Bloomberg, your me culpa is a little too late. The American people don't need another billionaire to be their president. Your self interest is clearly to maintain the hegemony over the American people of the 1%. It's time for a serious new direction for our country and you can't lead it.
1
A friend of mine (a graduate of an ivy league law school, who was then working in the general counsel's office of Fortune 100 company) told me that it was so bad when he was mayor that when he saw a policeman he would just throw up his hands and assume the position.
An apology here is not enough.
1
Not a good look having to apologize for YOUR policy's the day after you announce your candidacy! If he wins, how many more apologies can we expect for bad policy 4 years after his Presidency.
1
Stop and frisk was actually the only positive thing he did as Mayor. It made New York safe.
2
It's like a progressive 12-Step Program. First step, apologize.
1
Gee, one could claim that coming to this truth right before needing the support of the community damaged by this policy is cynical and manipulative but hey, that's just me riding the zeitgeist.
5
Billionaires are a huge problem in this country. They don't want to pay their fair share of taxes and the bulk of this nation suffers for their insatiable greed. I refuse to vote for any billionaire and/or any candidate suggesting the rich should not pay more taxes. My hope is the bulk of this country joins me in the fight for the little guys which is most of us. Vote for Warren.
2
I am not a Latino or Black person so I do not feel qualified to give absolution to Mr. Bloomberg. But it is possible, just possible that a repentant sinner who sees what he has done wrong may do more for the aggrieved group than the hollow voices who only give lip service and have not known the weight of their sins.
Like I say I am not qualified to look into Mayor Bloomberg's heart but it is something to consider.
I was wrong when I said all billionaires who have the unchecked audacity to hold public office should be stopped and frisked five million times. I’ve learned from my mistakes and I hope you can forgive me. I understand now that it was wrong to call for them to be stopped and frisked five million times. These billionaires should be stopped and frisked ten million times.
I'm thrilled. Another New York billionaire with an outsized ego and undersized ethical sense. Just what the country needs.
1
At least Mr. Bloomberg is capable of publicly admitting he was wrong. Don’t ever expect anything close that from the current president, who is utterly incapable of contrition.
1
The reality is that the effect of stop and frisk can't merely be measured by the number of arrests resulting from stops. In all likelihood, it made criminals more reluctant to be out on the street and less likely to carry weapons with them when they were on the street.
The nonsensical PC zeal for soft on crime policies will only help criminals. Look to Philadelphia where Larry (I Love Criminals) Krasner has presided over the highest murder rate in a decade thanks to his "criminal justice reform" policies.
This type of nonsense empowers Trump.
1
Stop and frisk isn't why I'll never cast a vote for Bloomberg. The fact is that billionaires govern for billionaires. Don't just look at Trump. Look at Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, etc. Oligarchs may fight among themselves, but they present a united front in terms of keeping wages and taxes low. The existence of billions of desperate poor people makes them even more powerful. They aren't going to upset that apple cart.
I will never vote for a rich person for any office whatsoever. Because I pay attention.
1
This apology is a good first step. Now Mr. Bloomberg needs to back it up, consistently, in his actions and his words. Mostly in his actions. That is that way that any of us determine if someone is truly sorry and if they are truly going to change. I think he can do it. I hope he does.
2
Two comments:
1.I am glad Bloomberg is in the race. ANYONE who has real potential to beat Trump is welcome.
2. With no intent to reference this case specifically, but more generally, I don't understand how we allow for such easy redemption for words and actions of public figures.
Being truly contrite is admirable and often worthy of forgiveness but these days whenever a public figure says or does something "wrong" and a few people, or many, call that person out, he or she apologizes. It doesn't matter whether it's to save his/her job, reputation, chance to be president, etc. he/she apologizes. And that's all it takes!
And what's wrong with that? It DOESN'T MATTER what the circumstances are; even if it's an obvious fauxpology, everyone accepts it and all is OK. Nothing else matters but the actual act of apologizing! It doesn't matter how contrived it is, it works.
It certainly depends on the circumstances, but I don't buy most of these public apologies, particularly if it coincides with a sudden personal need for the apologizer's redemption.
Let them apologize for no reason other than contrition. Then I might buy it.
1
I guess it's better to be like Trump and never apologize.
I'm not keen on Bloomberg, mostly because of his housing and real estate policies, but I've never known him to take a position or apologize for something he didn't believe it.
The purity tests on the left will be the death of it.
2
You know how Trump prefers heroes who weren't shot down? Pretty unfair, since dodging anti-aircraft fire is not a skill much needed in politics. However, being right about governance issues, that really is important.
I prefer politicians who weren't wrong in the first place.
Lots and lots of people weren't wrong in the first place; why not pick one of them?
15
@roy brander A politician or person who was never wrong??? What world is that? Frankly, I like a person who learns from their mistakes. Makes a better person and leader.
1
@roy brander People who need to make difficult decisions also make mistakes. Those who weren't wrong in the first place haven't made any tough decisions.
Running NYC as a mayor over three terms is a hard job. Running South Bend, Indiana is slightly easier; so is being a college professor and senator (non-executive positions). And, the stop-and-frisk was an arguable policy - responding to really poor violent crime situation in NYC at the time which proved problematic on the constitutionality at a later review.
2
@Kavm : There's wrong and wrong. I'm an engineer, and we all make mistakes. But if I stamped the drawings of a building that fell, I wouldn't get to design any more buildings.
So I'm definitely not letting either of you pick my brain surgeon.
Stop and Frisk wasn't a bad guess at tomorrow's weather; it was a huge program involving thousands of police and literally millions of victims. There's wrong and there's wrong, and Bloomberg was very, very wrong over an extended period despite all criticism, and continued in his wrong belief after it had been shown to have failed.
3
So, it only took 6 years after stop and frisk was ruled unconstitutional to state it was wrong. A little slow, and cynical, on the uptake Michael.
15
High crime areas are mostly areas with many people who are suffering from impoverishment. That means that if a family member is arrested or prosecuted, the costs will produce severe want affecting everyone in that family. The innocent will suffer with the guilty. That leads to a resentment of the legal system by all of them. That leads to whole communities with less than enthusiastic support for the criminal justice system.
1
Apologies of convenience that arise when you need something from the victim of your wrongful act just don't ring true. There is no way that kind of apology can be received as authentic or sincerely realized. It's really another form of quid pro quo: I'll apologize to you if you vote for me.
I reject this apology on that basis. The damage has been done to those who were unjustly brutalized by emboldened cops and to their families and friends. Where's the atonement? What actions has he undertaken to atone for this massive violation of constitutional rights? "I'm sorry" doesn't begin to cover it.
24
It's rare for any national political figure to say "Hey, I was wrong." Trying to think of examples besides this one and Obama's on gay marriage. Certainly since the inauguration of Mr. Trump it has never happened. So, certainly better late than not at all.
But the "hands off our kids" billboards I saw in NYC still speak very loudly in my ears.
7
Stop and frisk with known gang members and with probable cause of likely criminal acts in progressive was a good policy. But it seems to have been used like a dragnet which ended up affecting people who were not a threat to anyone.
There is a low level anti-social culture, mostly teenagers and young adults, who use controlled substances, that occurred across all communities which makes people who are defiant of drug laws and especially marijuana liable to expensive citations or arrests. It sent a lot of immature adults into the system, where they did not belong.
3
While politically incorrect to note at the moment, application of the former Stop and Frisk authority of the Penal Law which authorized police intervention if reasonable suspicion rather than the higher threshold of reasonable cause was present allowed the saving of untold lives in the Communities most threatened by gun violence and related crimes. The removal of this authority has undoubtedly resulted in an increase of illegally possessed street weaponry and will be reflected ultimately in the number of individuals killed or maimed by the disparate impact of the law's removal. Only time will tell but certainly no need to apologize for it's effective application by law enforcement professionals.
5
@Fellow "will be reflected ultimately in the number of individuals killed or maimed..."
But it wasn't. Violent crime went down after the effective end of stop and frisk. The stats showed that it was hardly finding any guns at all (since that 12% of arrests cited in the article was for other things like pot.)
Your position here isn't so much "politically incorrect" (as you claim) but just plain factually incorrect.
From the article:
"In 88 percent of the stops, there was no arrest."
Which means that 12% of the time, there was an arrest. No wonder people were duped into thinking the cops were doing a good job.
4
Ever work in cold call selling? Two percent is a good average for success. Empirical data always requires context to support any conclusion.
1
That’s a lot of abuse to absorb for the sake of making one obscenely wealthy man look good.
1
At least Bloomberg apologized which is something Trump never does and neither do other politicians who follow him. But Bloomberg should exit this race. It is questionable whether he is once again a Democrat and who would vote for a Democratic candidate who is willing to spend his own money flooding TV in large states with ads. Is he a corporate billionaire who trying to buy the election? I don't think this has any place in the primary. Rather than wasting his time and everyone else's time by running for president he should increase his efforts to fight climate change. His efforts to date have been considerable and that is how he can best server the country and humanity as this critical time of a climate emergency.
10
Thank you Mara Gay for pointing out the difficulties for the affected communities to forgive a former (longtime stubborn) mayor for his wrong, unconstitutional policy.
Clearly, Mr Bloomberg billionaire, with aspirations to replace a bad actor in the WH, needs to do to make amends with the humiliated and alienated communities.
More than an overdue apology, those who were subjected to the infamous stop and frisk policy need a more material token of Mr Bloomberg's change of heart:" at least $100 million in support of community centers where new generations will be strengthened by programs that support their sense of belonging, of self-respect, job-related training and growth into responsible citizenship. Instead of seeing them as weapon-carrying suspects treat them as people of dignity independent of race and heritage and economic background.
Only 12% ended in arrests. Is there any evidence that these arrests prevented more crime (particularly crime within black and latino communities)? which was one big excuse for the policy in the first place and Bloomberg's rationale for sticking with the "big wrong." There must be some statistics on crime in minority communities by their own and crime on other ethnic groups by some of the those who were subjected to stop & frisk.
One more request: analyses on what helps to diminish crime in NYC aside from policing, such as strengthened community care/activism, improvement of economic well-being, lifting out of poverty &other factors.
11
Forgiveness is not mine to give as I was not targeted. Similarly, I having no standing to judge those who were targeted if they do or do not accept Bloomberg's apology.
I do hope his words have value, if only to highlight a discredited policy that, nationwide, is still not dead.
12
Michael Bloomberg’s decision to make this announcement at a conservative megachurch pastored by a former member of President Trump’s evangelical advisory board tells me everything I need to know about the genuineness of his statement and how to view him compared to the candidacies of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.
61
"They say he has come to a conclusion that can be hard to reach for a stubborn 77-year-old billionaire: He was wrong."
Before we decide to make him president I wonder if there is a model for how things would be with a stubborn elderly billionaire in control. I believe there is and it does not look good.
No more stubborn billionaires.
46
@Duffy
Amen. No More Billionaires, No More Dynasties.
Pick one and it will likely take care of both.
7
It's hard not to be a bit cynical about all this, given the timing. But - I believe Michael is basically a decent, honest man, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. And also because my prime goal in 202 is to toss out the virulent evil in the White House. I totally get the problems of having a billionaire in the White House, and favor Elizabeth Warren for her policies and incredible ability - much needed - but I really fear that the Rust Belt/Electoral College problem just won't get her elected. If he stands, we'll see what kind of policies he promotes. And if he put Elizabeth in a prominent position in the cabinet, or even on the ticket, I'd vote for him in a moment. Somehow, I don't think that's going to happen. But Oh! what a ticket that wold be - for so many reasons.
2
At this time, I have no strong feelings pro or con Bloomberg. If I was strongly against him, I could prove to myself I was wrong, or right. Such is the nature of my perturbations over who I will wind up embracing as the Democrat who not only can defeat Trump but is best able to undo the damage he continues to wreak on our country and the world. Our woes will be far from over after Trump leaves office.
1
He's smart to get this conversation going. Opening his run with "I was wrong" shows that he's aware of his weaknesses and that he's not afraid (or too egoistic) to apologize. Time will tell. But there's not a lot of time for getting on the right side of this. The response amongst party activists will be important; determinative even. But Bloomberg may have more such moves up his sleeve. If he doesn't, well, his candidacy will likely be short-lived. His loudest supporters so far are never Trumpers and neo-cons, it seems.
1
@McDonald Walling
He has no choice but to het this conversation going. Without claiming to be the solution to racism, the Democrats have nothing to offer that anyone wants.
And any keen analyst would note that in the cities that have been controlled by the Democrats for centuries, minorities have fared measurably worse that in the others.
It took Mr Bloomberg 10 years and a run for the White House to realize he'd "made a mistake." OK. Better late than never.
May I suggest his next adjustment to reality will be even more difficult to hurdle. Mike Bloomberg would make a great Vice President.
He doesn't think of himself as a number two, but as his decade long struggle with the ramifications of Stop and Frisk demonstrate, he is not the guy to make policy. But, he is a more than able administrator. Hard for him to swallow, sure. But someone has to put the Federal Government back together after Trump. Can't think of a better guy.
If you ask me who should be President is such a situation I must say I don't know. But, I really liked what President Obama said about the 2008 primary season--the battle with Hilary Clinton made him a better candidate.
When the Dems find the 2020 "better candidate", I hope Mike will be ready to help.
6
Let him say the magic words and turn people's hearts to him. Words, after all, not deeds are what make a president. I'd like him or Mayor Pete B. to win the nomination. Either could show up Trump in debates; neither would send the U.S. down the path of his own entitled agenda, as Trump or Warren would.
6
The oligarchy thanks you for both your choices, Pete and Mike. Meanwhile, those of us who know millions can’t survive more of the same ole same ole, are going to have to disagree with you.
26
I often wonder what effect 9/11 had on crime in New York. I wonder if the feeling that all New Yorkers felt towards each other on that day and the days that followed helped start the sharp decline in crime that we have experienced in the years that followed.
3
Whether you take his apology to be genuine or not, you should keep in mind that this is the guy being nudged into the race by millionaires and billionaires so they won’t have to contribute their fair share to the public coffers, as they fear they might under a Warren or Bernie presidency.
90
@JDH Nail...head.
4
I am not sure what championing unpopular but prescient ideas like banning smoking in bars and limiting the sale of large sodas shows. Bloomberg is to be commended for his genuine efforts to make evidence based decisions on what would improve people's lives. His commitment to gun control and combating the effects of global warming are real as well.
I take him at his word when he says that he believed stop and frisk was saving lives and admire his willingness to apologize and say he was wrong.
What I find inexcusable is his defense of Wall Street in the wake of the financial crisis. I look forward to hearing him apologize about that.
I think Bloomberg would make an excellent cabinet member of our next Democratic president, hopefully, Elizabeth Warren.
10
@DebbieR Elizabeth Warren can not elected the President in the America of today. So, if people insist on nominating her - we will wind up with a second term for Trump. Winning politics is not a revolution, it is building a winning coalition - and Warren is very much my-way-or-highway person. Good for her, but not so good if you want to win the Presidential election.
Warren and Sanders cannot win; Pete B is articulate but too lightweight; Klobuchar is my favorite but not articulate; Biden is washed up. Bloomberg has the right politics, is very able administrator, has resources and can win the crucial middle that will decide this election.
5
@Kavm
That's what people said about Trump. He can't win.
FYI, those progressives are far more popular in the midwest and the south (where they are polling higher than Trump) than billionaires like Bloomberg.
9
Bernie beats Trump. It was something the mainstream media recognized last time, too late to help us avoid the Trump tragedy effecting us all now, but Bernie still beats Trump, now. It’s why the candidates, like Pete and Mike are running. Oligarchy will miss the ability to strip mine what’s left, from every aspect of our lives, of the resources of the middle class and poor, who aren’t yet living in tents. If Bernie wins, the banks won’t get to keep an entire generation from starting their lives because they are in, essentially, indentured servitude to Wall Street. They’ll pay a lot for you to vote against that... et cetera... I realize Americans are a proud people, can take a lot of abuse before crying Uncle, but... haven’t we had enough yet?
5
I am glad Michael Bloomberg apologized for stop and frisk. My own position on stop and frisk are mixed - bad in terms of the impact on the innocent who suffered under it, arguably necessary to bring the crime under control in NYC of those days. It is easy to quote the current day statistics - but the crime was a very significant issue at the time Bloomberg began his term as the mayor of NYC. All the same, it is not only a political necessity for him, it is right to acknowledge the negative side of a mixed policy.
I have very limited hope that Mike is able to make it through the democratic primary, let alone the presidency. But, he would be my top preference as the next president. And, all the sanctimonious comments on him are coming from people who will get us 4 more years of Trump. And, a second term will be a real mayhem. So - I hope enough folks see the sense before that catastrophe.
4
@Kavindra Malik
I am not a New Yorker so please help me understand how “in 88% of the stops no arrests were made” was a deterrent to crime?
1
@CBailey It's all in the framing! 12% led to arrests, and hopefully prevented crimes! NYC had a real violent crimes situation before and around that time. The push to be harsh on small crime in Bloomberg administration did have a visible effect on the crime situation. They also had the effect of harassing the remaining 88% and were later found unconstitutional. So, Bloomberg is right to apologize for them, but he is also right to see the positive impact on the terrible crime situation of the time.
There’s more here to build on. There are three challenges to conventional wisdoms which are part of the problem if we’re going to solve our wicked problems. There’s some larger hope to get out of our frame-restricting boxes.
You never apologize or admit you’re wrong. That’s weakness. We forget no one knows everything. It’s actually leadership to admit when you got it wrong.
Numbers (or data or facts) speak for themselves and basically are reality. Case closed.
Several fields believe that numbers are fundamentally how you see problems and know whether solutions are working. Yet, there are many problems with them, as K-12 educators learned. They can be valuable tools if carefully used. But the user/interpreter has to be open to what could be missed.
I wrote about different interpretations of stop-&-frisk numbers back then, https://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2013/01/25/3-measurement-pitfalls-sustainability-world-should-avoid. Now even its main proponent sees what apparently certain numbers missed; and, with time, we see that causality was misdiagnosed.
The framing of the Democratic Presidential race is as moderates versus progressives. There is no blending.
Instead, we’re seeing a prominent centrist move to a position of the left. I suspect we’ll see movement by Warren in the opposite direction, such as on health care.
We’ll have to see whether apologies can be accepted; another conventional wisdom possibly shaken.
There are other conventional wisdoms that will need questioning.
He should run in his own party—the Republican.
The fact that he isn't, shows how far right the Democrats are.
96
@Happy Selznick
The Democrats are spanning a wide range of positions now. Looks like the Establishment wealthy are afraid that a progressive such as Sanders or Warren might win the nomination.
13
@Sarah Warren is an ex-republican too and Sanders is actually an independent.
1
@Happy Selznick do you also say that about Warren? She used to be a republican too.
Not telling the truth does not appear to be one of the Mayor's faults so I tend to credit the sincerity of his badly needed apology.
His having been on the front line, made a serious mistake and regretted it, is an asset than less experienced candidates could not bring to the Presidency,.
It would be a joyous moment if he were to become President and took a major step towards rectifying the wrongs still suffered by black Americans in his effort to "win back trust."
22
A day late and a dollar short, but I am glad he is trying to make amends.
11
Making amends requires so much more than an apology.
22
To truly make amends- explain why you did it- explain why/how it was wrong and why it will not happen again and what will you would sacrifice if you make same mistake. I don't see anything like that over the last week or so from him. The ONLY reason he can contemplate joining race is because of his billionaire status. Yes, I like what he had done with his money since but why does that make him an authentic candidate? Do we really need another older rich white guy as president with misogynistic and racist past acts?
1
@Emily
You are very kind, he is not making amends at all. He doesnt want Stop& Frisk to come up every time he opens his white mouth. Bloomberg was a terrible mayor, he hated minorities and only cared about the upper east side. He did nothing but tear apart communities and the school system. A strong supporter of charter school vs public schools . Lied and lied to get another term, when he should of been gone after two. He didnt fix the subways and like Trump when he didnt get his way he bad mouthed people over and over , America crooked Mayor and Bloomberg have been exposed for the racist people that they are. Doesnt matter that he has rich black friends and mentors minority mayors,
He will poll very low,, spend his vanity money and be out of the race and he can take Patrick with him
.
There is nothing more to say about him except that he was a do nothing mayor and if he hadn't deliberately damaged people's lives this would be worth a conversation but he was the plantation mayor and he filled the jails to make his point.
Bloomberg is only out for Bloomberg nothing else matters, he gives all this money to causes and nothing every changes, because the root problems are never addressed.
IN other words, he refused to apologize or change course until there was some benefit to him for doing so.
332
@James
Maybe, but this just seems cynical to me. I lived under Bloomberg's excellent (if imperfect) administration of this city's government. I frankly don't believe any of us "change course" until we discover it necessary.
9
@James
Back when he was responsible for crime it was a different story. Stop-and-Frisk was designed to get guns off the streets. Black residents implored then NYC mayor Giuliani to do something about their kids getting shot while walking to and from school. They were afraid to leave their apartments.
Interesting how Mr. Gun Control, Bloomberg, has such a selective concern about removing citizens' rights when it comes to gun control. Bad to remove Blacks' rights. OK to remove everyone else's.
Good luck with that.
2
@James
Don't forget he had a police commissioner who advocated stop QUESTION abd frisk.
Maybe at the time he felt it was working and made the best of it.
At the end of the day he has had a change of heart.
Isn't that better?
2
Bloomberg still hasn't apologized for being a member of country & city clubs that don't admit women and many minorities as full members (although he conveniently quit them a year ahead of running for mayor).
Bloomberg still hasn't apologized for pushing the City Council to extend mayoral term limits beyond two terms -- effective immediately, and while Bloomberg was in his second term. Because he and he alone could get NYC through the global financial crisis -- a classic dictator move. Then, conveniently, during his third term the Council reinstated the two-term limit. Just wow.
No.
105
@Ab Cd Seriously? Country clubs from 20 years ago? Bloomberg isn't pretending to be a man of the people, but he might offer to be man for the people. He is an extremely successful business man who enjoyed the legal privileges of being a billionaire. If, like he did with his business, he is will to adapt and evolve his politics, I am willing to look at what he stands for now. His lifetime of work has proven he has a back bone and that he doesn't make empty promises. He hasn't earned my vote yet, but the ability to own a mistake is a quality lacking in many current leaders. If you're looking for leaders who have never done anything you find offensive in their past, you will only find followers.
23
@Rober
He was a leader in NYC for a long time surrounded by yes people, the poverty is still here, the poor schools are still here with the uncertified white teachers in charge, the upper East side became more elite, communities were destroyed by glass building and rich white people.
A leader, I dont think so, no difference between him and Trump both out for themselves.
Warren and Bernie have nothing to worry about from these vanity cases.
5
The Wall Street Wealthy are playing to win by having candidates in both parties to assure they remain in power. They didn't get Billions by caring about people. Don't be naive.
167
Amen. Those who amass and keep for themselves billions, have a sociopathic mental illness. They need help, not power over us and our future.
22
Anybody who falls for this deserves the consequences. There are other choices, people. We don't need the insincere one just looking out for his own bank accounts. We already tried that.
76
Bloomberg did the right thing and its not too late. There are issues that Bloomberg can more effectively advance than leftists. Income inequality, affordable heath care for all, the economy, climate change. He can beat Trump. Where Warren and Bernie cannot let go of poor slogans and threats to put entire industries out of work.
30
@Bananahead
In re to: "Bloomberg did the right thing and its not too late. There are issues that Bloomberg can more effectively advance than leftists. Income inequality, affordable heath care for all, the economy, climate change."
Bloomberg can only address Income inequality, affordable heath care for all, the economy,and climate change to the extent that his political beliefs allow him to . All you need to know about his position on those issues is held in this quote:
“If you want to look at a system that’s noncapitalistic, just take a look at what was perhaps the wealthiest country in the world, and today, people are starving to death. It’s called Venezuela.”
That is boilerplate Republican messaging. Venezuela's problem is autocracy, not socialism. If Bloomberg wants to run for president, he should do so as a Republican. That's his lifelong party.
8
@Bananahead
But of course there are already nonracist candidates already in the race that can do these things. Why let another billionaire muddy the waters?
6
@Bananahead
Bloomberg's plans for income inequality are going to work better than Warren's. Pffft. Dreamer.
3
I thought Bloomberg was a good Mayor and I thought that stop-and-frisk was a sensible policy. Without it the murder rate has been rising.
Some people seem to believe that sanctimonious preaching is more important than actually saving lives. It's too bad that Bloomberg has caved in to the pressure.
25
@Grace You are absolutely wrong -- the murder rate is currently at its LOWEST since the 1950s, and we don't have stop-and-frisk anymore. There is no need to hurt our communities with such a horrible policy in order to have safe neighborhoods.
119
@Grace
Many New Yorkers agree. We understood that getting illegal guns off the streets was an important goal.
Progressives like to talk about gun control, just not about any measures that affect illegal gun owners.
10
@AACNY We are still getting guns off the street with record low levels of crime , we just don't have to stop INNOCENT men of color over and over for walking down the street or hanging with friends. Good police work and even more importantly sending anyone caught with a gun to jail ( the big difference between NYC and nearly all other areas) is what keeps gun violence down in NYC not harrassing innocent people and having communities live in fear of the police.
12
Stop-and-frisk, or carding, as we call it up here both serve as tools of crime prevention and they work. It is much less costly and time consuming than drag everything through the courts.
18
Is Michael Bloomberg's eleventh-hour apology for "stop and frisk" sincere?
Maybe.
Is a 77-year-old billionaire going to resonate with enough inhabitants of the big tent that is the Democratic Party to win him the nomination?
I have no idea.
What I do most fervently hope for is for someone to come out of the scrum of Democratic candidates who can cobble together enough Rust Belt votes to remove the abominable incumbent from office after he skates on conviction in the Senate.
36
This is not meant to be snarky, because it’s good to atone for having done harm to others. I’ll take this apology at face value because Mr. Bloomberg has stepped forward to oppose the man who represents the worst leadership choice in American history. With his personal fortune, he has also sponsored and funded some important causes.
I don’t believe in his candidacy to replace Trump. He isn’t the right person for the times and could have offered an alternative in 2016. Not now, the field is crowded with Democratic candidates who offer a range of choices. Mine is Elizabeth Warren because average Americans need the improvements she is willing to fight for. Voters may differ with me for their own reasons but the others who have announced at the start are people I would support.
But he can still do much good as he pays for those political ads against Trump’s reelection. He deserves gratitude for that.
44
@MG
"...the field is crowded with Democratic candidates who offer a range of choices. Mine is Elizabeth Warren because average Americans need the improvements she is willing to fight for."
Yes they do need these improvements. But "average Americans" have been voting against their own best interests for years, as laid out in the book, "What's the Matter With Kansas?"
I'm all for most of Senator Warren's policies and plans, as are you, as are my very liberal sons, daughters, and their spouses. But getting the electorate to vote for Warren, if she's the nominee, because what she wants for them is what they need is a very different matter.
It's not just that voters outside the Northeastern liberal urban centers have habitually voted agains their own best interests, it's also the very deep, generations-long, anti-intellectualism that pervades this country from sea to shining sea and that Trump has so cannily tapped into.
What's "I've-got-a-plan-for-that" Senator Warren's plan for overcoming that? (And winning these folks' vote.)
As Earl K. Long, forgotten brother of "a-chicken-in-every-pot" Huey Long, LA governor and Senator and the inventor of Social Security (stolen, thank God by FDR)--as Earl K. was wont to say, "There's not a man in the world as blind as a man who just won't see, and there's not a man in the world as deaf as a man who wants to be deaf." Hello, Southerners! ( I'm one, and I know my own people). Hello, Midwesterners!
7
@SMS
Thanks for reading my comment and offering your thoughts, the content of which I which I have considered for some time now as I still feel the sting from the defeat of George McGovern, a truly great man, war hero from the middle of the country.
I know many people who are like the ones you describe and have relatives in Central PA which has been compared to the South (for reasons that are valid).
I have been liberal all my adult life, finding my way with the fight for Civil Rights. My core belief is that the government exists to serve the people.
I have somehow maintained a sense of optimism and it has served me well. I do think that is how all of the progressive advances have been able to be won.
You do know that Trump did not win the majority of popular votes and from what I read isn’t picking up new support from rank and file Americans.
Impeachment hearings just may cost him some votes as the truth emerges. Let’s see who wins the nomination and support her/him. We can certainly point out Republican extremism is more dangerous than any progressive proposals for change. Look at how they are behaving in these hearings.
Oh and Kansas has changed a bit since that book was written, you must know.
3
@MG
Let's hope that the people of Kansas are not going to support Pompeo. He and McConnell are at the top of our most nefarious politicians. Unfortunately, we have so many of them.
3
If Bloomberg manages to get the Democratic nomination, I'll happily vote for the genuine New York billionaire as an (admittedly flawed) improvement over the newly-minted-Floridian-fake-billionaire.
62
While it is thoughtful of him to apologize, did stop and frisk not achieve the desired results? Did it not drastically lower crime to the lowest levels in many decades, perhaps ever? The reason the city is so safe these today is primarily because Bloomberg cracked down on seemingly petty crimes like public urination and fare beating that tend to be committed by the same people who commit felonies. And safety is what the vast majority of people of all races and ethnicities care about.
20
@CP "..did stop and frisk not achieve the desired results?"
At what expense? At the expense of who's dignity and civil rights? The end does not justify the means, sorry. The police will need to get closer (as in close) to the community they police-it cannot be done at a distance, and it should not be done through programs like stop and frisk.
13
@CP, there has been no evidence that stop-and-frisk caused the decline in the crime rate. In the years after it was cut back sharply, crime continued to decline.
31
@CP We could bring down the crime rate even further by instituting a shoot and frisk policy. Many people would applaud a program like this.
It’s one thing for a priest to easily forgive him but a whole different story when it comes to everyone else and especially those who know someone who was stopped and frisked.
We’ll have to wait and see to know if it was too little too late.
7
Sure, he's an opportunist. But opportunism isn't all bad if, in the pursuit of votes, a bad idea receives one more public rejection and that arc that carries our hopes and dreams bends a bit more in the right direction.
('Course I'm still voting for Bernie, but I'm glad Bloomberg said this, for whatever reason.)
7
Let's put this in proper perspective. Alone among all candidates, Bloomberg understands that climate change is an existential threat. Against that basic fact, indignation about stop-and-frisk is inconsequential. (And having been mugged or assualted about every three months when I lived in an AA neighborhood in Brooklyn, I think being stopped and frisked once a year is not so terrible a burden.)
36
@Mark Nuckols
With all due respect to your woeful tale about being mugged constantly, I do not think "Stop and Frisk" was inconsequential to those who were stopped and frisked (in many cases, multiple times).
One can always find an issue more serious than the one in hand, but it does not diminish the pain caused by Mister Bloomberg's policies or, despite all evidence to the contrary, his continuing refusal to admit that they did not work.
27
@Mark Nuckols "Alone among all candidates Bloomberg understands that climate change is an existential threat"? That was Sanders' position in 2016 and if anything he has sharpened that position. What's the Green New Deal, chopped liver?
43
@Mark Nuckols
All Democratic candidates understand that climate change is an existential threat.
That giant and easily disproved assertion makes me discount everything else you said.
10
He intended to run all along he waited for now so he could excuse avoiding the early primaries where large black populations would surely give him a drubbing it would make no sense to try to continue on from.
And if this apology is genuine which I do not believe it is, what is he going to do to right the lives he permanently damaged? There are people whose children will still be dealing with the impact of Stop & Frisk 50 years from now. What is he going to do about them? I think that is far more important for him to fix than him trying to prevent a real Democrat from winning the presidential election just to protect his fortune.
125
@magicisnotreal
The first primary is the Iowa Caucus, followed by New Hampshire and Nevada, hardly the homes of large black populations. The first place he registered to possibly participate is Alabama.
2
Yeah like Iowa and New Hampshire, the two whitest states in the universe, that are also two two single most important. Sorry, you’re trafficking in speculation.
1
Fair enough I was not clear. I was referring to his mentioning that he was not going to file in some "early" states.
https://ballotpedia.org/State_and_federal_candidate_filing_deadlines_for_2020