Mikey would not sink them as badly as Bernie the self-admited Demo-Socialist.
Feel the Bern? That's the ideologically pure Bernie Bros and Sises who will hand the election to Trump and then stew for for years hoping another Demo-socialist will emerge to lose to Demon Don, Junior.
1
Bloomberg (despite being an old Jewish billionaire) may be the Democrats best candidate to unseat Trump. He’s as arrogant & egotistical as Trump, he’s self made rather then a Trust child (which Trump is), he can be just as politically incorrect as Trump, and, mostly, he’s had a hatred for Trump going back decades and would love to be the cause of his demise as president.
5
The Democratic establishment is again misjudging the mood of an angry electorate by throwing its weight behind Bloomberg. Trump won because of the rage of working people who are tired of a system that is rigged against them. If Bloomberg wins the nomination, it is just more proof of a horribly broken system, more fuel for the bonfire. I will not vote for Bloomberg even if it means four more years of Trump. Burn it all down instead.
Good overview of Mr. Bloomberg's strength and potential weaknesses, as per his past record with regards to his progressive bonafides. Will he really change the ways Democrats would want? I don't know. But, as with a lot of people, if you told me right now he can beat Trump, I'm willing to take that chance.
6
I am worried about Bernie Sanders’s rise to the top, because, if he is the Democrats' candidate, he will lose the election, and if he is not, losing the nomination to Bloomberg, he and his supporters will not support Bloomberg, thereby dividing the Dems. Our only hope, given Bernie's strength, o now rests with Biden, Klobushar and Warren. If Bloomberg is the nominee, Sanders and his base will not be flexible and pragmatic, will not compromise their hostility to billionaires and will either not vote at all vote, or not vote for Bloomberg, thereby assuring victory to Trump guaranteeing four more years of Trump. Sanders will then really be the spoiler (as he was not, despite Hillary's opinion in 2016).
I predict Trump will win 4 more years. God help this nation! Just today, Trump has asked Barr to "clean house" at the Justice Department. He wants to force out of Justice all Trump enemies, non-partisan career civil servants who heed the voice of conscience and the Constitution, not the will and whims of the President! One more step closer to authoritarian, totalitarian rule! God help this nation!
5
Bottom line----the Democrats better get behind someone and have a united front SOON!! If not, we are in for another four years of this madness! Yes the stocks are doing well but that's a shallow reason to justify another four years!! If you've lived long enough you know the financial markets can crash as easily as they rise.
4
Most US voters say they are 'moderates'....but how to define moderate--- vs extreme?
Our definitions are distorted. Best example---truly universal, affordable health care. Here it's portrayed as extreme, even radical. In other democracies that are capitalist also, HC for all is long standing, centrist policy. This shows that their citizens get a basic respect from the govt they elect, that we don't get.
Either single payer or insurance mandates with govt regulation of costs.
Here--- despite our venerable constitution, equal protection clause, and bill of rights-- we lack protection in the life/death matter of affordable medical care as a right. Obvious solutions are called 'radical'.
Many here are taught to be proud of what's promoted as our individualism, and freedom from big govt, so many are actually proud of our lack of HC for all.
It's 'moderate' here to just tolerate the results of our high profit HC system--earlier deaths, disability and bankruptcy from medical bills. Too bad but that's the price we pay.
Wha'ts moderate in other democracies to not tolerate this, and to fund HC for all with fair and adequate taxes.
1
Bloomie's getting a pass from some women despite his documented history of gross, offensive sexism. See NYT "Bloomberg’s History of Demeaning Comments About Women" Nov 15, updated Feb 17. with 858 comments.
Seems he's getting a pass from some blacks despite his notorious, excessive police stop and search of minorities on the streets who were just going about their daily business. In the vast majority of stops, the cops, directed to fill quotas, found no crime whatsoever.
The judge ruled it unconstitutional. Bloomie disagreed. What's his definition of a democracy then---this man who is supposed to save us from Tsar Trump?
See the 2012 'silent march' on upper 5th Ave with thousands of all races protesting.
Need-- an in depth analysis --- why are some women and minorities giving Napoleon Bloomberg a pass? If they think he's the only one to beat the sexist, racist, authoritarian Trump---then at how long before we can start creating a fair, just, society, where all are treated with basic respect?
How long, oh Lord, how long? -- as MLK said.
1
Trump at 6ft 3 mocks Bloomberg who is 5ft 8. But both men have huge Napoleon complexes.
If American voters have any self -respect, they should ensure these 2 meet their Waterloo, then be exiled from our politics.
Then we have to set about reconstructing our political culture for higher standards, so that millions of voters can't be swayed to fall for the blatant, self-serving propaganda of such would -be Emperors.
Otherwise Trump's harm lives on beyond his term. Swamp creatures will be inspired to rise from the depths. We’ll be lucky if we just get mediocre presidents.
1
In 2012, I joined thousands of New Yorkers-- White, Black, Latino, Asian, male, female, young, old--- in a silent march down 5th Ave, to protest the 5 million police stop and searches that Bloomberg inflicted for years on citizens.
No music, drums, chants or talk---from Harlem 110th St, past throngs of onlookers, some on the steps of the Met Museum, on to 77th St. City officials were there talking to the public.
Judge Shira Scheindlin later ruled the excessive “stop-and-frisk” unconstitutional in a rebuke to Bloomie. He vowed to appeal.
She didn’t ban all stops completely, but called it “indirect racial profiling” and ordered federal monitoring and cameras.
“No one should live in fear of being stopped when he leaves his home to go about the activities of daily life,” Scheindlin wrote.
Now for 2020, we already have good candidates, who will ‘get things done’ that we need, that show more respect for citizens.
2
Bloomberg is a wolf in sheep's clothing. I don't believe for a minute he's anything but a spoiler to syphon off votes from the Democrats. We don't need another billionaire with a checkered past in the White House.
5
Bloomberg is a billionaire, he has a bad past. But there'd be no Stop and Frisk without the bad politics generated by the infamous Crime Bill, written by Biden and supported by Bernie. And by Hillary, even though she had no vote.
But the left is supposed to stand for science, I believe. Trump is making war on American science, cutting funding and banning science from public policy.
The inconvenient fact here is that Bloomberg spends a lot of his own money supporting science. He and other billionaires have been quietly funding the gap between what American scientists need and what Congress is willing to give them for many years now.
Are we going to continue with this funding model under President Bernie?
If billionaires fund science, it means more taxpayer money can go to social programs that keep strughling Americans housed, fed and alive.
If we're going to choose that route, we should at least acknowledge that we're choosing it. And so we'd better show a bit of gratitude and not be so hateful towards people we are choosing to depend on.
Disclosure: I'm voting for Warren. I want to express this concern with her too.
2
Given that money in politics is the root of all our civic problems, Bloomberg is the opposite of the right guy.
4
Hmmmm
How Money Manipulates the Media and Minds
If Bloomberg can buy anything he wants, why not a team of commentators in the NYT? Do you not see the scripted similarities in many of the pro-Bloomberg comments?
6
Bloomberg is a weak candidate. He is the one Democratic candidate who *cannot* win against Trump. He's just like Trump, only more polite. Why would anti-racist voters turn out for Bloomberg? Why would union members turn out for Bloomberg? Why would people who don't have health insurance turn out for Bloomberg? If you think this guy is a strong candidate, you need to get out of your upper middle class bubble.
4
If Bloomberg wants to buy my vote, it is for sale. The price is a direct payment of 3 million in cash to me personally. In the absence of this transfer, my early vote on Super Tuesday went for Klobuchar.
To his credit, Bloomberg, for all his faults, would be a better president than Trump. Bloomberg gets my vote if he is the Democratic nominee.
1
Democrats never complained when Bloomberg used his billions on their behalf, presumably using his billions to “buy” votes for that Party. It is a bit hypocritical to complain now.
5
Answer to the question: Bloomberg would sink the Democrats, and this is the intent of the elite.
Bloomberg is in the running in order to drive a wedge into the block of the Democratic Party. I think the strategy is called "sabotage".
4
Mainstream [a.k.a. centrist] Democrats are in a tizzy predicting terrible loss in the 2020 election and down-ballot damage to the party at all levels of government if Bernie Sanders gets the nomination.
But this sounds exactly like the panic of similarly mainstream Republicans in 2016 who united as never-Trumpers fearing similar loss and damage were Trump to be nominated. How well did their predictions turn out?
The reality is that Bernie attracts and appeals to the same working-class voters in the rust-belt states who put Trump into office. Their frustration then how globalization and other factors disemployed them or stagnated their wages, with little help from mainstreamers, remains alive today.
Those worried about a President Sanders bringing about universal health care too abruptly should be reassured that even a Democratic House and Senate would ensure a careful, deliberate, and voluntary transition over many years.
After all, Medicare now is entirely optionsl. How many grandpas and grandmas refuse Medicare enrollment upon age 65, preferring private primary coverage at increasing premium rates? Virtually none.
The trillions now spent nationally for premiums, deductibles, and co-pays by both beneficiaries and employers certainly greatly exceed what non-profit Medicare for All (MFA) would cost.
Once Medicare is an option for under-65s, unions could negotiate higher wages in exchange for employers picking up their much lower Medicare premiums.
3
And for all you billionaire haters, hoping for Bernie to magically bring us the Big Rock Candy Mountain, please remember one thing: the greatest and most politically and socially important President of the 20th and 21st centuries was Democrat Franklin Delano Rosevelt; a very, very rich man—another flawed human.
Is Bloomberg a flawed human? Certainly. Is he anywhere near as flawed our would be badger and pretend president? Certainly not! You'd need to measure the distance in parsecs.
Frankly, if you cannot bring yourself to vote against the absolutely worst man ever to besmirch the White House, you don't deserve to live in a representative democracy. If Donny wins again and the senate stays red, you won't.
6
Bloomberg is no FDR.
3
Money is politics is the result of a do nothing Congress to ban private donations. Congress, should have, years ago made pubic funding and air time in the same amount for each qualifying candidate. But they didn't do so and now the contest is all about money. Complaining about it won't make it go away; only a change in Congress pledged to rid our elections of outsized money from megadonors will.
1
Bloomberg, for all the advertising and philanthropy, is an unknown quantity as a human being. An internet search only shows his career record and non-profit giving.
His racism is troubling. He ordered the NYPD to surveille Muslims, then demanded that information be suppressed in a biography about him.
He justified his "stop and frisk" policy, targeted only at minority neighborhoods, by saying, "they's where all the crime happens." He didn't back down when statistics proved that whites were 50% more likely to be carrying weapons, and 30% more likely to be carrying drugs, than minorities.
40 sexual harassment accusations, and his phrase for good-looking women, "I'd do her." is a winning quality to no one.
He's rich from providing Wall St. faster trading info., the Wall St. who brought the 2008 recession. He was unharmed. His extreme wealth, and who made him rich, casts doubt on his ability to relate to the majority of Americans not in his rarefied niche.
The world sees an image of a man, an empty suit, in Bloomberg. Whether he's only ego-driven, or if compassion, empathy, respect for the law are part of him--no one knows.
As President, divested from his businesses and his philanthropies, he will have to persuade voters, Congress and world leaders that his agenda is best for all, and must be paid for by U.S. tax dollars.
His agenda and personality are as yet unknown.
1
I will happily choose a genuine billionaire philanthropist over a fake one, any day of the week ... and especially on Tuesday, Nov. 3.
4
First of all, who is Spencer Bokat-Lindell? What is your expertise?
Everyone is totally missing the Bloomberg's strength. It is not about wealth. Why is no one talking about the other billionaire who is spending huge amounts? Tom Steyer. A good man. But what has his wealth achieved in ranking?
For all his faults, Bloomberg is a brilliant marketer. He is the only one who will be able to go head-to-head with Trump. He will be able to counterpunch in ways no other candidate can.
Democrats wake up. We are in the fight of our life. Stop with all your self-righteous, purity testing infighting.
You should all watch the history Channel series Washington. Trump was his greatest fear. The founders of this country were brilliant man. They all feared the prospect of a Trump. Although they had no idea who he would be.
1
Let's see how he does in the debate. If he's no good on live TV, he should toss his support to Buttigieg, who the best on his feet of any of the candidates, and who would cut Trump to ribbons in a debate.
One of the things that puzzles me is why some people believe that Bloomberg will defeat Trump. Maybe suburban centrists and Wall Street Democrats will support him, but why would blue collar and rural white voters in Michigan, Ohio or Wisconsin vote for him instead of Trump? Why would people of color in Detroit, Cleveland or Milwaukee or progressive young people in college towns turn out for him? I'm getting the impression that support for Bloomberg is largely a function of people projecting their hope that someone can defeat an incumbent President in a good economy and with Electoral College that favors his base.
4
Bloomberg will save the Democrats if nominated -- unless unhappy Sanders supporters sink him.
And in that case, we are all sunk. I hope that we can all behave like grown-ups, and kick out Trump.
5
Do you wish to find a candidate that can beat Trump ? Vote for Blooberg .
Do you prefer to keep Trump for another term ? Vote for any other Democratic candidate .
Americans are obsessed with Socialism , the most extremist Democratic candidate in Europe would be considered a perfectly eligible Social Democrat , this is why you have presidents like DT
4
Back in the 1990’s when a multi-millionaire ,who could afford the best defense lawyers in the country, was found “not guilty” for crimes of which he seemed so very guilty, a friend angrily responded with: “In this country, you get as much ‘justice’ as you can buy!”
Let’s hope that responses to Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s unprecedented personal spending in his quest for the Democratic nomination doesn’t trigger reactions analogous to my friend's reaction to the 1990’s verdict, i. e., it’s QUITE LEGAL, but it demonstrates that: “In this country, you get as much political success as you can buy!”
1
Apparently purity is more important than victory to many in this column and in the comments below. There are goals that are admirable and those that are achievable and often 'something's gotta give'. NY Times readers do not want 4 more years of Trump. Furthermore, many/most would have been pleased if Trump's impeachment led to his conviction, DESPITE fact that there would now be a President Mike Pence. Dems. must nominate the candidate who can best beat Trump. Tonight's debate, Super Tuesday primaries and beyond will help narrow the field significantly.
If beating Trump is as all important as many claim, then tests for purity are irrelevant.
Boomberg is aleading contender for title "Most Likely to WIN." THE GOAL IS TO DEFEAT TRUMP, not nominate the the candidate of your dreams. If Mike checks the box "Beating Trump" better than anyone else (& time will tell if that's the case), then he should be the nominee.
OF COURSE, everyone decides for themselves whether purity or denying Trump a 2nd term is more important, including NYTimes Op-Ed writers & Editorial Board (FYI: remember NO ranked voting in almost all primaries).
Choose the candidate you know/believe will beat Trump, not the the one you hope will do so, not the one with best policy, but the one with best chance to win. Of course, if you don't think denying Trump a 2nd term is essential, then all of this is irrelevant, but if that was the case: you wouldn't be reading this.
I'm leaning towards becoming a 'Black for Bloomberg!'...(pending his debate performance)... NOT because he's ruthless and can beat and beat up on Trump; NOT because he can self-finance his campaign; NOT because I'm terrified of Democratic-Socialist Bernie. I'm seriously considering Bloomberg because I think he's got the skill set to actually run the country and rescue government from it's seemingly endless dysfunction!
2
MRB is the DJT for the Democrats
How perfect -- scrappy two-bit con man from the right and a polished billionaire elitist from the left.
2 New Yorkers selling the Brooklyn Bridge
2 opportunists who jump to other side to get in the game
2 middle aged white men of privilege
2 men motivated by ego, not public service
2 men with history insensitive to women and minorities
2 purveyors of racist policies
2 men indifferent to people and the lives they wreck
2 men who talk the populist game but play by the plutocrats' rule book
2 men who see the country through the lens of profit/loss and balance sheets, not millions of people whose lives are squeezed with wage losses, rising costs of essentials, and depreciating value of human capital
2 men who dream of fantasies then make taxpayers foot the bill (the wall versus Amsterdam on the Hudson)
2 men who think they are so smart, then make problems worse (ask MRB about trying to turn Manhattan into a walking city without cars and putting little cafe-like seating and food trucks in the middle of midtown intersections!)
2 men who use public office to pursue personal fantasies (a wall at the border vs. Amsterdam on the Hudson)
2 whose governing style is my-way-or-highway
2 white men with messiah complex -- and a constituency who see them as their savior
2 who have amassed huge war chests for go-low attack campaigns
2 who will lie to voters
-- and the country will get what it deserves.
1
"When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time." -- Maya Angelou
Bloomberg has shown us who he is over and over again--racist, misogynist, turning NYC into a playground for the rich while making it unaffordable for working people.
I will never vote for him.
5
Might as well shut down primaries and voting and let billionaires fight it out among themselves. Bloomberg makes the whole democratic process a sham
1
Bloomberg is a total mismatch with the Democratic Party.
3
Bloomberg will go down like a lead ballon after tomorrow night’s (not ready for prime time) debate performance. Just you wait and see.
1
Funny how it is totally okay to engage in and repeat mocking of a person's appearance as long as it is a white man, while mocking the appearance of, say, Stacy Abrams is totally off-limits. I've marveled about this hypocrisy of liberals, especially woke women, all my life. You'd expect they'd at least pretend to not be hypocrites in published articles and limit it to personal, unrecorded interactions.
1
Talk about foreign influence in the US government!
Netanyahu already has his good friend Kushner in the White House. Now he wants to insure his influence on US foreign policy by having his good friend Bloomberg on the opposing ticket.
2
Americans have been so paranoid about Russian influence in their elections, they have failed to see the Israeli influence.
2
Democrats face a test of whether they believe in anything at all. Sure Republicans have failed this test miserably, but is that a reason to follow them over the cliff?
Racial equality and fairness? Too controversial. Democratic government? Inconvenient. Maybe next time. MeToo? Not us. Money buying elections? We have to win. Student loan debt? Tough luck, kids. Healthcare? We can’t afford socialism.
Democrats deserve another 4 or may ??? years of Trump (and maybe his crime family). They don’t even know what they want from a government they might elect. They just want to win. They will nominate a Republican only to watch Trump steal some of their issues. They’ll wrap old Republicanism around their necks, just like they lapped up RomneyCare and got clobbered. What a bankrupt party!
"Bloomberg is not on the ballot in the pre-March 3 states, so his debate performance(s) take on added importance. He has yet to be tested, and for that reason, virtually everyone, including the moderators, has reason to pounce." (Washington Post, 18Feb2020) And the Democratic circular firing sqaud rides again. Mr. Bloomberg has pledged to support whoever the Dem nominee is, and has made it a high priority to remove Mr. Trump from the White House. As an Independent, I might expect the Dem wannabes to welcome such a man ...
Here in Texas, while the gaggle of the usual Dems ate corn dogs in Iowa, Mr. Bloomberg was the only one telling us about his policy positions in detail in TV and newspaper ads. I found all of them to be appealing, including strong support for African American intiatives (yes, I know about the old controversies). "A meeting with nearly 80 black pastors in Detroit. A speech before a black Democratic organization in Montgomery. A rally at a historically black university. A tour of Martin Luther King Jr.'s church. An early voting kickoff at an African American museum. All in the past two weeks." (AP, 12Feb2020)
1
Bloomberg’s new slogan after the NV debate will be “The Bonfire of the Vanities.”
Mr. Bloomberg is the best person to beat Trump, and that is the main objective in this election if the USA is to be freed from a self-serving, willfully ignorant tyrant. Bloomberg has the intelligence, determination, and resources to do the job. Trump is a venomous unpredictable changeling who sees the USA as his own personal fiefdom. He could actually destroy the world in a tantrum.
>> He has since chartered his way into a prominent position
Charted, not "chartered."
America needs a president who can back up his ego with some brains. Bloomberg has it. Trump does not. Give me FDR. I've had enough of Mussolini.
3
Funny that a paper that is so adamantly pro-abortion should take issue with Blomberg's "Kill it!" remark.
1
In this fall's elections, there will be two candidates for President: Trump, and Not Trump. It doesn't matter who the Not Trump candidate actually is. That person will have my vote, and the vote of millions of other Americans who want only to see Trump gone. I don't care if Jimmy McMillan, he of The Rent Is Too Damn High Party in NYC, came back to run against Trump. I'd vote for him. At least we'd get some refreshing entertainment value out of it.
But there are no two ways about it, Trump has to be gone. And anyone who can't see that he has obliterated our democracy is blind to the facts. Not that facts ever got in the way of Trump supporters.
4
All this debate overlook the single most important fact of American life today: Trump will never willingly leave the Presidency. No matter how many popular or Electoral College votes we win, Trump will deny their legitimacy.
When Trump unilaterally proclaims the election invalid, when call he sends his red-hatted MAGA brigades into the streets like the Brown Shirts they are, when he tries to send the military against the very people and institutions the military has sworn to protect, which Democrat would fight the hardest? Which one actually is capable to doing what will be necessary? Sanders? Warren? Biden?
Who would be the 21st Century Lincoln?
Remember, Lincoln was a true genius and the most eloquent man ever to be president. The real reason he saved the Union, though, was that he was willing to spend 700,000 lives to do it. Which Democrat will be willing to spend the necessary blood this time? Bloomberg is the only candidate I see who might be able to do that.
3
Dear fellow democrats, Republican voters nominated Trump; a fake republican and conservative with all his astounding flaws and he went on to win and deliver for them. And we should second guess Bloomberg?!
I have only one reservation about Sanders, and that he will not be able to effectively run the federal government, and has no international network and alliances just like Trump.
Elizabeth Warren’s foreign policy including trade is questionable, and she will be bogged down just like Obama. Big promises little achievements when you dig deeper at their accomplishments.
The US is a massive corporation. You are investors in it. Who would you hire to run it so that you can protect your investments and turn it around?!
1
With all due respect, you’ve had what, 3 years professional experience as a journalist, and you’re now able to opine on whether Bloomberg is viable? Go out and follow some actual national campaigns - congressional, senate or presidential - first, and get some experience. Then maybe i can take this column seriously.
Spencer Bokat-Lindell, I agree with the sub-head even if you did not write it. Before Bloomberg made this official entry by being allowed to take part in a debate, I had ended many comments with a statement "I will vote for the DP choice."
I see no alternative to continuing to stand by that statement but will do so with great reluctance. What I have not understood in the past few days is the fact that the Times has been keeping comments open for up to 3000 comments or more and that in some of these sets the only word I can find to characterize the nature of the majority is "effusive".
I have now begun to write "Why not Warren President and Klobuchar Vice President" and note that the first time I did that I got for me an almost record number of recommends but after that almost none.
I do not explain further here except to state that we already have one "self-made" sexist patriarch as president with non-disclosure agreements with his victims or possible victims, so the last thing I want is another one of those.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
2
@Larry Lundgren - I would like to see replies telling me whay you, the replier, prefer Bloomberg over either Warren or Klobuchar or my combo.
Just me wondering in Sweden.
Why not simply disband the circular firing squad for the next 45 days and let the voters replace the pundits daily dose of negativity with affirmative votes. Perhaps then the consensus 1 or 2 candidates left standing will emerge relatively unscathed rather than mortally wounded and the Dems will actually win in November.
4
Bloomberg represent everything Democrats should be against. He is racist, he is sexist, he is against working people, he is for Wall Street, he is a plutocrat, he is trying to buy nomination and that is fundamentally undemocratic. And yet so many people are cheering for him. Here is the problem. If you are willing to abandon or your core values in order to "win" you already lost. We can only lose with Bloomberg either by electing him or by loosing to Trump. In both scenarios life for majority of Democratic voters will be getting worse just at different pace.
2
"Should" does not win elections.
1
@V
You win elections in order to implement your agenda. There in no point in winning if your president will largely implement Republican pro corporate and pro Wall Street agenda. Unless all that you care about are spoils of win.
And honestly do you believe you can win by betraying all your values and standing for nothing? Bloomberg will lose. The young people will not come for him, the working class people will not come for him, the woman will not come for him, the minorities will not comm for him. He will deprese base turnout even more then HRC did. Unlike the Democratic party establishment you can't but enough voters to win. People will not come to vote for someone that will make their life worse.
It’s fun to watch the Dems come to the conclusion that their Progressive Candidates won’t win in the general, their Moderate Candidates won’t either and their first billionaire put people to sleep. So what do they do? They bend the rules and allow a Republican, ex NY Mayor billionaire to get a chance.
And they say only the Republicans will do anything in their quest for power.
This party has imploded. Having too many aggrieved identity based factions, conflicted policies and nothing but criticism has lead them to this sorry state.
They should just rename themselves the Hypocrite Party and start over.
Bloomberg absolutely will sink the Democrats. He's just a liberal Trump! Their ship of state, already listing, started takiing on water when the DNC accepted a "donation" of about a quarter million from him. Then, it was all "oh yes Mr. Bloomberg. We'll cash that check right away" and presto-changeo, they found a place for Bloomberg in the debates. The Democrats certainly can't accuse the Republicans of corruption with clean hands. They're one election away from their demise.
6
Why not let Bloomberg pay whatever it takes to defeat Trump while everyone else's donations go to take back the Senate, increase the House majority, and add Democratic governors and legislatures?
Trump is the first and biggest problem but, he's not the only problem. Spend everything to change everything.
4
I voted for Bernie Sanders in the NH primary... but I believe Bloomberg will win the nomination following a fractious convention...I sincerely hope that Sanders can somehow gain the full support of the Democratic party and I am personally repelled by the idea that a billionaire might end up buying an election. But should Mayor Bloomberg emerge as the Democrat candidate, I will support him... In so doing I will take heart in the fact that our nation does have a precedent for electing a wealthy New York plutocrat to the White House following a brokered convention: in 1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt won the Democratic Party nomination on the fourth ballot and won the general election in a landslide. To tackle climate change, inequality, and the widening deficit, we will need an overhaul like the one undertaken nearly nine decades ago. Bloomberg MAY be the one to do just that.
5
Bloomberg's rise to 19% is probably due to the people's concern that none of the other candidates can beat Trump. Many of the news reports, such as in the NYT, have been pretty negative.His recent spending is a drop in the bucket. One article covered how over the years he has used his money to increase his influence and power. It relates his message to a Virginia political figure that he wanted to meet with her. He was going to tell her so why he should be president and "what he’s done with the Democratic Party." Not what he did "for" the party or what he believes he could do for the party if nominated. If he carries that attitude into the debates, he could have problems. Not all Democrats consider everything he's done all that good. Not only that, this group of candidates are slash and burn with no holds barred. They are not afraid to go after a former senator and vice president. They won't be intimidated by a billionaire NY politicization.
I question the positive impact of Bloomberg’s rezoning, which has been a boon to the well of, and a banishment of working folks to reside well beyond the last subway stops, or even homelessness. His zoning has congested Manhattan with architectural monstrosities and made it into a fantasy island for the Uber rich...and the over building of high end reality has brought retail vacancies and empty condos. Did he achieve his goal of affordable housing?
2
We do not need another old, white, male billionaire as president. Bloomberg was a republican before he was a democrat, and he entered the race at the behest of other millionaire friends freaking out over the possibility of a progressive candidate who wants to raise taxes. There is nothing wrong with being successful or filthy rich, but when you use the power of your extreme wealth to rig the game in your favor at the expense of millions of hard-working Americans, I can't support you. I think Bloomberg is most likely a decent human being. He's right about all the things he says about Trump, but what is his solution for wealth inequality? Universal healthcare? He's not a progressive candidate. If you look at the popularity of Sanders and Warren, campaigns fueled and funded by average Americans, you can see what the people are desperately hoping for.
3
out here in the real world, Bloomberg is quite attractive, Anyone with half a brain knows that Bernie can't win, nor can Warren. I don't say this out of antipathy to their positions but simply because it's the truth. The pundits and professional political class will scrutinize everything in the Bloomberg's history, but while there are concerning histories, none are disqualifying. He led New York in the tough period right after 9/11 and made some decisions that in hindsight seem wrong, ok. However, the city flourished and crime went down, and frankly that is what the vast majority of New Yorkers wanted. If at 78, he can beat Trump, and given his astute commercials and response to Trump it appears he can give Trump a good fight and maybe win, God Bless Him, because at this stage that is the most important factor. His administration would fight for gun control, environmental reform, expansion of education, expanding Obamacare, and he has even signaled some Wall Street re-regulation. Not too shabby when compared to the alternative. I fear Bernie not only losing but taking the House and Senate candidates with him. For those of you saying Bloomberg is buying the election , first of all Steyor couldn't so Bloomie must have more than money,
6
I can say with absolute confidence that Bloomberg will sink the Democrats and lead to a Trump re-election. In fact, it will be the end of the Democratic Party as we know it because the vast majority of progressives (nearly half the party) will walk away and start their own independent political party. Not in a million years will progressives stay in a party that allows a Wall Street, Republican billionaire with a racist and sexist history to literally buy the nomination. Ironically, maybe this will be best in the long run as the Democrats have been in a death spiral for years. This will mercifully just put the final nail in the coffin and progressives can head off in a new direction and leave the establishment to finally have their own irrelevant party and they can get on with forming their own political party that represents their concerns and policy agenda. As an aside, the massive political movement that Bernie Sanders is putting together won't be disbanded like what Obama did after the 2008 election when he turned his back on those that put him in office and literally went with Citigroup's pick of his cabinet. No. It will continue to grow and organize, being able to self fund, and it will eventually overtake the corrupt vestige of the Democratic establishment as a political force and relegate them to insignificance.
54
@FXQ Well, first those die-hard progressives would help reelect Trump. And after another four years of Trump we may no longer have what is, according to the 2020 Democracy Indec, just a "flawed democracy" even today. We are not as far from the authoritarian abyss as people like to think.
Splitting the Democratic party into two separate parties would also play right into Trump's hands. Republicans would easily win every single election, since neither Democrats nor Progressives could muster a majority.
Strength lies in unity, a lesson that Republicans, for better or for worse, have learned very well. Democrats need to stay united and elect a President who will emphasize and promote unity. Any sort of purity test is anathema to unity.
19
@Robert — I'm not worried. If progressives split from Democrats, the major parties will re-align. All the so-called moderates who have been running things on the Democratic side will see a chance to win instead on the Republican side, and go over. That will somewhat moderate the Republicans, while leaving them still corporatist and oligarchic.
The progressives left in control on the Democratic side will beat the Republicans with progressive policies aimed at majorities. What a concept!
9
@FXQ Do you have any special insight or experience that supports your claim of "absolute confidence"? I'm pushing 60 and I believe that most people are in the sweet spot of the Bell Curve - in other words, most people are moderates. My experience is that candidates at the extremes seldom win election.
9
We've been fooled into thinking that the individuals wealth is what makes them appealing. The average voter knows little to nothing about the candidates and so the shiny object gets the nod. If the Republicans won with a millionaire, then Democrats only answer is to put their money on a billionaire!
If Democrats get great voter turnout they will win no matter who is running...period.
I still believe Elizabeth Warren is the most prepared and equipped to be the next president, but she has been marginalized by the media and now she is being treated as an afterthought. She is in Third in the delegate count but you wouldn't know it by watching or reading the news.
46
@Magan Warren is being marginalized by the MSM, my 25 year old son thinks Bernie is being subtly discriminated against by the MSM; Klobuchar thinks she is ignored by the media. Biden had the media claiming him the front runner for a year and now they claim he's a faded dream. Only Mayor Pete is the darling poster-child of "whats new" (but not necessarily electable.) Steyer... crickets. (see money doesn't but votes, only recognition.) Now Bloomberg. Same thing money=recognition outside of the NE corner of the country. Starting tomorrow we will all hear what he has to say. Yes Stop and Frisk was bad, he expanded it, then decreased it. Yes he's made sexist remarks (but there is no taint of sexual abuse.) He's also spent billions on Progressive policies, which the nay sayers are largely ignoring.
8
@Magan
Elizabeth Warren either lied, was disingenuous or was frightfully stupid about the costs of MfA.
She panders endlessly about other things, too: a new Cabinet department, 'free college,' on and on.
I guess she figured it worked for Donald Trump, so she decided to give it a try.
She's wretched.
Good riddance.
1
I am disheartened by so many anti Bloomberg comments. I get it - we don’t like anyone buying our elections and it sure feels that way. But we’ve got to contend with the reality. There is a ton of money in politics anyway, it’s just a matter of whether you see if being spent transparently like in the case of Bloomberg or if it’s happening through PACs via giant corporations who got that right through Citizens United.
Right now the imperative needs to be voting Blue so we have a chance to fix the gaping holes in our system. None of us has the luxury of sitting out this election if it’s not the nominee we want. My stomach turns when I see “I’ll vote blue no matter who unless it’s x y z”. We need to get real and realize any Democratic candidate is a better outcome. Is this really up for debate? Now?
Bernie fans, anti Bloombergers, please think about the greater good.
77
@Shyamela I agree , and take a look Steyer wasn't able to translate his proliferate spending into anything near success so it is more than money.
4
@Shyamela It's interesting to hear all the folks who are worried about the Bernie supports sitting out the general election if Bernie is not the nominee. Why doesn't anyone also talk about all the so-called centrist Democrats who may well sit out the general election if Bernie is the nominee because they think he's too radical/extremist/socialist/whatever - thanks in part to a barrage of propaganda from the NYT, NPR and many other media sources.
11
@Shyamela I'll probably support Bloomberg, for three reasons: 1) He has the money to win, 2) He has voted with his money to support progressive causes, 3) He has executive experience. I see an election as an interview for a job. The job of Chief Executive of the US. Chief Executives have to get stuff done - they are held accountable. How does years in Congress qualify a candidate? Yes, Obama did a great job as President w/o Chief Executive experience, but he was exceptional.
7
Today we received a mailer from Mike Bloomberg. It features his support for issues we care about: climate change, backing renewable energy, the environment. Tomorrow it will be other issues and further mailings. Conservatives and Independents receive these mailings and may have their opinions changed. Whatever happens this is a good thing.
64
Several years ago, I knew a woman who had landed in local government here in San Jose. Before landing on the west coast, she had been one of the many Assistant DA's in NYC. She was a woman of color and a lesbian, and what she told me then has stayed with me ever since: "I don't care about party, I care about getting things done. And if Michael Bloomberg ever ran, no matter what party, he would have my vote." Nicky has since passed, but I remember her words. I'm looking hard at Bloomberg, because he's a "better billionaire." If we've got to have one, let's not just look at his stop and frisk policy and his sexism, let's look at the foundation, at the fact that he got voted in not twice but three times by NYC, and also, let's remember that he has probably learned something since his time as mayor--and--that he *can* learn something. Unlike another person running this fall...
78
Good article, but in all fairness it should have begun (not end) with all the good things Michael Bloomberg has done, as Mayor, and as supporter of good causes. We should appreciate that Mike is funding his own campaign. Unlike Trump who has probably never spent a penny of his own money either for his perpetual campaign,or any of his outings to his own properties, relying on bribes from big business; and the mislead "common folk/Trumpers".
64
Elections are won state by state. Most of them are not competitive. All that matters is winning the persuadable voters in swing states. A radical is unlikely to succeed in that task.
Whoever takes the nomination needs support. Ideological purity is not needed or wanted. You know who has such purity? Totalitarians.
2
I want to hear what Bloomberg says on the debate stage. I don't care if he's self-funded or accepting small donations from thousands of people. I want to know how he handles what will be serious questions about his views on domestic and foreign policies, how he intends to get things done with a divided congress, and how he will be different than Trump. Give Mike a mic and let him stand amongst his peers. And, by the way, no one in either party is so pure and perfect that there isn't something major in their pasts. Let's stop believing, also, that people do not change. Well, except for DJT who seems to have always been a lying conman but got elected and enjoys ridiculously fawning support in spite of his more than checkered past. That I can't explain.
56
@Desert Rat Trump won by saying "what about those jobs you lost to cheap labor?"
Not a single Democrat said anything similar--which is disgraceful, since it used to be part of the party's platform.
2
As a New York City public employee, I worked under Mayor Bloomberg. Yes, he is an authoritarian and no he doesn't like organized labor. Ask any of us who had to wait until Mayor deBlasio to settle a contract he stiffed us teachers on in his 3rd term.
We speak of Trump stiffing his contractors. Well, Bloomberg stiffed city workers and tried his best to undermine and bust our unions. At the time he was a Republican.
How Bloomberg's got the chutzpah to turn Democrat and claims he's our saviour from Trump.
We don't need another anti-union, New York billionaire for President! If Bloomberg gets the Democratic nomination, I will cross over as a Democrat and vote Green.
65
@Constance Benson - Right on!
11
@Constance Benson
Voting third party is a vote for Trump, unfortunately.
17
@Sharon Not in NYS. However, do you think anything goes to dump Trump, like electing another autocrat? Bloomberg could be Trump 2.0.
13
Will a man involved in 40 sexual harassment and discrimination cases, responsible for racist policing policies, who spews out racist and wrong information about why we had a financial crisis, who supported past republican presidents and the war on terror, who wants to cut social welfare, who is against unions, who said that 40% of teacher in NY should be let go, who wants to push school vouchers, who is against tax increases on the wealthy, etc. be a savior for Democrats?
Do we even need to ask?
How fast do Democrats want to sink?
84
@Merlot Exactly! If people think that Bloomberg would unify the Democratic party, they are living in a fantasy. I guarantee people will sit out the most important election of our lives if this guy gets the nomination. He's a Republican disguising himself as a Democrat and I'm sorry, but we need to rid ourselves of these people, not keep electing them.
51
@Merlot
Sadly, I‘m starting to believe the anointing of the candidate is up to the DNC, not the people.
12
@Merlot .. I hate to tell you this, but a lot of us voting Democrat now voted Republican at one point. You don't win the presidency without the support of independents/Never Trump Republicans/moderate Democrats.
There's a big difference in being Mayor of NYC in 2002 -2013 and President of the United States. from 2021+. Dear god, back then gays couldn't marry (and even Barack Obama wasn't in favor of it). Back then, we didn't have body/dash cam video to show us what minorities experience at the hands of the police. Give candidates some credit that they can grow and change attitudes.
If Bloomberg is president, in all likelihood, that will be with a Democratically controlled Senate featuring Bernie, Elizabeth, Cory, Kamela, Kristin, Michael, and a whole lot of other progressives. That should mean that Nancy Pelosi will still be in charge of a Democratically controlled House. Do you really think these people would roll over, wring their hands, and let Bloomberg be the devil incarnate?
In the meantime, how about giving Bloomberg credit for initiatives on gun control et al.
P.S. I hate to tell you this, but the allegations about Bloomberg were from 20+ years ago. I haven't read anything that puts the views as current ones. And from reading about the woman that he's lived with for the last 20 years, I see a man who is dating a super smart, age appropriate woman ... certainly not a woman that would be with a man who is a raving sexist.
16
Trump will have a two billion dollar war chest going into the election. Sanders the has raised the most of the Democratic candidates...maybe two hundred million? Bloomberg can put five billion in without blinking. Now tell me over and over again my Democratic friends you don't believe our elections are for sale.
17
If you believe Bloomberg when he says he will invest whatever it takes to rid us of trump, no matter who the candidate, then he will back Sanders if he is the nominee. Not everyone believes money is the measure of all things, especially in the rank and file of the Democratic Party. The Republican Party represents Plutocrats.
1
Bloomberg has the experience of real money making, he survived the position of New York Mayor and he will , due to his ability to control his word choices, knock the "baby in the White House" out of the ring.
What is it with the Dems, they are looking for a perfect candidate when no such person exists. Anybody but Trump is , in my opinion, the best choice and Bloomberg has steadily moved up the candidate list. The Biden etc group, all nice enough people, will not beat Trump whose insults and name calling will knock them out of the game.Plus Trump has support, we believe, from outsider countries.
Bloomberg is the future, not the past trying for another chance at the pie!
1
Most people change through experience . Trump is still acting the way he acted when he was expelled from boarding school at age 13 for cheating, compulsive lying & insulting and denigrating other students verbally.
Bloomberg SEEMS TO have learned from his stop-and-frisk days. It was Giuliani's policy that Bloomberg inherited & running a city where violence was dropping overall, but which had tragically high gang & drug-related gun violence, isolated in specific areas. His sexist joking was common & accepted at the time he grew up. I was offered consulting contracts at Bloomberg twice when I was already under contract but, working on the Street, I knew a lot of Bloomberg employees. Women actually advanced quicker in Bloomberg than in most of the rest of Wall Street, so I'm willing to give him a bit of slack on his 1950s sexist humor. I'm 72 now & remember what Bloomberg's era was like. He has done many good things as mayor, progressive things for the poor, for education, for minorities. Bernie, who I supported in 2016, but seems to be corrupted now by his close brush with power 3 years ago, has spent his energy attacking the other Democratic candidates, from Warren to Bloomberg. Only Bloomberg seems to remember Trump is the ultimate target & produces effective ads against him. Trump had Putin digging dirt on Dems in 2016. It seems like every Dem but Bloomberg is doing Trump's job this year. If Trump attacks Bloomberg's sexist comments, Mike can play back the Trump bus tape.
1
Mr. Bloomberg is not the mirror image of Trump in one crucial way: He is capable of admitting that he made a mistake, such as in his "stop and frisk" policy.
Mr. Trump is pathologically unable to admit any error or mistake on his part. Any, and I mean ANY, negative result is always someone else's fault. That is a disastrous flaw to tolerate in a president of the United States.
From the article:
[Bloomberg] spent at least $10 billion on charitable and political pursuits, including “virtually every progressive cause — gun control, abortion rights, climate change, Planned Parenthood, education reform for predominantly minority schools, affordable housing, income inequality and tax reform.”
Tell me again why the loudest on the left are so upset?
Way back in 800 AD, the friars in English Abbeys fretted and prayed earnestly in their effort to elect the next Abbot, just as Viking longboats beached nearby, and the voracious warriors overran the place, looted and pillaged and murdered, and promised to be back next year.
Likewise, Democrats seem determined to nominate progressive candidates who are entirely attractive to the congregation, but wholly unequipped to fend off the Vikings laying waste to the order and economy of the countryside.
Bloomberg is not without his warts and shortcomings, but at least he's come prepared to do battle with the agents threatening the nation, and has a solid track record to boot.
It's inexplicable that Democrats are horrified about the fact that he's spending his own money on the campaign, when the GOP is enlisting Putin and a rogues gallery of liars, cheats and self-interested cynics to take their favorites apart in the general election. It's time to focus on the real threat. There will not be a second chance to get this right.
4
Trump and Sanders have both upended their respective parties. Trump turned the GOP into a cult of personality in service to one ego-maniacal, power-hungry despot, and Sanders, who wasn't even a Democrat prior to about five years ago, has pushed his adopted party so far to the left that it is unrecognizable to moderate Democrats, forcing them to consider their other alternatives, including (gasp) the Republicans.
The Republican Party is a lost cause, a zombie who has decided it is about power at any cost and whose ethics, morality and brains have been infected and devoured by the Trump virus.
The Democrats can still save themselves.Biden is finished and Buttigieg is Young Sheldon without the charm. The simple electoral math makes clear that Sanders would have zero shot of beating Trump. Bloomberg and Klobuchar are their only hope--two experienced, tough, realistic, smart people who can beat Trump, especially if they are on the same ticket.
1
If the moderate Dems consider Trump's Rep party, the question is: are they really Dems?
He won't even face a TV interviewer, much less real voters face to face in speeches or townhalls. I don't think he will come off well at all when aggressively challenged, which he is not used to. The arrogance and entitlement will come to the fore. The man has spent his whole life in Manhattan office buildings.
2
No
Bernie will cost us two POTUS elections and has already cost us the SCOTUS.
All our elections are close; no room for mistakes, Bernie will be proven a catastrophe.
The GOP will never allow Bernie into the WH.
@Prometheus
Don’t worry about the GOP here. The DNC party leaders won’t let him get the nomination in the first place and as added safety measure the electorate is not going to vote for a revolution lead by an angry old democratic socialist with a heart condition.
2
So far, not nominated Sanders was the catastrophe that cost Dems the Presidency and the Congress.
1
Michael Bloomberg mistakes his financial success with some sort of cosmic endorsement of his opinions. Any casual observer of human fate notes and knows this: deserving and getting are, at most, loosely related. He's not a bad guy, far preferable to the dimwit-in-charge - far more deserving - but 'success' in business is not an necessarily indicator of acumen in governance.
Michael Bloomberg for President and Pete Butigieg for Vice President. That will restore America to Sanity.
1
Sorry, but that ticket would be too white, too male, and too opportunistic.
Sanders/Warren would be the winning dream team.
Politicians make poor problem-solvers because all they care about is political power aka re-election. Michael Bloomberg on the other hand is a problem-solver. Find the core of the problem, attack it head-on, no matter how politically incorrect it is, follow through and get the job done. No one else running has his mindset, his tenacity, his track record and his money. All they can do is find excuses to attack him
But Bloomberg, quite simply, is the ONLY candidate on either side who can tame America's slide into fascism. If the Democrats cannibalize him, we will all suffer.
He's an interesting and contradictory figure certainly but ultimately, and rather quickly in fact, people in places other than NYC will actually have to vote for him. So far half a billion in air time seems to have allowed him to pick off about half of Biden's notional support. Bloomberg is also busily trying to mollify the left, at least some Warren voters, but it is difficult to see much of the leftward third of the party warming to him no matter how many grand Warrenesque plans he espouses. Some will hold their noses and vote for him if he manages to be nominated since Trump is the dark alternative but plenty will not.
5
@Frunobulax In the last election I held my nose and voted for Hillary but I won't hold my nose and vote for Bloomberg. I have always supported Bernie; however, if he is not the candidate I will vote for any of the others except Bloomberg. Electing Bloomberg as president would only be trading one authoritarian for another.
2
I hope Democrats take a hard pass on Bloomberg. It's not worth it. We don't win a fight for the soul of America with Mike Bloomberg. His record on race alone makes him a terrible choice. I can admire his talents and appreciate him enormous financial contributions to progressive causes, and still think it would be a dangerous Faustian bargain that would further undermine the norms and institutions - in different ways - that have traditionally made America great. But, should he be the nominee I would hold my nose and vote for him.
4
Until we pass campaign finance reform, every important election is fueled by money. In the case of Major Bloomberg, he can afford to campaign without fund-raising, which makes him more independent and less vulnerable to pressures from big interest groups.
4
Three important considerations for Democrats to consider. First, the most important agenda for the country and the globe is restoring our institutions, rebuilding trust, engaging positively and shifting our politics to be more about positive prospects versus fear based criticisms. Second, if being extraordinary wealthy is a litmus test, then FDR would have been excluded in 1932. What matters most is how one serves not what one's wealth, one's gender, one's race etc. Ad hominem criticisms like these are the game that Trump plays and is exactly what the billionaire critique of Bloomberg emulates. If we don't keep these concerns in mind, we run the serious risk of paving the way for a Trump re-election, another Gorsuch like Supreme Court Justice, and four more years of institutional demise and presidential corruption. So think carefully and clearly about the country as a whole. The stakes are huge.
5
We could view Bloomberg as the technocrat leader of a caretaker government in the European sense, a chapter that would reset the needle so to speak.
He'd guarantee one term, choose an african-american/latino/woman for VP, would address reforms in the educational system that do not include a charter school free-for-all (a reason I do not want to vote for him), introduce a financial transaction or wealth tax, put his hands on campaign finance reform, set us on the complicated path to repeal Citizen's United, and appoint acceptable federal judges. We have to have some assurances that he isn't an authoritarian, libertarian-leaning control freak (which he probably is).
Truth be told, he scares me a little, so I've decided not to give my primary vote to him, though the pragmatic side of me was tempted.
4
"“Democratic voters who want to win more than anything else would be well advised to find a candidate who does as well.”"
I highly respect the voice of Jennifer Rubin, her blunt pragmatism and earnest common sense. I think she's summarized the dilemma facing Democrats: how do you accept a billionaire candidate whose past involves some of the nasties exhibited by Donald Trump?
It's this cognitive dissonance between an immediate (and urgent!) goal of booting Trump out of office and accepting the fact you've supported and elected a man who's the mirror opposite of a liberal Democrat?
Except for one fact: Bloomberg was a Democrat for decades before switching party to run for mayor in 2000. In 2007 he switched to independent, and then Democrat in 2018. His party affiliation matters less than his policies and goals, most of are shared by liberals.
Bloomberg knows how to push Trump's buttons. That may be the most important qualification he has.
13
Wait until the primaries are in.
If Sanders (or anyone but Bloomberg) has earned a notable plurality, and leads the pack, it will be suicide for the Democrats to broker a convention against the leader. If that happens, a great many progressives will stay home.
If Bloomberg leads, he is the candidate. Only some progressives will stay home.
4
If progressives stay home, then they should just leave the US altogether. Sitting out the most important election of their lifetime just because they don’t get their socialist way just isn’t ok.
1
“Shacking up with a billionaire,” David Dayen says, “reinforces the concept that everyone and everything associated with the Democratic Party can be bought.”
David Dayen misses the point. Thanks to structural issues, anything in US politics can be bought, Democrat, Republican, or some variant of socialist. Ignoring this reality simply empowers those who have a more realistic view of the landscape, which in this case means McConnell and Trump. The key is to work within the constraints to change them, not to ignore the constraints as if they don't exist. Believing it is possible to thumb one's nose at the financial constraints guarantees that they will be around forever.
7
Until we learn more about Bloomberg’s priorities many democrats will sit on the sideline since the two front runners have many flaws in the public’s eyes. Everyone shies away from mentioning bigotry......not only for Bloomberg millions, but from his religion. Butigeiget has his age and lifestyle choice. One would like to think that these flaws would not count against them, but thus is the hippocracy of what we say and what we do. At this point our best choice is Klobachar , but then she is a woman. I think perhaps we should go back to the old fashioned nominating conventions, but this too had many back room deals and flaws.
President Obama was not a street fighter so many things could not be accomplished even with Congress on the democratic side. Now we have to select the strongest vote getter who can also generate the votes to get trump out of the seat of power. Trump has shown that he will back only those who pledge fealty him and his Rasputin (namely McConnell). His release and pardons now to the venal old money crowd shows where his loyalty lies. Clinton won the majority vote but the farm voters have more power than urban people, How much more damage can trump do? Returning USA to all citizens and undoing the harm to our country and restoring our national pride will be a much harder task. There have to be honest politicians to run for president. Sanders is an honest man but the voters will not elect a man who thinks he can turn the USA into a utopia...
I see one critical trait in Bloomberg that seems to be sorely missing in the other Dem candidates - he plays to win. No one will give Trump a better run for the money than Bloomberg. His current ads are already very effective. Bloomberg is the self-made billionaire that Trump pretends to be.
We should be prepared for a very nasty fight. Trump will stop at nothing to hold onto power.
5
I'm a young, college-educated urban voter. On the one hand, people like me make up one of the most passionate and reliably Democratic voting bases; on the other, we're clearly not mid-western Republicans and thus also not, apparently, the Democratic party's main focus.
Any one of the current candidate who've been in the race thus far would be an exponentially better president than Trump and I'd work hard to support them.
The one exception is Bloomberg: If he were to win the candidacy it would affirm all of the worst accusations that the Democratic Party is eager to jettison the interests of its supporters for the first likely multi-billionaire to come along.
Choosing him would be a betrayal of every passionate, involved Democrat who believes that we should strive to improve the system, not just elect our own valueless authoritarian.
Yes, whoever wins the candidacy needs to win over 'heartland' swing voters, but must not do so at the cost of suppressing actual Democratic voters. Bloomberg will do that. He is the only person whom I genuinely think liberal voters will not vote for in principle, even against Trump. He can win all the suburban Republic votes he likes, but the Democrats can't win back the presidency if no one supports him in his campaign and enough people would rather stay home than vote for a man who treats our electoral process like an auction.
2
@Chris, Bloomberg put that same “auction money” to use backing Democrats for house and senate races in 2018. Were you good with that? Can we imagine that it is Blue PAC money funding Bloomberg rather than his own, would that make it better? Remember if he loses the nomination he’s promised to put his money to use backing WHOMEVER is the Democrats’ nominee.
3
@Shyamela
On the one hand, no - we should instigate electoral reform which massively cuts down on the ability to use large concentrations of wealth to sway the electorate one way or the other.
On the other, I'll happily accept that in the current political structure, people like Bloomberg spending money to champion Democratic causes is beneficial, and I would really hope he does continue to spend his billions if he isn't the nominee.
None of that qualifies him to be president though: He is not just using his money to promote Democratic causes, he is using it to circumvent the (small-d) democratic processes of the nomination process. I think this is a bad precedent prima facie, and I also think my point that choosing a recently Republican multi-billionaire whose main achievement is turning NY into a police state for non-white residents will discourage Democratic Party voters still stands.
Since we have a system that requires large sums of money to successfully win your arguments, it's great that people are willing to provide those large sums of money. That doesn't mean they should handed political power of the back of their wealth, though - that's the very thing that enrages so many voters about our politics.
2
@chris herein lies the catch 22. You can only instigate electoral reform once you have power. Currently the system is rigged in a way to favor Republicans and they have no incentive to reform. Get a Democrat in power - any democrat, take the senate and pursue reform.
Absolutely the wrong question.
The Democratic establishment is already "sunk".
Enabling the rash, bungled, and disastrous invasion of Iraq on false pretenses.
Failing to take substantive action when they had the presidency and both houses of Congress in 2009.
Lining up line like lemmings behind a dream opponent for Trump in 2016
Stalling on Trump's impeachment until the last minute, then lowballing it, rushing it and without the slightest attempt at bipartisan cooperation or rallying public support.
They are already sunk; they have blown it for America, over and over and over. They cannot be saved. They are completely unworthy of being saved. They can only be replaced, for the sake of the country, which should always take priority over any political party.
And, obviously, installing an aging billionaire who wants to buy his way to being anointed an anti-Trump, with no plan for seriously addressing the underlying causes of Trump, is not a credible solution. Where has he been, for the past years, (after retiring from the mayorship), when these problems festered and worsened?
3
We must vote for whoever gets the Democratic nomination, but we must nominate the person who has the best chance of being elected president by the Electoral College. Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, and Klobuchar would lose crucial states to Trump. Only Bloomberg can stand up to Trump and win in enough states between the two coasts.
12
@Kevin Cahill Your comment aptly illustrates the thinking of the average registered democrat.
The Democrat Party is controlled by the DNC, which is a Political Machine of enormous power and control of the electorate....as the DNC has incredible influence over the Federal Bureaucracy(and its Budget), and thus over how the money is doled out. Patronage.
...
The DNC built "the System" and the DNC can still make "the System" work.
All it needs is that one charismatic leader.....
That charismatic leader is Gavin Newsome, governor of California.
After Super Tuesday's looming fiasco....the DNC will step in and choreograph the nomination of Gavin Newsome.
Dont Worry.
By the end of summer its gonna be....
Newsome-Warren 2020.
DNC, still Large and In-Charge.
Bloomberg is a classical white liberal. 20 years ago, men like him would have had a home in the GOP, but they no longer do. Of course, Bloomberg is not a progressive and never will be, but he would save American democracy from Trumpian authoritarianism.
That said, he would not overthrow American plutocracy, which which would be too much to ask. The US is no longer the America of the New Deal or the post-war period, and I very much doubt that Sanders or Buttigieg would do better at campaign finance reform or at reducing the influence of moneyed interests - which has the norm been in American politics for most of its history.
The Democratic Party has no clear front runner, because none of the candidates running have the charisma to win in a general election. It's Hillary all over again, and Trump will certainly be reelected unless Bloomberg is nominated - which would still be a long shot.
10
Bloomberg's stated policies are kind of a mixed bag, but his major failing is this. None of our major, interrelated problems will be solved if a candidate is not willing to make deep changes to the way our neoliberal, capitalist, political/economic system is structured, and take on the military monster we have created as a manifestation of our belief that we are the exceptional and rightful leaders of the world. I simply don't believe Bloomberg will go far enough. He's too much of a believer in the present system to initiate the complete overhaul we need (and quickly) to successfully confront inequality and it's attendant problems of deteriorating health care, education, criminal justice (incarceration) systems, aka the social compact/fabric, and the already active threat of climate change, species extinction, chemical pollution and the other environmental horrors we are visiting on life on Earth. His time has passed. Let him support someone with more skin in the game of survival.
8
@Jeff Sher: We cannot even agree on equal votes for all in the election of three federal offices.
2
I wish that at the beginning of tomorrow night's debate all of the Democrats on stage would figuratively hold hands and say that they're unified in the quest to end Trump's so-called presidency, and that they all stand united, or divided they (and we) fall.
I want them to stop the attacks and instead present plans and policies for us to envision. I want them to look and behave like leaders on stage rather than squabbling throughout the evening. If they squabble, their vulnerabilities will be exposed on stage and exploited for the rest of the campaign season.
Democrats stand for health care, higher wages, education, and balanced budgets. I wish they would highlight how they would handle all of those in a Democratic administration. Tell us, too, how they can help down ballot candidates win because this election is about more than just the presidency.
Democrats - unite. Stop the attacks. Welcome one another to the fight against Trump, and may the best candidate win.
12
@furnmtz Why are you so freaked out about Trump?
Do not you not recognize how the "Democrats"(ie the DNC) is using this FEAR to control you?
30 years since Reagan, the DNC and the Bush Minions have used FEAR to control you.
Change does not happen by re-electing Dems that promise change.
@furnmtz: Democracy is one person, one vote. When they assert that, they will become Democrats.
1
From what I've read about Mr. Bloomberg before he chose himself as a presidential candidate, was that he did not like paying taxes for such things as public schools. An LA Times article reported that he, Eli Broad, and a number of other billionaires had a clandestine organization that raised moneys to defeat a bill that focused on putting more funds in public schools, which would have increased taxes. Even though Bloomberg is a New Yorker, he was against raising taxes in the LA area. I do not support anyone - those who make half a million to the multi-billionaires - who fight against paying taxes. Our taxes are for the common good. The 1%, like Bloomberg, have so much money they wouldn't be able to spend it in their lifetimes. I'm afraid he'd pursue the same Republican policies of tax cuts which got us into the deficit that we're in now.
8
A BLOOMBERG NOMINATION WOULD MEAN THE END OF
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
Bloomberg is attempting a hostile takeover (purchase) of the Democratic Party. Yet his views and record are Republican, including proposals to cut to Social Security and Medicare.
If he gets the nomination (unlikely, but possible), that would spell the end of the Party. The Democrats would lose a generation of young voters, and its activist base---the people who do the doorbelling, make small contributions, and keep the local party operating in most communities.
The result? Almost certainly: a split, and a new party--which may or may not be successful. There's zero reason to take this chance. ALL of the other Democratic candidates poll better in head to head polling against Trump. AND, Bloomberg would lose. Trump, the "anti-establishment candidate" (in his manner, not his actual policies) would defeat the "Wall Street billionaire who's trying to buy our democracy." Trump'd be correct.
14
Lloyd Blankfein, the Goldman Sachs poster boy for corporate welfare received $1 billion in taxpayer "incentives" courtesy of Mayor Bloomberg. Goldman had made the outlandish threat to move their HQ to Jersey City and crony capitalist Bloomberg cheerfully went along with the charade, enabling them to build a gleaming new HQ on West Street. Peggy Noonan would seem to argue that Blankfein, the son of a postal worker, who claimed the Goldman was "doing God's work" would also be sufficiently rooted in the middle class to be President. Once you've traveled in these rarefied circles for a few years, you're enveloped by a marvelous amnesia about your beginnings that cuts you off from everyone else. Bloomberg, campaigning from his mountain top, is no exception,
10
I am a very conservative Republican Texas voter....you probably can’t get more right wing than that!
But very candidly, if there is any one Dem candidate who can challenge Trump and win, it is Bloomberg.
I like and support many of Trump’s agenda items, but the non-stop drama is burning many of us out.
Bloomberg might be able to pull it off. The rest of the wannabes can go home now.
19
@Premier Comandante Trump will win 48 of 50 states against Bloomberg. You heard this from me first!
All politicians have blemishes although none are as all encompassing as Trump's who is not really a politician, just a con man pretending to be one. Given that in spite of those gigantic blemishes Trump is sitting in the oval office I don't think Bloomberg's will be much of a hurdle. I think it will be unfortunate to replace a fake billionaire with a true one. It would be the surrender of US democracy to a plutocracy. Nevertheless, if he buys the nomination I will vote for him as what is most critical for this country now is to remove the cancer that is destroying all honesty and decency, and setting a horrendous marker for the future. The country will be much better off after four years of Bloomberg than four years of the most corrupt administration in US history. The only thing that could prevent Bloomberg from bringing down Trump is if Sanders in a fit of spite decides to take his marbles home instead of entreating his supporters that defeating Trump is more important than him becoming President.
9
@Serban You mean, the way he (Sanders) did it the last time?
1
@Serban — If Democrats broker a convention against Sanders, with Sanders holding a notable plurality, I doubt Sanders will do much entreating. Even if he did, progressives would not be listening. They would already have concluded that the long-term good of the nation makes it a top priority for the Democrats to lose.
That, by the way, is not something all the electability mavens, and beat-Trump-emergency types, cannot wish away. If you want to take pride in your hard-headed political pragmatism, backing Bloomberg while ignoring that is not pragmatic, and it is not wise.
1
We won't have a clue as to who the Democratic nominee will be until there are only two contenders left in the race: a left-wing progressive and a moderate progressive. The first is likely to be Bernie Sanders. The second will be Biden, Bloomberg, Buttigieg or Klobucher. If it becomes clear over these next few weeks that Mayor Mike won't be getting the nod I'm hoping he has the decency to get out of the race early enough to give one of the other moderates an opportunity to take on Bernie one-on-one. I resent Bloomberg's ability to buy his way into contention with the active collaboration of TV addicts who think they've gotten to know him during commercial breaks for "Good Morning America." I'll resent it even more if he decides to hang in there simply because he's got money to burn.
5
If there were candidates and if there was a political party absolutely nobody would talk about Mr. Bloomberg to run.
But there are the usual debaters and there are the Democrats.
This is the one and only reason why everybody is talking about Mr. Bloomberg recent ambitions. Like it or not.
2
The leading current Democratic candidate is really an extraordinary angry man whose vetting is that he once was the mayor of Burlington, Vermont. I understand why Mike stepped into the race to try to save the country. Only heaven knows what Bernie would or would not do if he ever were elected president and commander in chief.
13
I plan on voting for Bloomberg as I believe he has the best chance at DEFEATING Trump. I don't care about anything else frankly. NOTHING ELSE. However, I will enthusiastically vote "blue no matter who." For any democrat who says they are going to pout and sit out the general election because they don't like the eventual democratic nominee may have a hand in re-electing Trump. Please please please don't.
23
Michael Bloomberg is the adult in the room. Has wonderful plans for the country. How can this be anything but make him a top candidate.
25
@sandcanyongal #metoo and black votes will be his undoing!
The bad news about Bloomberg for the democrats is his rise in the polls is not so much he is seen as a great candidate, as people realizing the other candidates can not beat Trump. I'm surprised he is going to be in the debates. This group is slash and burn and with few if any holds barred. Their attacks are mostly directed at each other, so having a new target is going to be interesting. In he last couple of days, news agencies have given them a lot of ammunition to throw at him. When Trump ran it was at first just a publicity shot. Sometimes I think he was as surprised as anyone that he won. But for Bloomberg, it has come with years of planning and buying increasing influence. A recent NYT report wrote about how he wanted to meet with a woman who had become involved in Virginia politics He wanted to tell her why he should be president and "what he’s done with the Democratic Party." That sounded like he felt he already owned them.
I frankly don't get the hatred for Bloomberg who was born in a middle-class family and worked hard to make his fortune. This is an American dream. Unlike Trump, he didn't make money by defrauding people.
Democrats are missing a bigger picture by focusing on past mistakes of Bloomberg. Bloomberg did lot of good things as well. In totality, he is a very good candidate. He is better than Biden, Bernie, Warren and the rest. Bloomberg is using his money to campaign, and I don't see this is unfair to other candidates who are spending the money donated by others. Survival of the fittest.
21
@AP "Survival of the fittest" is precisely what's wrong with this society. I want a chief executive who'll spend his/her time helping the least fit among us to survive (and preferably to thrive).
8
@stu freeman
Bloomberg Philanthropy is helping millions of people in USA and around the world. He is spending his fortune to help the needy people. We should not forget about this as well.
@AP True enough. He should continue doing so instead of spending his money trying to buy elections.
1
Who is most likely to beat Trump? Think what Trump's campaign manager could say about this Democrat to diminish his support. Trump wants to pick who he runs against. So, again ask what you would do to inflame and energize his supporters. I wonder if Trump pardoned criminals today who were in prison for one form or another of financial corruption. Now, who in the entire slate of Democratic candidates has bellowed the loudest about Wall Street and financial corruption (and rightly so). Therefore, whose poll numbers would go up in response to the sense of revulsion one feels from this act of pardon? In fact, I wonder if Bernie supporters are not being targeted in other ways by the Trump campaign to keep them angry, inflamed, and energized. (The establishment doesn't want Bernie to win - and variations on this theme - would do the job). Is the intensity of the Bernie supporters entirely due to the persuasiveness of Bernie's ideas or is Bernie getting help from the Trump campaign's social media skills? Remember, Trump is trying to pick his opponent. All one needs to do is observe who he is trying to knock down and who he is help. Trump is afraid of Bloomberg and Biden's ability to peel away his supporters - each is strong among some part of Trump's coalition -- each in their own way. To figure this one out, forget the issues and think as if you were Trump's campaign manager.
4
"But his racial politics have drawn scrutiny for other reasons as well, such as linking the 2008 financial crisis to programs devised to overcome the damages of redlining." Bloomberg's logic here is that the unscrupulous banks took advantage of a smoke screen of noble purpose to make high interest risky loans to minorities with a longstanding American dream when the banks knew that most of the loans would default. They then sold the worthless paper to investment banks who in turn packaged them for sale. It was this pyramid of greed that became an entirely avoidable financial crisis. So the victims of redlining became unwitting victims yet again. Bloomberg is a root cause thinker. He understands how things work and how to get it done. I hope that the biased and superficial analysis of his thinking will get some backbone and work to figure out his logic.
6
@CH —If I were Trump's campaign manager, Sanders is the last opponent I would want.
There are very few pickable targets on the right side of Trump's base. Democrats, moderates or otherwise, can't reach them anyway. And Democratic moderates also can't reach any pickable Trump supporters on the left side of Trump's base. But Sanders can. There are a significant number of those, and Sanders can reach them. He is the only Democrat who can. Sanders is the only candidate running who can take large numbers of votes away from Trump, and put them in his own column.
That is why, among the Democratic candidates, Sanders consistently polls in the lead in precincts Trump carried in 2016. That is why Trump's campaign manager wants anyone but Sanders as the opponent.
3
I am deeply offended by the fact that both Bloomberg and Steyer bought their way into the primary. I will also vote for both of them over Sanders, and I will vote for Sanders over Trump.
Trump, Bloomberg, and Sanders are all overly sympathetic to authoritarians. Trump is obviously the worst, by a lot. Sanders rides on a cult of personality and has the same fondness for slogans over policy - M4A versus “build the wall.” The difference is that M4A is literally one million times more expensive. He is Hugo Chavez to Trump’s Bolsonaro.
Bloomberg has authoritarian tendencies as well, but at least he’s proved he can actually accomplish things.
We appear hellbent on breaking our democracy one way or the other. And to think we got here because of Her Emails.
2
@Mercury S You're in California. If you're moving thru life with your eyes and mind open.....you can see whats gonna happen on Super Tuesday.
Most of the states involved in the Democrat Primary are southern and middle american......doubtful that many voters are going to trust a Wall Street Tycoon for anything.
California....is NOT "democrat".....most voters claim to be "independent"(yeah right). California has a completely DNC controlled primary process...
...
Bernie will take 1st in delegate count...("independents" plus sneaky "repubs" attempting to spoil the results).
Biden, the loyal DNC soldier, will possibly take 2nd.
Bloomberg ..... flops. Not even Californians are that mind-controlled to the point they want a NYer telling them what to do.
..
In the end, Biden withdraws and endorses.....
Gavin Newsome.
If the US is going to scrap any pretensions to democracy and finally let billionaires buy elections, why not simply let the super rich bid for our votes? In return for a receipt proving your vote delivered to him or her, one billionaire might offer you $350, another $500, then the first would counter with a raise to $700--and so on. It would be a lot more efficient. And a lot less hypocritical.
10
Folks, from an overseas perspective, if Bloomberg wins the nomination, let alone the Presidency, it will be seen as a disaster.
Confirmation as stark as one can imagine, that the American political system has become a sham, a rich man's (yes man's) game played by plutocrats and/or their backers.
Around the world we've seen a recoil by ordinary people to 'establishment democracy' and incumbent parties representing it.
People feel western democracy is not working, it's not listening to them and the governed don't come from or listen to 'the people'.
Bloomberg isn't as bad as Trump but he's too close to assuage ordinary people's doubts and fears that 'the system's is set against them.
10
I’m surprised that further evidence is needed to prove that the system is a disaster. Didn’t y’all hear about Citizens united, our gerrymandering and voter suppression already?
14
@Simon Nash And in 1776 the biggest, and richest, players were John Hancock and George Washington. Gimme a break.
8
@Simon Nash
Like it hasn't been a "rich man's game" forever?
2
Bloomberg is going to disappoint a lot of folks on the left because he doesn't take stands like de Blasio, and he will disappoint an equal number on the right by being fiscally conservative and reversing Trump's giveaways in favor of making some smart investments and bolstering financial regulations. He isn't a transformational figure, but he is capable of eviscerating Trump. Since he likely would only serve one term, I would sign up for it in a heartbeat if he brings along a solid VP that can keep any prospective Trump acolytes stuck in whatever future South Park episode they might emerge from.
23
I don't agree to the argument that Bloomberg is buying the election/presidency.
He is not running to enrich himself or to get a fame or ego.
He is already rich and famous.
I believe his motivation is to unseat Trump for the country.
I'm afraid a candidate tied with traditional Democrat value, though politically correct, is not strong enough to beat Trump's no hold barred style politics.
I hope he will be unflappable with hard questions in order to please everybody. President can't please everybody.
27
@uji10jo totally agree with you. He only entered the race when it appeared as if the candidates were going to cannibalise each other. I do believe he wants to unseat Trump for the country - for the world and to restore America's reputation. Yeah, he's not perfect but he may be our best chance.
16
Mr. Bloomberg's motivation is not to stop his fellow billionaire and golfing buddy Trump, but to stop the Socialist movement of Bernie Sanders that threatens the capitalist system that produces Bloombergs and Trumps.
I honestly did not think that the Democrats would respond to a racist plutocrat president by considering nominating their own racist plutocrat to run against him. Given the constituencies that the Democrats need to win a national election - specifically a high turnout of nonwhite voters - it seems more than foolish to nominate him.
Turns out the dreaded Bernie Bros are right - the Democrats are unprincipled hacks who would sell out their most prized constituency in a heartbeat. Good luck in November!
21
The DNC has not nominated anyone yet. Right now it’s the people who are voting. We need to hear their voice regardless of what any of us might feel about billionaires, autocrats or plutocrats.
4
@Vin Bloomberg is polling very well with black voters. The Democratic Party isn’t helping Bloomberg. The primary voters are picking him. Blame the power of tv advertising or blame us for being stupid, but this has nothing to do with some nefarious Establishment.
You know how Democrats derided Republican erstwhile never-Trumpers for claiming character mattered and then.... supporting Trump?
10
“Shacking up with a billionaire, reinforces the concept that everyone and everything associated with the Democratic Party can be bought.”
Says it all. You think Black voters stayed home in 2016?
There's no way they'll turn out for BB, who gave poor families one-way bus tickets out of town.
Bloomberg would set a record of losing all 50 states.
13
I am just incredulous that people think Bloomberg was a good mayor. What Kool-Aid did they drink?
14
@Le They probably don't live in New York.
Bloomberg has skeletons but it seems that is ok in politics now. According to the Trumpians, you don’t have to apologize for them. You just keep pushing forward, so why should the Dems be any different.
7
@Anthony - So you want them to lower themselves to Trump's level? What happens when they, in turn, sink even lower?
3
@anthony let’s note Bloomberg has apologized and there is no perfect candidate
Do Americans really want both major political parties captured by self-serving billionaires with a long and well-established record of racism and sexism? At present, the Democrats, despite their disorganization and tendency to go along with disasters such as the Iraq War, have a diversity of views and include some leaders with principles. As President, Mr. Bloomberg will do the same to the Democratic Party as has already been done to the Republicans. If he is nominated, the country will be better off if he loses.
11
I am not going to vote for Bloomberg if he is the nominee. I don't buy the "anyone but Trump" line.
Two things I cannot forget and forgive politically:
1. Stop and frisk.
Anyone who has ever been stopped by cops for no reason understands that this is extremely degrading and upsetting. I am white and I got into heated arguments with family over this when it was in place. Bloomberg had no concern or consideration for the rights of minorities not to be randomly searched. This, by the way, is a sacred right that the right wing and libertarian element in our society should have been vehemently opposing but they were strangely silent when Bloomberg was doing this.
2. Bloomberg buying himself a third term.
He completely overturned the will of the people who voted for term limits for mayor. He declared himself to be above the law on this one, and for any of you "anyone but Trump" people, how are you going to square this hypocrisy of supporting such autocratic behavior when you can't stand that Trump does it?
If Bloomberg is the nominee, Trump wins in 2020.
13
@Sirlar If Sanders is the nominee Trump wins in 2020.
20
@phil — If Bloomberg is the nominee, progressives desert the Democrats. If Sanders is the nominee, progressives turn out. Why doesn't that mean Sanders is more electable? It only means that if you assume so-called moderates will sit it out.
2
It's hard to believe that any of the commentors bashing Bloomberg have read his positions. The amount of misinformation is mind-boggling.
24
@MKR - It depends on what you believe. Do you believe his 'positions' that have just so happened to come out in the last year by his 2020 campaign or do you trust his long history of being a racist, sexist conservative? People don't like him don't change.
This life-long Democrat will "vote blue no matter who". But not for Bloomberg and if the Democratic Party nominates him, I will stay home.
If the Democratic Party nominates Bloomberg, then the time has come for a third party. A choice between Trump, an incompetent, dishonest, extreme right-wing Republican, and Bloomberg, a competent albeit slightly more moderate Republican, is no choice at all.
14
Bloomberg has supported the Sierra Club in shutting down about 300 coal mines. He will work to save the environment. He has invested in Senate and house races to vote in blue candidates. Are you sure he’s not worth your consideration if he’s the nominee?
29
@Richard F.
Lindsay Graham or even Mitch McConnell would make a better President than Trump. At least they are not criminals with a personality disorder.
Next to Trump, Bloomberg looks like Jesus.
1
That's for sure. I'm in the Sanders/Warren wing of the party and have hated Bloomberg for years for his autocratic, real estate driven reign of terror over NYC. I will not vote for him under any circumstances. Any. Any.
13
Kellyanne Conway was on Fox News this Sunday with Chris Wallace attacking Mike Bloomberg as "much worse than Trump" for his comments about women and his "racist" policies as NYC's mayor. And then she started gushing about Bernie and Pete and what great wonderful amazing candidates they would be for the Democratic Party, and you could see Chris Wallace's eyes pop with disbelief at her sly enthusiasm.
I don't know whom I'll vote for in the primary, but I'm leaning towards Bloomberg. If he scares Trump and Kellyanne, that tells me everything I need to know.
24
@cef - Look up the videos of Trump talking about Bernie's campaign. He's definitely afraid of him. Perhaps Kellyanne is trying to divide the left through misdirection.
8
the only binary is between Trump and his Administration and any of the Democrats and theirs. as in all of life, it's complicated. my heart tells me Buttigieg, my head tells me Bloomberg, and my gut tells me Bernie.
1
I sort of more expected the panic ridden centrists of the democratic party to roll out an Oprah candidacy rather than Bloomberg. You know, a kinder gentler super wealthy person to protect us from the predatory super wealthy people.
Bloomberg is such a bad candidate that it should end the democrats. Not just sink them in this election, but finish them for good. If he is the candidate I will never ever vote for another democrat.
12
@Chris Well ... here's the dilemma. For a lifelong, activist, left-of-center Democrat such as myself--one who has voted for Democrats for 40 years, campaigned for said candidates via calling, ringing doorbells, contributing & even doing a few fundraisers--I cannot imagine nor support a Senator Sanders nomination. His positions and background supporting social upheaval ("social revolution") as well as the tax consequences of M4A almost guarantee major loss for Democrats, including potential loss of the House. Etc.
We need unity as a party and as a country. We need to work on a pathway to occasional compromise to move forward; we cannot move anywhere with the Sanders' "my way or the highway" rigidity. For me, a nomination of Sanders by my party leaves little choice ... for the first time ever, I plan to write in a name for president: My dog Celeste. Yep, we are caught at opposite ends.
6
It's the USA which is racist, generations of it, hundreds of years. It's America's 'original sin.' But many have given years of their lives to rip out the racism they were indoctrinated with early on. This process has changed us radically. We are open and caring with others, not suspicious and fearful.
People like Trump, and to some extent Bloomberg, are in the language of a book title, "Prisoners of Hate" (famed psychologist Aaron T. Beck). You see, hate harms the hater as well as the many who are targeted for that hate. Their is a mental derangement, fear and paranoia. I hope that Americans free themselves from the hatred of Blacks the way they have gotten over their fear and animosity of of LGBT persons in just a short time, to the point that they can marry now.
Trump will never have the ability to get rid of his racism. It serves him so well; it's who he is. But Bloomberg being a pragmatist may evolve. For all his demerits, he can change, whereas Trump grows more Trumpian by the day.
6
@Tulipano — Here is what will not change about Bloomberg. He thinks he is very smart. And he thinks rationalism points the way to the best politics. If Bloomberg gets it in his mind that trimming just a bit from Social Security is the rational thing to do, nobody will be able to argue him out of it. He will just figure anyone with counter-arguments isn't bright enough.
In politics, relying on rationalism is always a worse guide to wisdom and good outcomes than relying on experience. That is why Bloomberg will remain the wrong choice.
Trump's power comes from the fact that millions of people are crazy anout him. They feel like he genuinely cares about them. That he means what he says.
Some of the current Democratic candidates have those same strengths. Bloomberg is not one of them.
4
A Democrat for much of his life before he got his chance to swallow the Republican Party whole, Trump set himself adrift and apart from Republican principles and has made up GOP ideology from day to day, which is more than okay for his cowering enablers.
A Republican until seeing this opportunity for himself to save the nation, Bloomberg has the Democratic Party about halfway down his gorge already.
The uncomfortable truth is that the Democratic nominee will have to carry the DNC on his or her back to the finish line this fall. The DNC doesn't appear to have a clue.
That speaks loudly for a Bloomberg candidacy which brings to the most important election in my long life a big organization filled with bright people and deep pockets.
To win, and to wing big by flipping the Senate and unseating McConnell Democrats will need lots of money to buy voter data, target ads, and get the vote out.
If the Democrats unite, they will need a top flight operation to handle logistics of many campaigners working their constituencies to energize the coalition that elected Obama twice and can do it again now, if they have Bloomberg's money and organization.
As part of his deal with Democrats, Bloomberg should give minorities more chips in the game of governing the nation in the form of cabinet appointments to Blacks like Stacy Abrams or Corey Booker (VP,) Kamala Harris (AG,) Susan Rice (State,) Latino's like the Castro brothers, and Asian Americans like Andrew Yang (Commerce.)
4
New York Times, we Democrats will not nominate Bloomberg. We're disgusted by billionaires trying to buy us. We're sick of Republicans. And were sick of Democrats pandering to Republicans.
Bloomberg endorsed and assisted the execrable Joe Lieberman when a real Democrat challenged him for his Senate seat. It wass Lieberman, once reelected, who joined the Republican filibuster of the public option. Bloomberg endorsed Elizabeth Warren's Republican opponent. Bloomberg endorsed George W. Bush.
Bloomberg is nothing but a Republican who thinks he's rich enough to buy us Democrats.
He's going nowhere. And The Times needs to stop pandering to this plutocrat.
10
"Mr. Bloomberg’s mistakes have to be weighed against the rest of his record, the Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman writes."
A disclosure at the end of that article notes that Bloomberg donated to Friedman's wife's museum. What was that about "the concept that everyone and everything associated with the Democratic Party can be bought"?
7
I smiled when the line "Here's what people are saying" was followed by a list of pundits pro and con. I suppose MSM commentators are people, but they're not "the people" and have little more insight as to what the masses believe.
4
Enough with all of this talk about buying the election or being bought.
Any candidate who takes a dollar has been “bought” by the individuals or special interests that are supporting them.
Scream and yell and stomp your feet or maybe lobby for campaign reform but until then please stop complaining.
7
@Bronx Jon — That's nuts.
If you get a zillion $18 donations, there is literally no way you can sell out to the donors, except by doing what they seem to want in the aggregate—which is probably a politically desirable outcome.
If your campaign is funded by just a few huge donors, they own you. They can pull the plug. You do what they say. And you don't tell anyone about it. Which is not a politically desirable outcome.
If Bloomberg is shoved down our throats by the Democratic establishment- no, nope, nada, no way will I vote for him.
We all have our limits.
Mike
9
“ I’m a New Yorker and I know a con when I see one “- Bloomberg, about Trump.
Full Stop.
12
If the Dems steal the nomination from a Bernie far ahead of Bloomberg, as one of the greatest experts in America on these issues, David Plouffe, said recently: "That's the kind of thing that takes a party DECADES to recover from." Certainly, its would be in the interest of the Republican Party--and Bloomberg's obviously a Republican now opportunistically disguised in Democratic clothing--to destroy the Dems this way. Perfect for the fascist takeover our oligarchs in both parties would be fine with.
11
Bloomberg has declared a liberal/progressive policy agenda. but is he committed to it, or is he just saying whatever to get elected? His current policy agenda is very different from his past politics. There is little reason to believe he will actually pursue his stated policies.
I think Bloomberg will betray his supporters if elected.
6
The question is not whether Bloomberg will save/sink the Democrats, but whether he will save the country from Trump. And, whether Bernie Sanders will sink the country by re-elected Trump.
I voted against Bloomberg 3 times in NYC, but right now I'm leaning Mike for the win.
18
All he has to do is tap Stacey Abrams as VP and his path is clear.
Unlike the mild attacks that the other Democratic candidates are trying Bloomberg from the get go is bringing it hard core right at Trump. He’s already hit Trump with some uppercuts and jabs. Trump is cut and he knows it. Trump already is flailing - acting frightened and panicked. At this moment and at this time the nation needs someone like Bloomberg. Bloomberg can beat this guy - and a win is what we desperately need.
13
There are pros and cons for Bloomberg but if uniting the Democrats for the general election matters he is a poor choice. Many of the reasons why are laid out in this article. While there may be no candidate who can truly unite the Democrats some are more divisive than others. I think the candidates who have the best chance of uniting the Democrats as much as possible are Biden, Warren, and Klobuchar.
6
This week, my Husband told me he would Happily VOTE for Bloomberg. He is truly an Independent, and Voted for HRC AND for John McCain. Now, multiply THAT by 10 or 20 million.
Seriously.
26
@Phyliss Dalmatian I agree. The millions he is spending on this race will have an effect on the whole electorate.
9
@Phyliss Dalmatian Exactly.
1
My friends who have up to now supported other moderates now are waiting eagerly for the next Democratic debates where Bloomberg where he will meet the other candidates openly. They like him for his strong stands and that he does not depend on money from any other source.
But who really is Michael Bloomberg? He has flipped his allegiances and ideas about how to do things many times, but in an election this is not always a bad thing as some might call this trait flexibility and strength with money behind it is often a two edged sword.
This election cycle as we face the criminal Trump as president and democratic candidates coming and going in our uncertainty is enough to give you heart burn. But the stakes are too high with our democracy at stake and an out of control con man at the helm.
1
For voters in the middle, both parties have abandoned us.
The Democrats push leftist learning pols and the Republicans are well, what can i say.
Bloomberg is a politiican that brings a sense of reality to things.
Something I am not getting from Biden or the other side.
We need new approaches that are less beholdent to the old puppet masters (the unions on the left and the corporations and wealthy on the right).
As someone who is tried of Trump and Pelosi, I am eager for a 'third way' that does not follow the scripts of the two existing parties or their mouth pieces.
It is time for the Swamp to be drained and the 'old handlers' sent out to pasture. And soon.
12
I mean, it would be great to get Trump out of office. But is bringing a billionaire who has committed many of the same crimes as Trump a good thing? Sure, Bloomberg is better than Trump in multiple ways, but a candidate like Elizabeth Warren or Amy Klobuchar would be way better for everything.
10
While a Sanders supporter, I would be quite happy to back Warren for President and hope that Sanders could assume the position of Senate Majority Leader. I, and every Sanders supporter I knew in 2016, ended up voting for Clinton in the general. This time around, I and every Sanders supporter I know will support any of the other candidates who have participated in the primary process to this point, but will not vote for Bloomberg.
It won't be a matter of sulking but refusing to vote for the antithesis of everything we stand for. There will be no lesser of evils, simply two evils. We will vote for down ticket Democrats but either leave the top of the ticket blank or vote for a third-party candidate.
Since "electability" seems to be a dominating priority, centrists need to consider that with Bloomberg heading the ticket, defections from the Democratic nominee would make 2016 pale in comparison. No amount of insults to our character or intelligence will draw us into their fold. Nominate accordingly.
27
@Ray Harper Bloomberg's published positions are very close to Warren's. But you wouldn't vote for him.
7
@Ray I believe the position you describe is known as cutting off ones nose to spite ones face. It’s not worth it.
Bloomberg may believe he is practicing noblesse oblige, but he still has far too much of the "I'm always right, and I've proved it by my wealth" attitude than I am comfortable with, even when he IS right.
And, you know, it's not like there aren't other choices. There's a PLETHORA of other choices.
And I am not convinced that none save Bloomberg cannot unite Blue enough to defeat Orange. Especially if Mike follows through on his word to provide massive financial support to the Democratic candidate no matter who it is (let's hope that's a legitimate promise).
I've already said that if Bloomberg makes is to the top spot, I'd roll my eyes and fill in the oval for him, because anything is better than what's filling the Oval now. But I think I'd rather see almost any of the other contenders come out on top, because, having lived through Bloomberg's three terms as mayor in a city that he always reminded everyone was HIS city, I worry that he has that oligarchic tendency to keep a steel fist in a velvet glove.
11
After noting how Trump has been spending his copious idle time recently, I've decided on one more 'zero compromise' that I'd like to be assured of by our eventual Democratic nominee.
No pardons for Trump. For anything. Ever. Period.
On this, I promise you that Michael Bloomberg will deliver.
49
If he didn’t win the nomination, would he really support whichever candidate does? Even Bernie, the one most feared and opposed by the DNC?
14
Only Bret Stephens gets what the job of President actually is. He is Commander in Chief and leader of the free world. Bloomberg will sign the bills the Dems send up, should they regain the Senate. I will gleefully watch Mike send (his own) money to campaigns to win back the Senate in 2022. The rest of the "opinions" written hear simply do not matter. All that matters is the votes of the good people of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. If Dems want to commit suicide that can win the "twittersphere", but not the election, ti is in their hands. Mike is the smartest guy and he will do the right thing for his place in history. He will surround himself with real patriots. I can't wait.
108
@USNA73
Define “real patriots”, please.
4
@USNA73 The president is Commander-in-Chief of the US military, not Commander-in-Chief of the country.
2
@USNA73 "The rest of the "opinions" written hear simply do not matter." I'm one of the good Pennsylvania voters and I can spell. Please do not presume to speak for my electoral preferences.
1
Bloomberg is the only viable choice the Dems really have against Trump. But far beyond that, he would actually be a very effective, possibly great President. Woke dems need to put their self-flattering virtue signaling aside and get real. Bloomberg 2020
61
@Dan Really? You think another billionaire Republican is our only hope? God help us if this guy wins the nomination and loses the election, giving Trump four more years.
25
@luvbugnorm -- Good help us if Sanders or Warren win the nomination, then (most certainly) lose the election?
Mainstream Americans do not want extreme medical care overhaul, nor handouts to those with student loans, or any other give-aways.
15
@Don Juan Not really man. Most Americans want health care reform. Its long overdue. The insurance companies are a disease in our system. Time to catch up to the other 30 countries with better, cheaper health care.
14
Voting for Bloomberg is trading one authoritarian for another. The difference is that Bloomberg knows how to hide what he is doing.
Bloomberg supported George W. Bush, the Iraq war and oversaw New York's "Demographics Unit" which surveilled private citizens. He defended stop and frisk through his entire career and only apologized for it right before he started his bid for 2020.
All of these new policies his campaign is purporting to support were rolled out specifically for this election and have no connection to his political past. They are a smokescreen meant to sucker centrists into thinking that he is 'forward thinking liberal.' Don't be fooled, he is not.
We already know with Trump that a 70+ year old man doesn't change his thinking.
60
@Mack "We already know with Trump that a 70+ year old man doesn't change his thinking". ???? He can plunge us into a world war or bankrupt the country. This is not a benign 70 year old man. This is a wannabe dictator. No one running would be as disastrous for the country as the second Trump term.
7
@Mack Yep! This guy is so transparent. I guess we'll see how many people see right through him, but I'm afraid people will be duped again.
5
@Mack
It's absolutely terrifying that Bloomberg's ad avalanche is working. Remember how all the "sophisticates" laughed at those slack-jawed yokels who believed that the real Donald Trump was the guy they saw on TV? Well, somehow those same elites are swallowing Bloomberg's vapid campaign hook, line, and sinker. Lack of critical thinking skills is a universal problem in America and not confined to any one party.
1
Of all the reasons to support Bloomberg his willingness to pay for his own campaign seems like the weakest. I cannot believe that there are not 100 thousand or 200 thousand people in this country who are terrified of Trump and would be happy to donate $5,000 or $10,000 each to defeat him with any of the other candidates. Judge Bloomberg on his merits and his record, not on his wealth.
10
@CA And still, on the merits (what I call values), I would not vote for him.
5
@Wodehouse I won't vote for him in the primary, but if he ends up as the candidate, I will, as I am terrified of Trump.
1
Bloomberg is a plutocrat.
As authoritarian as Trump, he'll come under much less scrutiny, if the adoring Times people quoted here signify anything.
Bloomberg is much scarier than Trump. For one thing he's more effective.
And for another, the liberal elite--source of the Resistance--are drooling at the thought of him as President.
There's even been talk of HRC as VP.
60
@Talbot
Well, if HRC on the ticket as VP didn’t get people to stay home, I don’t know what would!
10
@Talbot
If you're calling Wall Street Democrats and DLC 'Republican-lite' Democrats the 'liberal elite', you can, but they're GOP wolves in Dem clothing, not FDR progressive Democrats.
They're not the 'liberal elite.' In my book, the liberal elite are the Dems who canvass door-to-door with snow on the ground.
10
@DataDrivenFP
I just want to say, a lot of so called "elite" or "Wall Street Democrats" are ordinary working, two earner families with mortgages and 401Ks saving for their children's college and their own retirement.
They are not wealthy, but comfortable enough. They do not see themselves as the desperate souls that the "progressive" paints the country as.
They are not anti business, and not do they hate "Wall Street" as an catch-all article of faith.
They do not label people or things as "corporate".
They favor healthcare reform, but are not anxious to trade the health insurance they have for a TBD, one-size-fits-all government plan delivering lesser quality service simply to save money.
They don't take Medicare For All seriously, because there has been no serious discussion about how it could be achieved or engagement with players who would provide it. "Paying for it", even with a Congress that doesn't want to pay for anything, is the least of the challenges.
They believe in an egalitarian society and targeted social welfare, but do not see helping the poor as the first and only duty of government. They care more about "work" than about the "working class".
Not pure enough to deserve candidate who will represent their interests?
Who's elite now?
4
Bloomberg is guilty of fostering institutionalized racism, and then defending it for 12 years, all the while knowing full well that it was completely ineffective at reducing crime.
Do we really need another racist egotistical billionaire running our country? This is not a "purity test" issue. Such a candidate will only serve to divide the Democratic party and ultimately guarantee that Trump is re-elected!
40
@Susan Bloomberg cleaned up the city. The current mayor of NYC is inept.
He’s apologized for his mistakes.
He’s donated hundreds of millions of dollars to charity and to helping Democrats win in 2018.
He’s committed to spending $1 billion to back whatever candidate wins the nomination.
And that’s critical to counter Russian and other trolls.
This is not a deal with the devil.
This is a critical moment in time when we have to win this existential threat against democracy in our country.
50
@Bronx Jon Look it up on FEC.gov: He's made recent campaign contributions to Orrin Hatch (2012), Susan Collins (2014), Pat Toomey (2016), a Super PAC supporting Lindsey Graham (2014), Mississippi Conservatives (2014), and the Massachusetts Republican Party (2014), to name a few.
He endorsed and supported Rick Snyder of Michigan in 2014, the Republican governor who oversaw the Flint water crisis. He endorsed George W. Bush in 2004 at the RNC.
This man does not represent the values of the Democratic Party, or if he ends up representing our party's values, it will solidify our party's fate of having no values at all.
27
@Bronx Jon - His donations to Democrats were nothing more than a plan to ask for their endorsements for this election. He 'bought' them.
As far as his 'commitment' to spend $1 billion to back whichever candidate wins the nomination, who is going to hold him to that promise? It's a pretty easy commitment to make since he might gladly give it to a centrist candidate but Sanders (and maybe Warren) wouldn't accept it. Somehow I doubt he'll be writing any checks with that many zeros though.
16
@Becca
And one other thing. I did look it up. Here’s something from The NY Times from late last year about how he’s spent most of his money supporting Democrats since 2012.
“Federal records show that political committees funded by Mr. Bloomberg have spent more than $86 million since 2012 — the bulk devoted to promoting Democrats.”
10
I liked Mr. Bloomberg's most recent comments about running against Trump's economy. I'll be watching tomorrow night to see what happens in the debate.
10
Is your vote for sale? Will you do anything for money?
If all we care about is having the Democratic nominee win, we could nominate Trump. The point is, the candidate has to stand for something bigger than himself.
What DOES the Democratic Party stand for?
If it's only a collection of identity voters willing to allow big money to buy elections, then merge with the GOP and stop complaining!
The Democratic Party should stand for:
Government of the people, by the people and for the people.
Fairness, Equal Opportunity, and the Rule of Law.
Honesty, Science as a key to understanding the world.
Community, Responsibility, Strength, Empathy for others.
Protecting people by protecting the natural world.
Protecting children, and helping them grow to reach their full potential.
Protecting the poor, and helping them to become more self-sufficient, and join in prosperity.
To do these things, we must
Create a fair tax system that rewards work, but doesn't direct all wealth upwards.
Provide affordable health care for all. Twenty OECD nations have less expensive, more effective systems. None depend on unregulated, for-profit insurance. The most effective have single payers and a substantial public provider system.
Remove the influence of big money from politics. If our government is for sale, money will rule.
Revamp our energy use to protect the natural world and ourselves in it.
Our Democracy is not for sale.
Bloomberg should not be a candidate.
63
Our democracy has already been sold. What else is Citizens United? Where do we think the Koch Brothers spend their money? Or Robert Mercer? Let’s at least have a candidate with money who’s trying to do the right thing.
10
@DataDrivenFP "Our Democracy is not for sale. Bloomberg should not be a candidate".
Fine and dandy. So, you fancy a second term by the yellow-haired "dictator wannabe"?
6
I’d like to point out that Bloomberg is in alignment with each of the policy and values issues you enumerate. I think he’s powerful enough to actually get all that stuff done. I’m not bothered that he also happens to be filthy rich - so was FD Roosevelt. And he sparked the most progressive era in the nation’s history.
13
Data driven. Facts based. Hires based on skills. Best city manager in the history of New York. Again, remind me why I should not vote for him? That is it. No empathy. I think I can live with that.
117
@Michael Harburn
I agree completely. I am concerned that too many Democrats will hand-wring themselves into an election failure through purity tests and insistence upon an "everything for everyone" savior who has never uttered an unkind word or done anything that would ever be construed as correct.
It won't work--that will only get us four more years of Trump and the end of the Republic, what's left of it.
80
@Michael Harburn - Except can he beat Trump? He is able to spend money but he is not a charismatic leader that will raise turnout. His history with stop and frisk and sexual harassment allegations will depress turnout for minorities, women and young voters. They're gonna be needed in November in order to defeat Trump.
22
@Sharon He WON'T beat Trump because people will stay home, I guarantee it. People don't want guys like Bloomberg running the country anymore, hasn't worked. A lot of us don't want more of the same and that's what you'll get with this guy.
19
Is the glass half-empty or half-full?
In the end, one's bias or perspective will answer that question for us. Complete objectivity, they say, is impossible, so we all have some prejudice when evaluating any person, place, or thing, but we can't see it -- or admit it when the truth becomes undeniable.
Whoever wins, you can be sure, though, that the results will a mixed bag of bittersweet candy.
After millenia, we still can't cooperate and work together in good faith to solve our endless smorgasbord of problems. One universal truth, however, remains: The problem is the other guy who's either stupid or evil or both.
"Only a god can save us."
~ Martin Heidegger
Mr. Bloomberg is the only candidate who can beat the con man. Some of the so- called journalists in the media (including NY Times) are trying to destroy him so that the can man can win. It is a shame that they are so self centered. Sorry, Bernie cannot win the election and he would be destroyed by con man’s propaganda machine labeling him as a socialist. Most importantly, Bernie is phony as con man. Both “populists” feed pipe creams and manipulate people. Look at Bernie’s record- a professional politician (meaning never had a real job) serving legislature over 30 years. His legislative accomplishments? Almost none. Like the con man, he figured out ways to exploit anger of the people. Alas, some people fall for the pipe dreams. Con man has done enough damage to our nation and he must be stopped. Mike is the right man to defeat him.
47
@Rm - Mike is another conman just like Trump. The difference is that you won't see how he's enriching himself.
26
@Mack -- You should listen to what Bloomberg has to say in the debates before you label him a con-man. I do agree with you that Trump is a con-man. If people don't pull together, we will have a dictatorship.
5
@Mack He said if he wins he will sell his company. He has 60 billion. I don't think focusing on enriching himself the way Trump has is really very interesting for him. Bloomberg has given hundreds of millions to progressive causes. Trump has given virtually nothing.
Prioritizing is not something the Democratic party is terribly good at. In Daniel Patrick Moynihan's famous aphorism the far left of the party would rather have nothing than not enough. Blloomberg offers the Democrats the best chance of winning the presidency. It's time to face reality. It's not a new phenomenon. The most progressive president of the 20th century was FDR and he was ENORMOUSLY RICH Hudson river gentry.
75
@John
Bloomberg is nowhere near as progressive as FDR, though he's richer.
If we're voting for an oligarch, then the GOP has taken over both parties.
29
@DataDrivenFP FDR ran as a conservative in 1932 -- only after winning did he become a "traitor to his class." The fact is that it is rich politicians who have done the most for the middle and bottom -- e.g. Jefferson, Jackson, FDR, LBJ -- because they have the most room to maneuver. Bloomberg is advancing a very progressive agenda -- one that is nearly identical to Warren's.
8
@DataDrivenFP
Just to set the record straight, Bloomberg has long supported (with hard cash, not lip service) many progressive causes and many Democratic congressional candidates' campaigns.
If we are voting for an oligarch, it's because a weak, strategically divided Democratic field has given him an opening. Thus far, "winning" candidates' margins of victory are 1% of 25% votes cast.
1
There are many ways to remove the incumbent.
.
Mayor Bloomberg is one of them. Senator Sanders is another. Mayor Buttigieg is another. Senator Klobuchar is yet another.
.
All of them are credible candidates who have the energy and vitality it takes to connect with voters and to win.
.
Mayor Bloomberg is a credible candidate. There is no reason why he couldn't do the job, and do it well.
.
Democrats need to stop over-fussing about this, and instead work on getting the main job done.
129
@Richard Blaine
Right about everything, except about Buttigieg.
The guy:
-had good grades
-spent 6 months away from a military desk job (still not in combat)
-landed a consulting gig where it's up or out (apparently out for him)
-became mayor of a small Indiana town
Nothing in that pedigree flashes President of the United States.
9
@Richard Blaine Progressives are going to get thrown under the bus...again. That's why the left is wringing their hands about Bloomberg. If Sanders is the nominee he will split the party in two. Moderate suburban voters will not vote for Democratic Socialism. Ever. We know that. Independent swing voters will hold their nose & vote for Trump. Sanders has contempt for the Democratic establishment & intends to eviscerate them once elected. The DNC will not co-operate in their own demise. They will try to undermine his campaign in ways both large & small as they did in 2016. Sanders has demonstrated time & time again that he doesn't have the temperament to be POTUS. Last year he called for giving incarcerated felons the right to vote. The Boston Marathon Bomber kills three people, maims & injures 280 more. Bernie’s concern? That he gets his absentee ballot. What will be the reaction when Sanders travels to swing states with Michael Moore & he tells women’s underrepresentation in Congress a form of “gender apartheid.” Or when AOC, says in Texas, “I’m here because Senator Sanders has actually committed to breaking up ICE.” Sanders' codependents are writing the GOP attack ads. If this election is about kitchen table issues jobs & affordable education there's no way we lose. If it's about Medicare for All & more illegal immigration there's no way we win. We can win with or without progressives. We can't win without swing & centrists voters. That's why the party is pushing Bloomberg.
4
@Richard Blaine
Yes, wouldn’t this be ideal. But the Sanders knife-fighters have no intention but supporting their Dear Leader and trashing and smearing in every dishonest way possible anyone else. Good luck.
2
To answer the question that your title asks: Bloomberg will save the Democrats and if he can’t no one can.
54
All I want is a candidate who can beat Trump. I really don’t care much which one it is. I like Amy. But then again, I liked Cory. I could easily vote for Liz, or Pete. I don’t think Biden is up to the task, but if somehow he makes it through, he’s got my vote. Bernie is an irascible crank, but he’s the man if he’s the nominee. Bloomberg the billionaire? Go Oligarch Mike! The problem is not figuring out who I want. It’s who I think my fellow voters want. If Bernie isn’t the nominee, will all the Bernie Bros stay home, out of spite? If it’s Amy or Liz, what about the misogynists? Will Pete alienate the gay-phobes? Will Bloomberg turn off the socialists? Who cares who I want? It’s triangulating everyone else’s preference that’s so hard.
127
@John Ranta
Actually, it's figuring out what Independent and undecided voters want.
They can be swayed to support Trump style racist, 'strong-man' rule.
They can be swayed to support Obama's populist 'We all do better when we All do better' message.
In 2016, lots of black voters stayed home when Dems ran a 'centrist' with financial ties to Wall Street.
In 2016, lots of Midwest voters voted GOP when we ran a Wall Street, 'unregulated free trade' candidate.
Undecided people respond to talk about moral values.
Oddly enough, the Democratic candidate most Democrats feel is 'acceptable' says,
"It's US, not me."
He's also been fighting for the middle class, fairness, and equal opportunity for the last 40 years.
He's worked across the aisle to sneak progressive paragraphs into not-so progressive bills.
He won the Michigan primary (where Independents can vote with Dems) in 2016.
Polls then and now show him winning against Trump (by more than Clinton, btw.)
Democrats win by appealing to Democratic moral values, not by pretending to be Republicans.
If 'stop-and-frisk' gets the nomination, no matter who wins, the country loses.
I want a candidate who
Wants to restore Opportunity for the middle class, and extend it to everyone.
Wants to create millions of new jobs by public investment in American infrastructure and energy
Wants affordable health care for all Americans
Wants to get big money out of politics.
Most Americans do, too. Why settle for less?
18
@John Ranta You should vote who you want in the primary and then vote AGAINST Trump (whoever the D candidate is) when it comes to the general election.
I'll vote AGAINST Trump but in the primary, I'm voting for Bernie. I believe he has the ability to cross party lines and get to the issues that ordinary Americans grapple with. For a long time, most of these folks have had no one really helping them. I find it laughable that people argue Bernie has not been a "D" for long but are willing to support Bloomberg who was a "R" for many, many years. On the other side, party loyalty doesn't matter that much to me and polls suggest it is similar for most people, barring DNC leaders and the political class. I just want someone who will address the issues I face everyday, such as lack of affordable health care.
14
@John Ranta - If Bernie doesn't get the nomination then the 'bernie bros' will have to decide for themselves if the candidate is worth supporting. But what if Bloomberg gets the nomination? How many women, people under 35 and people of color stay home due to his racism and sexism? They make a much larger part of the Dem base than the 'bernie bros'.
7
I see all of Bloomberg's ads saying, Mike will 'get it done.' But merely pointing out the issues that he supports does not guarantee he'll be able to get Congress to cooperate. How will he get Congress to get the job done?
4
@Paula Haenchen
Does Bloomberg have stronger coat tails than Sanders. Look in the mirror and ask yourself!!!
9
@Paula Haenchen Well for starters, the likes of Mitch McConnell and his cronies need to knocked out of the majority or removed altogether. Honestly I think flipping the Senate and keeping the House is more important.
1