Yes, Bloomberg is flawed. But he is still the best candidate to take on Trump and the Republican Enablers. If Bloomberg can turn the ship of state away from the waterfall we are close to going over, another candidate can take over.
Bloomberg and Klobuchar would be an interesting ticket.
20
I am looking forward to President Bloomberg's election, enacting gun control legislation, followed by stop and frisk of white males who might be carrying illegal concealed weapons.
11
S&F was a racist policy; however, Mike Bloomberg is not a racist. If anyone is a racist, Trump is. The bottom line is that Bloomberg has the money to beat Trump who is building a huge war chest. For the sake of diversity and inclusion, Bloomberg should run with a person of color. Groom that individual to takeover when he finishes his term(s). I see that as a win-win.
13
I'm a lifelong Democrat (I've been voting for nearly a half-century) and "Democrat" is my religion. I've been fairly activist over the years and I consider myself to be very well-informed.
We are fast approaching "the point of no return" in this country and it's incumbent upon us to face reality; there is NO way Bernie Sanders can beat Donald Trump. Admittedly I have very negative sentiments about Sanders, but I'd force myself to vote for him if in fact he was the nominee. *However*, we need to concentrate on saving this country from what is increasingly becoming a path to annihilation.
There is no perfect candidate - and people might view the choice as "the lesser of two evils", but that doesn't matter. If we are foolish enough to abdicate our collective responsibility to vote for the only person who could possibly prevail, we will pay the price indefinitely. I’m absolutely convinced that Michael Bloomberg is the only one who can manage to (possibly) defeat Trump. Also keep in mind that we need to recapture the votes of conservative Democrats who defected the last time.
I fervently hope that we can manage to reclaim our democracy before it's too late.
16
How about a Bloomberg - Obama* ticket?
*Michelle that is.
Failing that, it is VERY likely that President Obama will endorse Bloomberg, if Bloomberg starts to look like a potential nominee.
The Democrats have no viable candidates. It's almost impossible to unseat an incumbent in a good economy. I respect your objections to Bloomberg, but just keep in mind that your principled position is almost guaranteed to give us four more years of Trump. Is that the price you're willing to pay to keep riding your high horse?
15
Bloomberg is a good man. A GOOD man, a former competent mayor, a strong proponent of gun safety. And supremely generous. I like Mike!
17
How exactly does Democrat Mike make his fortune, and why did he complain about "outrageous" fines levied against crooked bankers after the 2008 financial crime spree?
4
Mr. Bouie must be out of his mind. I'm sorry but any comparison to the positions of Bloomberg and Trump is just slanderous. He was a great mayor of New York City for three terms, and in his last run he garnered over 50% of the African-American vote so, again, this is just another attempt by a person of color to distort the record of someone who would bring PROFOUND change to this country, for the better, in the wake of the neo-fascism of our current gangster-president.
12
Let's not put Trump and Bloomberg in the same basket. Trump is not driven by ideology; he's driven by doing what's best for Trump. Bloomberg, by contrast, is driven by ideology. His many philanthropies are evidence of that. It's reasonable to hold politicians accountable for failed policies, but the critics don't seem very interested in acknowledging the truth in Bloomberg's characterization of the typical murderer/murder victim, or proposing alternative solutions to the problems that plague the black and hispanic community. Hilary wasn't good enough for a lot of Democrats either. Look what that got us.
9
I'd like to humbly suggest that it is okay to vote for Trump for a second term. He is mostly a blowhard, beating his own chest and is obnoxious but not terribly effective except at upsetting liberals. Charles and Jamelle are losing reader confidence. I check in just to be amused and am not often disappointed.
2
@JW
Besides being a pathological liar, ignorant of anything that isn't on Fox News, being guilty of abuse of power and obstruction of justice and interferening with the administration of justice when it concerns his pals, destroying the fabric of the US government by allowing his cabinet to destroy the departments they are in charge of, appealing to bigotry and racism to attract support?
15
Pres. Donald Trump had 51% approval rating wow will the American people see through him on his characteristic and things he's done in the last 3 years of his presidency. I think we have to go down this less again to make sure we're still here or pinch ourselves or do we bleed.
1. A Muslim ban
2 taxes for the rich
3. Dividing families at the border did they ever find all of them?
4. Children dying on the border and concentration camp without medical attention.
5. His 15,000 lies and still growing.
6. Giving the NRA a green light to kill our children at school.
7. Pres. Donald Trump and his kids making money off our government proved by the Justice Department.
8. Changing verdicts on Roger Stone a known criminal.
9. The Justice Department AG William Barr is Trump lawyer not for the American people before himself.
10 not reporting how many veterans were injured in that missile attack with Iran 21 head trauma nurse.
I could go farther with this list .
His budget report 2020 cuts out entitlement programs for the rich and middle-class $80 billion to Medicare and Social Security.
So one November 3, 2020 comes around we you still vote for him. I will not because I have a conscience.
7
Please stop calling Trump a billionaire, there's no basis for that.
17
What makes Bloomberg such an exceptional candidate that he can avoid the debates the others were in and have very minimal contact with the public until today?
What makes him superior to the real Democrats who have been Democrats supporting Democratic policy objectives on the ground?
What made Bloomberg the only candidate the DNC would change its debate qualifications for, so that a candidate could be included?
Money, lots of money, enough money to buy 100's of millions of dollars in ads to bury the other candidates who have been slogging it out in rallies and debates, putting their case to the Democratic electorate.
We can do without Bloomberg whose only distinguishing characteristic is MONEY.
8
The stop-and-frisk policy was a disgrace on a number of levels and should have had no place anywhere in our society. Clearly, there was a blind spot in Bloomberg's eyes in which the technocrat in him saw only number-crunching data about criminal behavior that was garbage to begin with. And yes, he went with his gut, rather than relying on experts in the field, who would have told that what he was doing was wrong in terms of violating civil liberties and wrongheaded in terms of accomplishing his stated objective.
However, the criminal activity that Bloomberg was trying to reduce was crime within the minority neighborhoods themselves. It was not as if frisking kids in the Bronx was making the streets of midtown Manhattan any safer.
That is not to say that he deserves a pass for his racist policy, but it is to say that equating Bloomberg with Trump is a statement of hyperbole that is way, way beyond reality. As a white guy, trust me, I know that I have no basis to say that I even remotely can relate to being a person of color in America.
But you need to more forward. "Let it go," in the words of the song, rather than be consumed by your own form of hatred. People do change. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," so I ask you and others who condemn Bloomberg for his past bad acts, have you never acted in a way in your past that in hindsight would be judged as sexist or racist or unkind today? No one can pass that test.
4
There's always the possibility that what he means by Make America Great Again is Make America Great Again.
The real issue being was it, or not, already great and could a guy like Trump make it better.
What about the real kids who were wrongfully stopped, wrongfully had pot planted on them, wrongfully sent to Rikers for months even years on end? Where do they go to get justice?
If Michael Bloomberg really wants to apologize, he needs to put his money where his mouth is, and pay real restitution to every wronged boy and young man from those years, or their survivors.
6
If you want poof that Michael Bloomberg won't beat Trump just look at this comment section. There is no way that Bloomberg can unite the Democratic Party, and there is no way he'll get enough black and Latino voters to get out and vote for him.
Pick another candidate.
11
And yet Bloomberg consistently won 50% of the African American vote in NYK. Just maybe he got something right for the times. Gandhi had allegations of sexual harassment, Mother Teresa of physical abuse. If these two are being cancelled for their lesser natures, what chance do ordinary 'warts and all' aged politicians have? As we watch every norm of power sharing disappear under Trump, and the Rule of Law vanish under Barr's ponderous scowly jowls, we need to focus on only one thing: Just win baby! Vote Blue No Matter Who.
6
To quote from the end of your Op-Ed, Mr. Bouie, "Yes, Bloomberg might be the one to beat Trump at the ballot box."
QED, Mr. Bouie. This election is about the Republic's survival itself, and until that survival is assured, it's arrogance to worry about putting a Trumpist stamp on American liberalism, or indeed anything else. It's suicide.
2
Jamelle Bouie's excellent article gets one thing wrong: Bloomberg didn't only have contempt for the civil rights of minorities.
Ask any woman (a group that accounts for a majority of all citizens) how they were treated by Mike Bloomberg--either in his company or his administration.
The sexist, misogynistic behavior was equally Trumpian. Equally degrading and equally offensive.
Let's not let Mike off the hook for just bad behavior toward black and brown men and Muslims. Toward minorities--Mike is an equal opportunity offender.
About two thirds of the population knows what it's like to be demeaned by the Mighty B.
9
Lots of folks defending Mr. Bloomberg here. I think he is going to have a boomlet for a few weeks, until all this racist, sexist and as-yet-to-be discovered baggage finally comes back to haunt him, especially among Democrats in states where only Democrats can vote in the primaries. Then he will be gone. He'll have some delegates by then, but not enough. He'll also start getting it from the opponents, whom he has to face tomorrow.
8
You honestly have to wonder how many of his defenders are paid. Bloomberg obviously has no problem using his money to buy political influence.
9
Would Bloomberg be a worse president than Trump? Is that the question being asked? Republicans have accepted Trump because they are getting the results they want. Conservative judges, and tax cuts. An economy that's strong, and if you're in the market your pension and portfolio surged, and if not, at least very low unemployment. With that Trump the charismatic populist secured a loyal base.
So Republicans turned a blind eye to Trump's character flaws, incompetence, chaotic non-management style, grossness, lies, disrespect for pretty much everyone, and blowing up democratic institutions. Even Evangelicals have narrowed their focus on their concerns and offered him dispensation for all of the above.
So why is it that this single-mindedness in retaining this person has become acceptable to half the country, and the other half is focused on doing everything possible to insure Trump gets another four years? He's already unchained. He's behaving as if he's already won the 2020 election, in case no one noticed.
Democrats are still unfocused on what they want. A return to normalcy? A new direction for healthcare, education, re-inventing our capitalist system? Democrats need to develop the same ruthless, single-mindedness and focus on attainable goals. But first, they need to decide who can do the possible and who is selling snake oil. Who can capture Independents, Democrats who went red in 2016, and those who stayed home.
5
Maybe Tessa Majors would be alive today if stop and frisk was still in effect.
5
Bloomberg has been supporting dictator tyrant Xi for a long time, doing fine business helping China's businesses take US workers' jobs, and he's been opposed to wage increases for regular workers. But the elite well-off readers of the NYT love him so much, as seen by all their comments the last few days.
8
The time to act is now folks. Trump is a clear and present danger to all we hold dear. He is a menace to society. We have to get him out, whatever it takes. Bloomberg, with some missteps, led NYC with competence and careful stewardship for twelve years. He can do the same for the United States as a whole. He leads the fight against gun violence and he is strong on climate change. He won't frighten the vast voting middle and he can restore sanity to our country and respect for our role in the world quickly. In fact, the troubled world we live in will breathe a giant sigh of relief once the dotard is removed.
6
Bouie is right. Mayor Bloomberg should have ignored pleas from the African-American community for greater police presence in their neighborhoods, and deployed police strictly on the basis of geography and population density. A twenty-story apartment tower on York Avenue in the Upper East Side should get just as much police presence as a similar tower of public housing in the Bronx.
4
If statistics show that the highest crime are in minority neighborhoods, that's where the cops should be—whether East New York, Flushing, or the Upper East Side. Back then, it was East New York. Did anyone take math?
For those complaining that Bloomie was a republican mayor. Yeah, but he was a lifelong democrat before then, who, has a long history of putting his money where his mouth is—supporting liberal causes, many that the other current democratic candidates are running on. And, he did this while the republican mayor of NYC.
Bernie is not a democrat. Why is he using the DNC to get the nomination? Why doesn't he run as an independent? He's actually anti-democrat, and anti-capitalist. This country's main draw is capitalism. Furthermore, far left progressive politics will not get the votes needed in the midwest swing states. If he gets the nomination, welcome Trump to his second term.
I moved to NYC during Bloomie's last few years. My experience is that the city then felt safe. Now, with DiBlasio, I walk through wafts of weed smoke on a daily basis during all hours of the day, in the most touristy areas of the city. Bloomie wouldn't have put up with that. And, crime has increased in my Queens neighborhood.
I want to see how Bloomie debates tomorrow. But, I'm voting blue, no matter who. —From an registered independent, who always votes democrat.
2
“ Given his record, he’s someone who might try to consolidate Trumpism — moderating its hostilities into less disruptive form — rather than reject it wholesale.”
Please... really? You think that Bloomberg is just as bad (or the same) as Trump because they both supported Stop and Frisk? You can’t see any other issues on which they differ?
I am finally starting to glimpse what people may have meant by their “Fake News” chants... maybe those idiots were not wrong about everything.
5
Please, stop to criticize to everybody!
2
From what I have read, Mr. Bloomberg did a good job, even with his policy called stop and frisk. Maybe police should use hand held detectors of guns, as in airports. Mr. Bloomberg did not help himself in the comments from the past. ...I heard a poignant, heart wrenching podcast on NPR about the effects of gun violence in black communities in Baltimore. Where do you look for the guns that killing in these neighborhoods without targeting people in families in these neighborhoods?
4
Thank you Mr. Jamelle Bouie.
6
Slate has an article: Meet the Lawyer Who Fought Bloomberg on Stop and Frisk—and Won. Darius Charney, who sued NYC for years, tells his side of the story.
Says, “Judge Shira Scheindlin didn’t overturn stop and frisk, but she said it was being applied overwhelmingly against black and brown New Yorkers, and that was unconstitutional. She appointed a monitor to oversee stop and frisk by the NYPD, and recommended that police wear body cameras. How did Bloomberg respond to this decision?
He called her biased. He said she did not know anything about how policing works in New York City. And the city appealed the ruling.
Stops have gone down 95 or 97 percent during de Blasio’s time in office, yet crime has not spiked."
We'll see how the Dems use this in the debate, and what Napoleon Bloomberg can think up in response.
11
Why do people blame Bloomberg for stop and frisk. It was the people of NYC who voted for Giuliani for two terms and Bloomberg for three terms. Stop and frisk is on the people of NYC. Twenty years of stop and frisk. They kept voting for it because they were fed up with crime.
Here's the line up of law and order Presidents: Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush. Seven terms for a total of twenty eight years.
Why did Houston's Mayor Sylvester Turner, a black person endorse Bloomberg? There are many many black people willing to vote for him. Ever meet any of them?
4
Jamelle, although you no doubt consider yourself totally woke, you are only 32 & lack the life experience & wisdom of someone like Thomas Friedman, whose column last week in this publication stated why Bloomberg would be the candidate to defeat Trump. I suggest you read the column & think about it.
Why can't you accept Michael Bloomberg's apology for the stop & frisk policy that was used 17 years ago? You were 15 years old at the time, so you have no personal experience of this. Bloomberg has apologized ad nauseam. Accept his apology & move on. He was trying to make the area of high crime in the black areas of the city safer for the black people who lived there. This policy removed numerous guns from the street & saved a number of mothers from weeping over a child's body killed by a bullet from the neighborhood.
Charles Blow wrote another tiresome "I Hate Bloomberg Redux" column yesterday. Charles will continue to nurse this issue until his last breath. Why be like him? Show your maturity with the ability to forgive & forget. Accept Bloomberg's apology. He is the only candidate who can defeat Trump, & that's what matters to me.
8
You just don’t get it. Your condescension isn’t wanted. You can’t force people to accept your candidate by preaching at them and downplaying your candidate’s faults with misinformation. (Bloomberg certainly has not apologized “ad nauseum” and we have no reason to accept his apology at face value. And if stop and frisk wasn’t racist, what does he have to apologize for?)
8
@Ben
Bloomberg apologizes for the stop & frisk policy every time he holds a microphone b/c people delight in making a huge issue out of it, & he has to respond. This is not misinformation, it's the truth. He was trying to make black, high-crime neighborhoods safer for the people who lived there - black people - with this policy. Racism was never his intent, & I don't believe he is a racist, either. So don't accept his apology, & don't vote for him. My vote will cancel yours, anyway. By the way, it's spelled nauseam, not "nauseum".
4
More condescension and bragging about how Bloomberg doesn’t need my vote. You’d better hope you are right, because he’ll never get it. I don’t want to be ruled over by an octogenarian racist billionaire. You obviously do.
7
I bet you if war criminal Dick Cheney decided to throw his hat in the ring and switch from being a Republican to a Democrat, the DNC and the corporate MSM would be singing his praises too. DJT has scrambled so many peoples’ brains that they can no longer think straight. Sad.
7
Perhaps you and your colleagues like Charles Blow should put together a spreadsheet of quotes from your columns that Trump can use against the Democrats in campaign adds. That way he and his minions don't have to go routing around in your old Op-Eds. Let's keep an eye on who we're trying to defeat here.
4
When your other choice is between the anti-Christ and a merely imperfect human being, please dont wait for Christ
7
I’ll make simple for me Mike Bloomberg is a patinaed version of Donald Trump.
5
Jamelle your fiddle burns, while Rome burns with it.
3
Mr Bouie would have made a good Sgt Major:
Form a circle.
Face inward.
Port arms.
Load.
Aim.
Fire!
4
The number one thing this nation needs now is to get big money out of politics. Just because Bloomberg is siding with some progressive positions, that is absolutely immaterial to the fact that he represents the truth of the statement "The US Government leadership is up for sale to the highest bidder." - Do you want to be part of that?
We don't need another Billionaire Oligarch in the White House. If he wins, then you should know. In the United States, democracy is dead.
Bloomberg, a former and now stealth member of The Gang of Plutocrats otherwise known as Republicans.
Bloomberg is demonstrating that you can Buy a Political Campaign.
We need to make sure that our elections are not up for sale.
The billionaire class wants to make sure that we don't have anyone leading our country who actually has anything resembling anything actual empathy for our fellow non-billionaire Americans.
Bloomberg is as dangerous to democracy and the causes of healthcare as a right and or expanded Social Security as the giant dark money pacs that Mitch McConnel wields over the slick sellouts.
Don't be fooled. Bloomberg is a massagist, classist supremacist multi-billionaire who is trying to buy our election.
Fight for real democracy and getting big money out of politics.
8
Bloomberg was the best mayor NYC has had in recent times and will go on to be our best president.
I couldn't care less about left wing purity tests.
We need to beat Trump and no one else can do that.
No one including the Socialist Revolution candidate and his deluded follower can win a national election against Trump.
Mike will get it done.
Count on it.
8
Agreed Jamelle. What the People of the United States need most in their government right now is to "Get Big Money Out of Politics". - That was a headline.
If Bloomberg wins, we will have demonstrated the fact that Big Money is back in Politics with another Billionaire, a massive mega-billionaire, has bought his way into our politics and government. What next "Bezos for President?"
People so focused on themselves, on hoarding, on manipulating, undermining and controlling are not the type of people focused on "helping average people get health care," helping root out corruption from our government," "helping draw down our unnecessary spending on nuclear weapons," "reparations for the history of slavery and many decades of Jim Crow," "ending the racist criminal injustice system," and dozens of actually progressive issues.
Let's get and keep big money out of politics. Its the number one priority of rooting out corruption in our government.
6
Yes, we finally have a Democratic equivalent of Tsar Trump--with a blatant record of gross disrespect for minorities and women. Then he calculates what good causes to donate to for his image.
He's supported GOP candidates, and switched parties. Whatever is expedient. But we have better candidates to deal with guns and global warming.
Bloomberg's arrogant contempt for other people is so obvious---and this is the one some think will beat Trump? Then where are we? What norms will this create for future candidates to follow?
Bloomie will distort the truth and insult his oppenents. same as he's dissed non-whites and women. It's a clear past pattern. He makes up his own reality, because Bloomie's got a King complex, same as the one he wants to replace.
If voters can be duped enough to be pro-Trump, they can be pro Bloomie too, from the opposite side. It's quite shocking now some voters accept dictatorial tendencies, downplay huge faults, just rationalize them away.
Yes, it's happening again.
Seems many voters are naive and easily led to idealize a candidate who respects nobody. I keep my TV remote in hand---to switch channels whenever I see Bloomber, same as I do with our current sociopath.
6
Does anyone reasonably doubt that gun violence is committed by, and on, minorities in the vast, vast majority of cases? Not only do the stats bear this out, but for me, my experience as an assistant DA in NYC in the 90s made this fact painfully obvious. So, why is everyone attacking Bloomberg for speaking truthfully?
I would have thought that with the Trump presidency built upon lie after lie after lie after lie, we might want to hear the truth spoken now and then, even if it didn't fit our desired narrative. Instead, it seems people just want to hear the lies that suit them. Attacking Bloomberg for speaking ugly truths only goes to show yet again how endemically perverse our body politic is.
7
After the 2008 financial crisis, right wingers blamed liberals by suggesting they somehow forced poor, innocent bankers to lend money to people of color.
Bloomberg is a Wall St. financial icon so of course he'd be happy to embrace such a racist idea. There's nothing a corporate billionaire would love more than blaming liberal economic programs designed to help poor minorities rather than blaming the reckless deregulation of the financial industry designed to make the obscenely rich even richer.
Bloomberg's 60 Billion dollars in wealth should be enough of a clue for us to predict that he'd embrace this racist, blame-the-victim idea. But there's also his disgraceful eviction of Occupy Wall Street protesters from NYC's Zuccotti Park in 2011. Occupy Wall Street was protesting economic inequality, something for which Bloomberg and his cohort of corporate oligarchs are entirely responsible.
Also, innocent, mostly young, Black New Yorkers have been subjected to police stops and street interrogations more than 5 million times since 2002. Bloomberg was NYC's mayor for 12 years when the vast majority of the 5 million mostly-unconstitutional, racial-profiling stops were conducted.
These are just a few of the many reasons why Bloomberg should not be the nominee of the Democratic Party.
10
I agree with Bouie on every point except the statement that Bloomberg could beat Trump in the general election. When all is said and done and it's time to vote, most leftists, racial minorities, muslims, and many others will be so disgusted by the choice between two racist, misogynistic, anti-worker billionaires they will simply not be able to bring themselves to vote for Bloomberg. Nominating Bloomberg will turn an entire generation off from the Democratic party. It's absolute insanity to think he represents any kind of salvation from Trump.
6
What amazes me on this front is that people making the "vote for the lesser of two evils" argument don't realize that a fair number of progressives would consider Trump the lesser of the two evils.
Given a choice between an obviously incompetent racist authoritarian and a competent one, is the obviously incompetent one not, in fact, less of a threat? If asked to choose between Trump and Bloomberg, I'll vote for whichever far-left party has the most viable ticket.
I recognize that will increase the likelihood of a Trump victory. That's part of why I will do it. Trump is an absolutely awful President, but at least he isn't very good at being an authoritarian. I could never bring myself to vote for him, but I can absolutely bring myself to vote against Michael Bloomberg.
8
Here, here!
3
@Jamie " . . . a fair number of progressives would consider Trump the lesser of the two evils."
Agreed. The phrase, "Better the devil you know . . ." has been flitting through my mind of late. If the D party decides to go to the wall with Mayor Mike, people who wanted another candidate might not simply stay home. They might pull the lever for the dreaded T monster. The longer this goes on, the less unthinkable that becomes.
1
While the S&F policies may have been egregious, can you say that "good people on both sides" is not 1000% more vile? Trump is a racist to his core, Bloomberg is not. As for wealth - I would rather have a candidate that actually has a legit foundation, and cannot be bought as easily as the POTUS in corruption who is violating emoluments, and every other sense of decency. Give it a rest Boule - at the end of the day, if Bloomberg is the only way out of this nightmare we should forgive - and save the Supreme Court from being irreversibly changed for the next generation.
3
First of all, no matter who our Dem candidate is, he/she better hope for a majority in both the Senate and House, or we will see no progressive changes.
Second, I am no supporter of bigotry in any shape, form, or manner. That being said, we may need a candidate with some racial bigotry baggage to help pull those purple, white swing voters over to our side on Election Day. I believe there are millions of previous Trump voters that hate what DT has done to our country, but they go along because he represents old timey white comfort of the past. You know, less crime....ect.
Now if we just had a Democrat that we felt represented our White interests...
They look at Bloomberg, see a conservative guy who's demonstrated his approval of cracking down on urban crime, has more money and success than Trump, bada-boom, bada-bing, Trumps yesterday's news.
I'm not sure this message will resonate thanks to the destructive cancel culture. These issues are different in that they are based on things Bloomberg actually did and for which he (mostly) has expressed no contrition. Nonetheless, I think people are going to see this as yet another SJW-type attack and roll their eyes, which is unfortunate.
2
Mr Bloomberg now is more proposition than an idea. He’s accomplished, smart, analytical and not shy about putting his money where his brand is. His marketing campaign has succeeded in getting his foot in the door after cutting the queue, although I must confess I’m not sure where he stands on any of a myriad of issues important to us all. What his fortune has seemed to afford him a pass. Tickle me with your financial feather and I’ll call you cute. Not a full throated all-in catcall, but a wink and a look the other way.
4
To respond to the claim that he's a racist and outflank the primary competition, Bloomberg may soon suggest strongly that he'll choose Kamala Harris or Stacey Abrams as VP and/or Harris as AG. This may not placate Blow and Bouie but it could resound with the bulk of African-American voters. If Bloomberg were to win the nomination, he would have to do something like this to unite the party.
2
I have made mistakes in my life that have affected others in horrible ways, and today I have a spiritual practice that demands apology and change of behaviors, with rigorous reflection so that I don't repeat those old awful mistakes. If someone actually forgives me and I am able to mend the broken ties once created, I consider myself very lucky, but I don't expect it. I make the amends because I have a desire to change and be a better person. Why can't people believe that of Bloomberg? Are we not to forgive so that we, too, shall be forgiven?
3
@Anne, If he were truly contrite, he'd be discussing reparations for the harm he caused to so many young men. His "apology" is lip service so he can run for president, evidenced by the fact that he made it shortly before announcing his intention to run. Moreover, none of us who weren't "thrown up against the wall" has the moral authority to "forgive" Bloomberg. We weren't harmed. They were. It's their call.
2
Trump, 6ft 3, mocks Bloomberg's height, 5ft 8. But both men have huge Napoleon complexes. They might as well be wearing ermine, and crown, holding a sceptre.
If American voters have self respect, they must make sure these two 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.
"same signal albeit at a different frequency"
4
If I needed a lawyer to plead my case, I'd hire mr. Louie in a heartbeat, because he can make a case that supports a cause. But, if Mr. Louie was a judge, I would fear to appear in his court, because he does not demonstrate intent when he passes judgement. It is one thing to take facts and use them to support a thesis, it is another to determine somebody's guilt.
Fact: Mr. Bloomberg supported the Stop and Frisk policy that over-targeted young ethnic male communities.
Question: was Mr. Bloomberg's intent to discriminate and cause harm on the basis of race or ethnic background?
I do not know the answer, but I sure did not see a valid indictment in Mr. Louie's editorial. I understand that he may be sensitive to the issue, as I would be, and as we all should be. But, before aligning Mike Bloomberg with Donald Trump, I would suggest a bit more caution and a sense of care before using big words like "racist" and "Trumpian".
My two cents...
5
@George ... so what, if with stop & frisk, discrimination and causing harm on the basis of race wasn't Bloomberg's 'intent'? Suppose with his profane, gross comments to women, he never intended to insult them and assert male dominance?
Then by disguising intent, anything is permissible?
What was the intention of America's past lynchings of blacks with no trial? Or racial segregation in schools, and public places? Plenty of rationalizations about 'intent'.
The S. Court ruled segregation an unconstitutional violation of the 14th Amendment in Brown v Board in 1954. Millions of southerners defied it.
The judge ruled Bloomberg's stop and frisk was excessive, with no safeguards, as an unconstitutional violation of the 4th Amendment. He fought it, he appealed, he lost.
6
@Meredith
I hear you, Meredith. The focus on Mr. Louie's editorial was to judge Mike Bloomberg's personal ethics and to determine if he shared Trumpian attributes. This is what we are talking about here, not whether stop and fisk was an acceptable policy. You can invoke tons of revolting issues about how race was handled in the past, and I would agree with you on every point you are going to make. But I believe that is not the issue we are debating here. We are debating whether character assassination is a good idea to pursue at this stage of the Democratic Primary process...I am happy to evaluate candidates on their merits and potential shortcomings, I am not sure we need to resort to insults just because we want to support our preferred candidate.
This is why the Senate and House seats are so important. If we're gonna get Bloomberg as our no matter who, we've got to have the Senate and House to pass the legislation we need to save our democracy..
3
@AnnaJoy
If we get Sanders, then we better hope a democratic congress comes with him, because there is no way on God's green earth that Sanders will get anything through the GOP Senate.
8
Bloomberg may not be your cup of tea. Consider him in a broader perspective - relatively weak (i say, very weak) pool of candidates so far while facing a series of relentlessly ruthless Trump campaign team. I say let's give him a chance to see whether he can topple the beneath-the-standard White House occupier ....
3
Bloomberg also handed the city over to his real estate buddies who proceeded to tear the city apart with over-development, all while living in a single-family townhouse.
70
The amount of uninformed or blatantly false comments are a painful reminder that racial stereotypes are so engrained in the American psyche that facts and studies can’t penetrate the storyline that white Americans wants to tell about the black and blown “super predators” that roam the streets of New York and according to Bloomberg the rest of the country.
The ones incapable of living among civilized society without heavy policing. That’s what broken mirrors is about, and is what stop and frisk is about. Furthermore, redlining apparently have saved the American economy from certain combustion. It’s sickening how seemingly sensible people make excuses for the manager of a blatantly racist construct and worldview. It’s foolish to think that a man Bloomberg’s age suddenly have a come to Jesus moment and realize the thousand of lives he has ruined when less that 5 years ago he was telling people to get over it. The epitome of white privileged. To tell minorities to get over thousands of babies, young boys and girls, being terrorized on a daily basis. Not being able to leave ones homes without being targeted for no other reason that their skin color.
9
Why bother to defend Bloomberg if you aren’t getting paid to do so? It isn’t the general election yet. We don’t have to accept him as the Democratic candidate. Why should we? I don’t believe he can beat Trump, if that is your reason. I will never vote for Bloomberg. Even against Trump. I’ll vote for any other candidate. I can’t be the only one who feels that way.
6
Let's give Bloomberg credit, he's not a racist, he's a believer in economic "ethnic cleansing" to the benefit of his cronies in real estate and finance. He sought to clean out lower and middle class communities by any means possible, making them ripe for gentrification. How the policy was carried out depended on the neighborhood. In poor minority neighborhoods, it was by constant harassment by the police; in middle class areas, it was by rezoning, so that forests of luxury condos would eventually make them unaffordable to their long-time inhabitants. This policy was reinforced by his cavalier approach to the schools, where what hundreds of thousands of kids, who were not college-bound, would do for a living was of no concern. His hope was that all the riffraff would just move away. Looking about, he almost got his wish, having turned NYC into the sterile, glass wasteland it is today.
8
I swear some people can't see the forest for the trees. When will the Democrats understand that they need to Fight Fire with Fire in order to win? No candidate is perfect. This isn't about any one candidate. It is about the party winning in Nov. That seems to be what the GOP understands better than the Dems.
12
I am white, but I have been stopped by cops while driving many times. One cop told me it's because I look like a vagrant. One time, in the eighties, state troopers pulled me over - for no reason it turned out - and when I opened the glove compartment to get my registration all my maps spilled out and they said "oops, you're a drug dealer that's why you have so many maps" and decided to tow my car and search it top to bottom for drugs. Only when they finally reached my parents after about six hours and they confirmed I was an honors student in college did they let me go.
In none of my stops was I given a ticket or anything. My point is I completely understand why black people would be angered by getting stopped for no reason other than being black and in the wrong neighborhood. I also remember getting into heated arguments with my white friends and family members about Bloomberg's racist stop and frisk. It was wrong a million times over and I can't forgive that enough to vote for him.
11
In addition to supporting stop and frisk until it became a liability, Michael Bloomberg would dearly love to privatize public education, a position espoused by many of the super-rich. I would truly hate to find his name on the ballot with a (D) next to it.
8
@gesneri Do you have a source for this claim about him wanting to privatize public education?
1
I agree most with Bernie. That said, I am blue no matter who.
It is an absolute absurdity to compare Bloomberg or anyone short of David Duke with the racism emanating from the WH.
5
I agree with Mr. Bouie and Mr. Blow. There's no way I can accept Bloomberg's manifestly insincere apology, coming just before he decides to buy the Presidency--anymore than I can accept Biden's fake apology to Anita Hill coming just before he throws his hat in the ring. Both those candidates have a lifetime of supporting the corporations and wealthy individuals against the rest of us. I'm not overlooking their track records any more than I'd overlook the work history of someone I was interviewing for any other job.
13
I am a gay man who voted for generations of Democratic presidential candidates, including Obama, even though they were against same sex marriage. Why? Because they were better for the job than their Republican opponents. People, policies, nations evolve. To examine the extent of Bloomberg’s racial bias is one thing, but to claim that makes him “Trumpian” is false equivalence. It’s an attention grabbing headline, but it’s a smear. Can’t we get DJT out of our brains, even for a minute?
19
@avery
You’re absolutely correct.
To make the moral equivalency between former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Donald Trump is delusional and insulting.
This NYT essay tries to drag Bloomberg’s moral level to the gutter level of Trump. How dishonest!
On issues of race, intolerance and fighting crime, any decent New Yorker knows the difference.
3
Bloomberg's money will be useful in the coming campaign & a slot at Energy or Treasury in a Democratic administration would be reasonable but he should not be considered for the presidency.
6
I'm curious when you say, " However, there’s no indication that he has really changed; no evidence that he’s dropped the commitment to racial control." What would that look like? How would he do that as a private citizen?
3
It's still shocking to me that loads of intelligent, educated white people rush in to contradict any black columnist who speaks with wisdom and authority about the major challenges -- and injustices -- that black Americans still face.
I'm not putting myself forward as any kind of exemplar. But for various reasons -- one being that I'm a middle-aged woman who has been aware of misogyny since I was 12, in 1974 -- I accept that I can't begin to understand the experiences of someone from a *different* group that's still not equal. So I listen.
Yes, white people, we probably will have less power than we have now if we have to share it with others. But less power doesn't equal "too little power." So please stop feeling defensive, and listen, and be flexible.
Mr. Bouie has made excellent points about Mr. Bloomberg's troubling policies and worldview.
11
@DW99
Perhaps that's because some of us recognize Mr. Bouie as *A* voice of black Americans, not *THE* voice. Same for Charles Blow.
Are there not other black Americans supporting Bloomberg, including some who lived in NYC during stop & frisk? Is their "wisdom and authority" somehow less valid because they don't have a column in the Times?
2
Trump and Bloomberg are comparable? Seriously?
Bowie should find a better subject.
13
Yes they are in the context of their attitudes toward black and brown folks as witnessed by anyone with an open minded attitude to witness others lived experiences. Do some due diligence with the goal of being well informed.
6
Three mights in your last three sentences, Jamelle.
I think YOU might vote for Bloomberg. The ballot is secret. No one will know.
3
Okay, Mr. Bouie, we understand that you support Mr. Sanders and will write anything to persuade voters to go along with him. Your consistent putting down of other Democrats will ensure another four years of Trump. Thanks for nothing. What wouldn't surprise me at all is should Bernie not get the nomination, he would run as an independent to keep his movement going and sending all of us down the road to a worse than ever period of Trump. Support the candidate who can win against Trump and stop criticizing him.
9
@Mike Mr. Bouie is an opinion columnist. He has his opinion, you have yours. Instructing anyone to stop "criticizing" the candidate(s) you support is a regrettable position.
11
@gesneri You are right and I apologize. He has a right to his opinion. I made a mistake, but as his column is viewed by thousands of NYT's readers it has great influence. Still, he does have that right.
4
@Mike Bouie, Blow, Warzel, Krugman: A formidable quartet lining up to attack Bloomberg. Thank goodness NYT readers are capable of adding some balance to these unrelenting editorials on Bloomberg.
For a fair News Analysis, read Matt Flegenheimer's piece "Michael Bloomberg Has to Fly Without a Net on the Debate Stage".
For the past three years I have wondered how Trump supporters overlook his misdeeds. Watching Democrats twist themselves every which way to defend Bloomberg answers that question for me. It’s as Ezra Klein notes in his book on polarization: when groups are polarized enough, it’s no longer about ideology, it’s no longer about what’s good for the people, it becomes about one thing: WINNING. As long as the Republican misogynist, racist autocrat is the one WE have chosen and not one of the “others”, then nothing is unforgivable. I suppose it’s evolutionary.
11
I thought the self-righteous fervor of the Bernie Bros was bad. It is nothing compared to the cold naked nihilism of the Bloomberg Bunch. They don’t believe in anything. They are just sick of feeling disenfranchised by Trump. So they are ready to sell the presidency to the highest bidder. It’s sad.
9
The real point about Bloomberg isn’t about whether “Stop and frisk” was the right thing to do, or if it made NYC safer.
It is what Bloomberg said about black men. How can you think of electing a president who thinks 95% of violent crime in “virtually every city” in the nation is caused by young men of color?
He can apologize all he wants, but I doubt his thinking has changed at all.
12
The difference is that when Donald Trump did these things, his base cheered him on and didn't blink an eye. These statements were the basis of his policies for his presidency. For Bloomberg, he is going to have to get down on his knees in abject apologies and beg for forgiveness from the Black community and the whole Democratic Party for having said and done such things. He would not dare to say or do them as president.
5
It will take a respectable billionaire to expose this lying, thieving corrupt billionaire president of ours. It will take a self made New York billionaire to expose the New York con man, crooked billionaire who is posing as the legitimate president of our fast disappearing democracy.
It will take the organizational skills of Bloomberg to undo the toxicities and ineptitudes of Trump's Washington and to restore the Constitution and the rule of law to its rightful place.
8
Voters: If you find Trump's racism revolting, but are excited to vote for Bloomberg, perhaps it's time to reassess how much racism truly bothers you.
8
@Dominic The diff is that Trump is a bitter, hate filled poser.
And Bloomberg is a fairly normal human being, prone to mistakes, reflection, and self improvement.
4
Yes, as recently as 2015, Bloomberg defended stop and frisk. Just when he enters the Democratic primary he apologizes.
As the church lady of Saturday Night Live used to say: "How convenient."
9
Has Bouie ever lived in the City's neighborhoods "targeted" under Bloomberg's administration?
7
I don't believe Bloomberg had racist intent when he oversaw the increase the use of Terry Stops (stop, question, frisk with cause, more precisely) in minority neighborhoods of NYC. That is where 95% of gun crimes were (and still are) taking place, the overwhelming number committed by young males of color.
This is of course the "silly season" when single issue activists make the case for purity tests and look back many years for statements (often taken out of context) or positions intended to cancel candidates they don't like. They came for Biden first (worked with segregationists decades ago to implement some progressive policies). Then they came for Pete (fired a black police chief). They even came for Kamala (was tough on some minority criminals in sentencing). Now they are feeling around for something on Klobuchar and going after Bloomberg.
There's always something to dig up that doesn't fit current woke sensibilities. Voters should keep the big picture in mind when choosing a candidate to support. And the big picture is appealing to the wide swath of moderates and independents in swing states and removing Trump come November.
10
Now I get it.
If some members of an identifiable group are a real (or maybe a sincerely imagined) threat to me in some way that is important to me, and I and my group have power, then it’s okay to use the armed agents of the law to collectively effectively abuse all members of the group to reduce the threat.
Consider 20th century history. Then think of all the ways that premise has, to understate it, gotten out of hand.
9
When I read a column like this, I conclude that this country really needs three political parties: a conservative party, a centrist party and a progressive party. Currently the Republican party owns the far right, and a segment of the Democratic party inhabits the far left. In these two regions live the ideologically pure, where no sin is ever forgiven (Mr. Bouie) and compromise is an unthinkable act (Mr. McConnell and Mr. Sanders). A centrist party could allow inhabitants from the center-right and center-left, which is where a democracy must be governed in a pluralistic society such as ours. I believe that such a centrist position would win the most votes and we could finally get something constructive done in this country.
7
The ‘stop and frisk’ issue was, and will forever be controversial; and per his campaign staff, Bloomberg will forever be apologizing for it. It was a drastic response to a desperate situation.
What’s lost in the hand-wringing dialogue is the perspective that most of the lives that were saved by stopping, frisking and forcibly taking guns away from 15-25 year old black and brown kids is the fact that most of the lives saved were of 15-25 year old black and brown kids.
Many kids were embarrassed and humiliated in front of their friends... a few kids’ lives were saved. Was it worth it? You decide.
10
I don't agree that Bloomberg is running as the anti-Trump candidate. If he were running as the anti-Trump candidate, he'd be in the Republican primary. At this point in the primary season, it's much more accurate to say he's running as the anti-Bernie (and to a lesser extent, the anti-Elizabeth) candidate.
12
@Joel Schwartz
Agree that Bloomberg wants to save us from Trump. In doing that he also will save us from Old Bernie and his vicious bros.
Bloomberg in 2020!
4
At least Bloomberg seems to learn from his mistakes, seems to have a conscience, and hasn't been accused of many rapes by credible victims.
On the stop and frisk policy, consider the book by Malcolm Gladwell, "Talking to Strangers." In it, Malcolm explains how a poorly thought out policy develops. Crime is local, and the problem with stop and frisk is that the study that proved the statement was misconstrued and then applied. It's not local to a neighborhood, but to a single block or two. The killing of Sandra Bland was another example of the misapplication of the potential learning about how crime is local can be misapplied.
We are all on this planet for a short time, and should be learning as we live. Bloomberg sees the error of his ways, and the stop and frisk policy was, I would argue, responsive to poor teachers of the study that discovered that crime is local and policing works if the local is very well identified and the crimes that occur there are very well disrupted.
Bloomberg's money can be applied to deal with the fact that we are "Zucked" (see book by Roger McNamee by that name) -i.e., that Facebook and other tech giants lead us around to our detriment by our brains and emotions and self-selected but hijacked groups - because he understands it.
I support him because he has put his money in the right place last election cycle and is doing so again.
I don't have the money and power to stop the burgeoning fascism that Trump has created. Do you?
8
He might be a racist, but he's *our* racist.
/s/
7
@Barbyr
Bloomberg is not a racist. If you, as an African American, had to share a cell with Trump or with Bloomberg, which one would you choose?
4
Mike is an extraordinarily able person who overall has an excellent track record. People of color were victimized by fewer crimes when Mike was mayor for 12 years of NYC. Mike is extremely fair and extremely competent. Trashing people because they are talented and motivated and do well in life, is a very bad thing to do. Mike has spent billions on gun control and safety, and on environmental issues, money that he earned.
12
He acknowledged his mistake, owned up to it and is not a racist. In fact, his personally funded programs have done more to help people of all shades than anyone I can think of.
6
"[Mr. Bloomberg has] made mistakes, especially around stop-and-frisk policing in New York City, which disproportionately targeted black and brown men and for which he recently apologized." (NYTimes, 13Feb2020) Indeed. And Mr. Bloomberg has apologized and is standing up to this issue: "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)
On the other hand, Mr. Trump, well: "President Trump, who has supported the stop-and-frisk policing tactic and who has been criticized for statements widely criticized as racist, on Tuesday tweeted the audio recording of Mr. Bloomberg’s remarks. In a Twitter post that he pinned to the top of his feed, Mr. Trump wrote, 'Wow, Bloomberg is a total racist!' He deleted the post a short time later ... " Somebody mentioned pots and kettles?
1
Sorry Mr. Bouie...although he is not my primary choice right now...if he is the nominee, I am going to vote for him and support him. Anyone with even a shade of blue is better than what we have. This does not mean that I think your concerns are not valid - they are more than valid. But we all (you included) will do better with Bloomberg that with the current administration.
9
Warning noted. I only hope this article and all it contains makes it outside the bubble of NY. Many New Yorkers who comment on Bloomberg seems both to know and to dismiss his racism and sexism.
The irony being that many of the those same people, force fed a narrative of Sanders as a dangerous radical who would take away their health insurance, are more negative towards him than towards this far more dangerous plutocrat who would violate their civil liberties.
Of course, the commenters - who are likely white, educated and privileged - are never the target. What doesn't affect them, personally, can be overlooked in their rush to Stop Sanders and find a savior.
They oddly believe that only one billionaire can stop another. Why? The media needs to be careful with the narrative it pushes or be complicit in the destruction of democracy itself.
7
We do not need a saint as our candidate. We need a Dragon Slayer. And no one has a bigger sword or uses it better than Bloomberg.
He is the only one who will beat Trump. Full stop!
5
Bloomberg has a long career of huge accomplishments and working for the public good. Sanders has a long career of hot air. Bloomberg arrived throwing hard punches at Trump, and he hasn't let up. I'm looking forward to the knockout.
21
Once again, we see the focus of the opinion section completely focused on identity politics. Columnists seem either opposed to or incapable of looking at the totality of what someone has to offer.
And in Bloomberg's case, he is a born leader, manager, and thinker. He is incredibly competent.
He has done much for all the citizen of this country, but this narrow focus on something he has apologized for reflects on the opinion writers more than the candidate.
Bloomberg has the support of 3 members of the Congressional Black caucus and many ministers.
This complete focus on identity politics is just too limited to be on real use.
12
“Identity politics” are just issues that don’t affect you as a white person. If Bloomberg becomes president, perhaps he will expand upon his police-state programs and you or a family member will experience what it is like to be the victim of his injustice. Will his authoritarian tendencies still be considered “identity politics” when they don’t just affect black people?
2
My question to the author and to Charles Blow:
If Bloomberg becomes the nominee are you going to vote for him or not?
If not then Trump wins and perhaps wins the popular vote as well so he then has a mandate.
Is that what you want? Is that what the USA needs right now?
If you do not support the Democrat nominee in the general election then in the infamous words of Pogo "We have met the enemy and he is us."
6
Mr Bouie,
Why no mention of Bloomberg's Young Mens Initiative, created in 2011 to aid young black and latino males?
“When we look at poverty rates, graduation rates, crime rates, and employment rates, one thing stands out: blacks and Latinos are not fully sharing in the promise of American freedom and far too many are trapped in circumstances that are difficult to escape,” said Mayor Bloomberg. “Even though skin color in America no longer determines a child’s fate – sadly, it tells us more about a child’s future than it should."
Bloomberg in 2010
13
I honor and respect any black or brown person who has survived growing up in America; I do not know of a greater challenge to sanity than being judged so quickly by others and judged in negative way. I am now old and am being judged in the same way based just on my age -- but I have already lived a life of white privilege, so I accept what being old means in our society. Not comparable to growing up non-white. Bloomberg: absolutely accurate; does it take someone like Boolberg to address our greatest threat? Trump is at war with the country; we know that. He is a clear and present danger. If Mike is the only way to survive this war, we need to select him. I prefer a country under Bloomberg to a country under Dictator Trump.
7
I don't think Mr. Bloomberg was motivated by racist disdain. The contempt he openly and continually shows (and I think never apologized, but rather doubled down on) is for individual rights in the way of data driven policies. So I don't think the danger is a president that would pursue politics of racial control, but one that would intensify the politics of control and privacy violation on everyone. The danger is not about something dark in his liberalism, but with his belief in an unconstrained and technocratic utilitarianism: A perceived favourable outcome for the population at large admits practically any harm on groups or individuals within that population.
4
As I only now realized, Bloomberg qualified because the Democratic National Committee changed its rules to allow candidates to qualify even if they are self-funding their campaigns. This is so wrong.
8
After citizen united - it is so right-
Where do you think the corrupt trump gets his money to campaign “from the people” ?
Please -
5
One of the things that Bloomberg had better learn if he wants to beat Trump is never apologize, ever.
The more he apologizes for his past actions the less likely that Americans will forgive him.
5
If the Democrats nominate Bloomberg they will go in 2020 with a candidate at the right of Trump, effectively changing the party.
1
You live in NYC like I do and you know that’s not true.
3
@Alexgri Read his platform -- it is virtually identical to Elizabeth Warren's (minus M4A and instant fracking ban).
every day I'm demoralized to see so many well-meaning people voicing their full-throated support for Mike Bloomberg, both in these opinion pages and in the comments section.
He cannot beat Trump. This narrative that he is somehow the most 'electable' option is flat out false, and it is interesting that so many of his supporters don't seem to have much else to say about him.
It's just, "we need to remove Trump." And of course everyone agrees with that sentiment. Which is why Bernie Sanders, the clear frontrunner in the democratic primary and the candidate with the most national support, is the clear choice to beat Donald Trump.
I'm a left wing individual, and I would absolutely vote for nearly every candidate in the democratic primary over Trump. Bloomberg is literally the only one who gives me pause. He is deeply conservative billionaire who believes that he knows better -- IS better -- than the average citizen.
He has displayed extreme bigotry and racist vitriol, not to mention he has even more sexual harassment and assault allegations against him (many settled, with NDAs that remain) than Donald.
He is, by anyone's measure, a smarter and more capable individual than Donald Trump, that's true. And it's for that exact reason that I see him as even more dangerous for this country. If Bloomberg buys this election, as he seems determined to do, you can forget about democracy as we know it. Our next ten presidents will be billionaire megalomaniacs.
9
Bloomberg apologized for "hurting peoples' feelings," not for being wrong on the merits that it was biased, ineffective in finding crime or deterring crime, and harmful to a generation of Black and LatinX young men. Bloomberg and his police commissioner Raymond Kelly knew in 2002 that it was biased, based on an investigation by then Attorney General Spitzer, yet he proceeded to expand it by 700% by 2011. Perhaps the biggest sign of Bloomberg's hubris was his inability to question his own data, and to insist despite the facts that he was right.
5
The current president can only be described as a disaster. I am convinced that the democratic nominee, whomever is eventually selected, will be a far better option. As a three term mayor of a large city, Mr. Bloomberg is going to have a large record with the occasional policy failure. Stop and frisk is clearly an important one. However, this failure must be compared to important failures of other candidates: voting for the Iraq war, the claim to have substantial Native American heritage, historical support for NRA positions. It becomes obvious that all of the candidates have flaws. No doubt it is because they are imperfect human beings.
1
All other arguments aside, why would any American be okay with the idea of another billionaire president? The only reason Bloomberg even qualified for the next debate is because he could afford to pay for an unprecedented advertising campaign to garner that support. Buttigieg at least raised his advertising budget by convincing others - even if they are rich - to support him.
4
I believe that any failings Michael Bloomberg may have revealed in the past pale in comparison to our current failure.
So I will support him with my vote if he is nominated. It is really a very simple choice in my mind. I approve of the KISS method in our current political turmoil. Don't over think this!
3
At what point do we stop boxing people into their own past ignorance versus allowing them to redeem themselves and grow?
Stop and Frisk is a terrible policy. However the evidence I need to confirm that Bloomberg has no interest in racial oppression is this: his emphasis on education, specifically improving education outcomes for young black people, who bear the brunt of a terrible education system; his emphasis on gun control, which will keep people of all races protected; his views on immigration, which he sees as necessary for economic and social reasons; his investment in art and culture, which has not been exclusive to white artists and benefits society as a whole; and his investment in protecting the environment--which again, the folks who bear the greatest brunt of our current environmental policies, are minorities.
Stop and frisk is a horrible violation; the rest of his record proves his humanity, charity and love of humanity.
His ads are more creative, on the point and he has the power to defeat a fake billionaire who is a real racist.
He has this black voters confidence and vote.
8
Stop and frisk traumatized people of color. I don’t believe Bloomberg is a racist. Bloomberg will spend and spend to end the Trump era and he will continue to do so even if he is not the nominee. It’s a big ask to move forward without reconciliation. I hope the Dems get it right.
2
I think Bernie is far more Trumpian than Bloomberg.
7
I dislike Trump but I disagree wholeheartedly with your entire first paragraph. I don't accept any of that as "true." I worry that the Democrats explain and rationalize their entire ideology and their policies using race, racist policy, and racism. I worry that we, blacks and whites, are moving away from each other as a result. We are looking at each other with increased suspicion. We have spent so much time "celebrating our differences" that we have forgotten what we have in common. I am not making much sense I realize. Just so frustrated with the Democrats.
6
I experienced Bloomberg’s three mayoral terms and have no qualms about saying that he treated citizens, including city workers, with disdain and cruelty. I’ve been following the stories and op-eds about him for the last few days. One thing I notice from reader comments is how willing many people are to not only excuse Bloomberg’s behavior but to justify the abrogation of other people’s constitutional rights.
6
We don't live in a perfect world. Trump is one option on Election Day. I'll take anyone over him, even if there are serious concerns about the opponent. Anyone.
Let's focus on getting out the vote. whenweallvote.org.
3
Even though liberals may not like it, facts should not get in the way. Bloomberg was right - at least in the New York City area, most crime was, and still is committed in minority neighborhoods, by minorities, against minorities. You can disagree with tactics, but police need to be in these neighborhoods. And individuals who break the law need to be arrested. In 2020, stop and frisk may seem too aggressive, but look at NYC 30 or 40 years ago. Using parks after dark, out of the question; Times Square and 42 St, full of undesirables; subways outside of rush hour were always risky. Car theft was all too common. Something had to be done, and at the time stop and frisk made perfect sense.
6
Holding one accountable for his multiple statements supporting racist views and policies is not issuing a purity test.
Purity tests are refusing to support a candidate after a single political misstep, which changed no laws and hurt no one.
During primaries, voters must exercise judgment. That is not a purity test.
After the primaries, we put that aside to vote blue, no matter who.
5
We are so desperate for some return to normalcy that even a fake Democrat such as Bloomberg looks good.
7
The greatest irony of all of this is that:
1) a GOP President who isn't really a Republican at all, will run for re-election, and win, against a Democrat Party candidate who isn't really a democrat.
2) the very thing the Left has been lecturing us about for years (whit e male billionaire) will be their standard bearer
3) and they will lose because they have insisted in transforming themselves into a bicoastal, elitist satrapy of a party full of rent seeking, credentialized minions
I mean --- it's rich!
7
Stay tuned my friend, the corrupt vulgar trump will soon be out of the White House with his collection of corrupt morally bankrupt cronies right behind him.
And good riddance.
Conman trump will be happier going back to real estate money laundering and lying and stealing from his “business partners” something trump is actually good at!
Vote my friends Bloomberg 2020
1
I think a little perspective is needed here. I you were to pick, completely at random, a male between the ages of 18 and 35 out of the US population, and he happened to be black, crime statistics would tell you, simply based on that fact alone, that the likelihood that he was the perpetrator of a violent crime is at least 8 times higher than if he had happened to be white. So its not unreasonable to suppose that the stop and frisk focus on black males was based on data, not racial bias. That is not to say that it couldn't have been implemented better, with more safeguards, etc. but that takes more resources, and maybe those resources weren't available; I don't know. But the unquestioning, knee-jerk condemnation of Bloomberg on this is not justified without at least examining the data that the policy was based on.
8
"Because we put all the cops in the minority neighborhoods. Yes, that’s true. Why’d we do it? Because that’s where all the crime is."
"All" the crime? Really? During Bloomberg's reign as mayor, I seem to recall a boatload of white-collar crime going on in New York City, namely banks that were "too big to fail" fleecing and ruining the savings and lives of many, many people of all races and religions, Were any of them stopped and frisked? Prosecuted and punished. We all know the answer.
For the extremely wealthy in this country, there is one set of rules for them, another set for working people and an even harsher set for the working poor, many of whom are minorities, immigrants and other disadvantaged citizens of our society.
If Bloomberg is nominated, I will hold my nose and vote for him, but make no mistake he goes by the rich man's set of rules, no matter how many millions he spends on pet liberal causes.
7
Sorry I think your confusing George Bush damaging policy with Bloomberg.
“Banks too big to fail” was a federal level problem created after Bush and the GOP undermined most of the major finance regulations in the country that allowed these banks to merge business units into massive banks.
It had absolutely nothing to do with Micheal Bloomberg or New York City.
2
@JanY You don't send street cops to deal with white-collar crime. You need higher skills to catch it, and political will to boot.
1
@Steven Pardon me. Let's just say he's no friend of Dodd Frank, and no enemy of banks getting away with highway robbery. Better?
Leadership is more than policy, it's for standing for something.
https://slate.com/business/2019/11/michael-bloomberg-financial-crisis-congress-wall-street.html
2
Every time the Republicans have tacked hard right, the Democrats have meekly followed. This is not leading to a good place.
8
The good news is Bloomberg is surging. The opposition can be dealt with now, as we see here.
3
"Trumpian Liberalism"? Is that like "military intelligence" or "extra large"? Bloomberg is a wolf in sheep's clothing. If he got in the White House he'd keep protecting his money by following Trumps lead just without the tweets and crudeness. We don't need another billionaire with a checkered past.
6
I grew up in Indiana and have lived in NYC since 1980. I can tell you that you are not correct.
Micheal Bloomberg is a man of high integrity and moral values. He gives millions of dollars a year to charities, and social and environmental causes. He doesn’t need or care about more money.
Mr Bloomberg has absolutely nothing in common with the morally bankrupt trump who seems to spend his time setting up scam universities and self dealing charities and basically lying and stealing from anyone dumb enough to let him.
Trump prays to only two Gods, money and himself.
3
Dems need the strongest candidate they can get to run against Trump. We can overlook the warts. But we must save our democracy for future generations. Bloomberg can never do as much evil as Trump.
2
I would not be surprised if the Russians are offering to help the Bloomberg campaign, sort of hedging their bets. Bloomberg shares many of their values.
5
Who cares?
Has everyone forgotten that when Bloomberg became Mayor of NYC there were term limits for his office?
He made sure to remove them so he could a serve for a third term.
If you are even close to being a sentient adult then you know that a president Bloomberg would do the exact same thing to the 22nd Amendment.
This is the best reason for every adult to vote for anyone else, regardless of your politics.
9
@Robert Cicero
The NYC council can change the NYC rules by a vote. This is not the same as changing the 22nd Amendment of the US Constitution.
As a sentient adult I am not close to thinking that Bloomberg would even try to change the 22nd Amendment, and if that's your best reason for vote for anyone else, I'm glad that Bloomberg probably doesn't need your vote.
1
@Robert Cicero So you think Bloomberg will run for re-election at age 82 and then, at age 86, seek a third term.
@Greg And Bloomberg has not just donated to causes which I agree with. He has initiated, organized, given time and expertise to making these good things happen. This is an EXCELLENT CANDIDATE for the Democratic Party. Do not let perfection be the enemy of good!
3
Universal healthcare coverage is the single most important issue for me and a 'must'. Bloomberg opposes it. This is besides 'stop and frisk'/civil liberties issues, oligarchs run amok, etc. Perhaps Mr. Bloomberg can work on anti-gun violence issues in the Sanders Administration.
6
by universal healthcare coverage you mean free universal healthcare coverage, correct?
Because the last time I checked, anyone in the US can have healthcare coverage. It's called Obamacare but it's not free unless you are poor.
2
The threat of a despotic Bloomberg presidency pales in comparison to that of a Trump second term. The inability to reconcile on the part of supporters of any candidate not chosen will be fatal to Democratic hopes–and a significant blow to democratic hopes around the world. Would JB encourage Cory Booker or Kamala Harris to refuse a VP candidate offer from Bloomberg?
1
I am 58 years old and I have lived in East Baltimore all of my life. I wish we had a mayor wise enough to implement "stop and frisk". I live in a city where people take bets on how many people will get shot on any given day or weekend. The only reason why Baltimore doesn't lead the world in murders is that our medical system is one of the best in the world. People who live in nice, safe, crime free neighborhoods (probably yourself) should realize that people don't want to walk by a corner where a dozen guys are loitering and hope you don't catch a bullet. Three o'clock in the afternoon and you been out here all day, I wonder what you doing here? Maybe he is just waiting for the work van to come around. Myself and a lot others like me say that criminals belong in jail. Criminals shouldn't be hanging out on the corners of every neighborhood in the city. People just want the ability to live a proper life free of all of the nonsense that goes on. I say stop and frisk and apologize later, if you are wrong; which in this city, won't be that often.
10
@Kelvin Eaddy The medical system owes something to Bloomberg's huge donations to Johns Hopkins.
Sorry Bloomberg is not a racist, or anything of the sort. Micheal Bloomberg is a man of high moral standards and integrity.
I’ve watched Mr Bloomberg since the 80s build his company, into one of the most inclusive, gender and racially integrated and diverse work forces in the world.
I watched Bloomberg while Mayor help transform the New York City police department into one of the most inclusive, gender and racially integrated and diverse police forces in the country. A fact that I as a New Yorker, am particularly proud of.
Micheal Bloomberg will bring balance and quality back to the White House.
Vote my friends, Bloomberg 2020.
10
"Stopping someone on the basis of race was a recipe for false positives; stopping on the basis of actual suspicious behavior, on the other hand, would yield results, which is what happened when police stopped white residents." This is correct if the human instinct of bias didn't get in the way which it did.
He has shown a deaf ear to anyone who criticizes his ideas both at Bloomberg Financial and in the mayors office. He is only open to people he knows and that is a very small circle.
5
One fault of Democrats is to deny facts when they don’t fit the narrative they wish to promote. When the statistics show that more crimes occur in minority neighborhoods, why wouldn’t it be sensible to increase police presence there? Do we really believe that the law abiding people who live in those neighborhoods would welcome a reduction of police presence in their neighborhoods, leaving them to the mercy of criminals roaming the street, just to level out the number of police in their neighborhoods to the same number found in crime-free neighborhoods?
The bigger problem is the impact of poverty, which, because of decades of neglect and discrimination, continues to breed crime among those most caught up in the web of poverty ... minorities. And those minorities are, too often, unfairly pushed by that poverty into neighborhoods that become crime ridden.
The better approach, I would humbly suggest, is to do all you can to address the discrimination and poverty, AND in the meantime, provide those people caught up in those neighborhoods with law enforcement proportionate to the number of criminals preying upon them.
7
@Larry Griggers Thank you, this is EXACTLY how I feel.
1
Jamelle Bouie raises valid issues concerning Mike Bloomberg's tenure as mayor. And yes, candidate Bloomberg needs to do a complete explanation for those actions, some of which are inexcusable. And while any election, particularly a Presidential election can never be a selection of the lesser evil, the reelection of Donald Trump would be a catastrophic event. A total and utter destruction of our society as we know it. Pardons for his cronies, raping of our natural resources, destruction of the environment, unlimited advantage and privilege for his friends, disenfranchisement and even ridicule for anyone he does not like. This is happening NOW!
Mike Bloomberg likely has the best chance to win broad coalition support. He is intelligent enough to recognize his mistakes from the past and sensitive enough to learn from them. He was not, is not and will never be anything like Trump, except in his ability to shut Trump down cold. Give him an effective vice-president, elect a Congress not just as corrupt and complicit, not scared of their own shadow and we will be much better for it.
7
I do not support Bloomberg... he’s not even my third choice. Senators Harris, Warren, and Klobuchar (in that order are my choices)... Still, I think there are enough problems with Bloomberg’s candidacy without drawing a false comparison to the man who would be king. Mr. Trump stands alone among American Presidents for his utter disregard for our Constitution, for his apparent desire to be a dictator, for his disregard for traditional American allies, and for his apparent love of Mr. Putin. He is a menace to all Americans, regardless of race. He needs to be defeated. I sincerely hope Bloomberg is not the candidate, but I will vote for him in order to dump the Trumpster.
4
Bloomberg refuses to apologize for his support of the disastrous invasion of Iraq. His poor judgement makes him unfit to be the President.
3
"Mr. Bloomberg needs to contextualize his law and order policies "
And Mr. Bouie does too. Lately he seems to have engaged in an vendetta against all non-black candidates, with Sens. Harris and Booker having dropped out of the race. While he criticizes some/many/most of Bloomberg's policies (as he has done of others in the race), he ought to recognize and "contextualize' them against the times they were in force.
Desperate situations call for desperate measures. Many a time the pendulum swings too far, and needs correction. It behooves a columnist, at NYT no less, to recognize the need, and acknowledge the course correction.
Mr. Bouie should note that unintentional as it might be, he is giving aid and comfort to the opposition, the cruel, cavalier, contemptible, callous Mr. Trump.
6
A main difference is that Trump stirs up racism and xenophobia to rally his base and to keep that base intact. I see Bloomberg doing nothing like this. He will not embolden neo-Nazis and groups that follow in the KKK tradition.
Although what Bloomberg did was extremely hurtful to individuals, family, community, and city, he has apologized. If he follows this up with hiring excellent advisors and good policies/proposals/programs that work, that will move us forward. Forgiveness is good, too, but actually making changes to make a difference going forward will lay the groundwork for remediation, and perhaps, by some, forgiveness. I believe he will do this. Trump would do no such thing. Plus, I don't think Bloomberg could turn a party moving to the left toward Trumpism.
Most Democrats will vote Blue in November, regardless of who the nominee is. We will need a unified party to dump Trump.
5
@Kathleen
It should be obvious by now that Michael Bloomberg, a for republican is not going to unify the Democratic Party.
4
@Carl What if he wins the nomination. Will people just vote for Trump.? I hope not.
2
Thank you, and your colleague Charles Blow, for using the platform to show just how racist (and sexist) Bloomberg is, and how his nomination might destroy the Democratic party as we know it. But I'm seeing a disturbing trend in that it appears your white counterparts at the Times don't understand what a danger Bloomberg is, or just ignore it. I've now seen a 2nd column from David Leonhart extolling the virtues of Bloomberg (his college plan). I know opinion pieces are exactly that, and a diversity of opinions at a paper is a good thing, but I fear that it is falling on black people, once again, to expose the racism of white folks who sit idly by as if nothing is wrong. There is a reason MLK feared the "white moderate".
7
Trumpian you say??
Really!!??
Again I have to say it is difficult for me to take the arguments of NYT columnists who don't read the reporting of their own colleagues on the other side of the house in the newsroom.
"Michael Bloomberg Leans Left With Plan to Rein In Wall Street"
'Some of the billionaire’s proposals wouldn’t be out of place for his more progressive presidential rivals.'
Bloomberg leans left and takes aim at Wall Street
Exclusive: We’re the first to report Mike Bloomberg’s proposals for changing how the financial industry is regulated, which he is planning to announce this morning. The plan features ideas that wouldn’t be out of place for Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
Among Mr. Bloomberg’s proposals:
• A financial transactions tax of 0.1 percent
• Toughening banking regulations like the Volcker Rule and forcing lenders to hold more in reserve against losses
• Having the Justice Department create a dedicated team to fight corporate crime and “encouraging prosecutors to pursue individuals, not only corporations, for infractions”
• Merging Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
• Strengthening the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and “expanding its jurisdiction to include auto lending and credit reporting”
• Automatically enrolling borrowers of student loans into income-based repayment schemes and capping payments
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/business/dealbook/michael-bloomberg-wall-street.html
3
I cannot imagine what it must be like to be stopped and searched solely based on being a young male of color but I also can't imagine what it is like to live in neighborhoods where crime is so prevalent. There is no easy solution to crime as we all know. Bloomberg made a big mistake in doubling down on stop and frisk but there were many in the black community who supported this policy. It doesn't make Bloomberg a racist. You can say his judgment was flawed but in the same way those black New Yorkers, mostly older ones, were and are not racist, Bloomberg is also not a racist. I think his record of supporting liberal causes with not only his time but great efforts should be applauded. Stop and frisk should be evaluated as part of the greater whole of what Bloomberg has done rather than disqualification, imho
3
The only issue is, do you prefer Bloomberg or Trump?
Or do you plan on giving Bloomberg the HRC media treatment, and Trump a pass? Here’s an idea: write a column on Trump’s racism.
5
@GSL
The risk here is that people find neither choice palatable and they don't vote.
Trump then wins, because moderates in essence turn their backs on the one group that they cannot win without. Think about that, Hilary lost with about 60% turnout and over 90% of the black vote. If you think that Michael Bloomberg is every going to get 90% of the black vote, you are deluding yourself.
1
@Carl I was not clear. I am not suggesting Bloomberg is “the guy”. However, if he is the nominee the choice is, indeed, Bloomberg or Trump. If “we” allow Trump to get re-ejected, we get exactly what we deserve. Whoever the nominee is needs to get the full-throated support of every single person opposed to Trump. My main point is, here is an article clearly attacking Bloomberg, and ignoring Trump’s far more malevolent racism, just as the media was obsessed with HRC’s email red meat being fed to it by Trump.
1
I believe Bloomberg would do well to use his money to aid worthy candidates and help clean up trump’s mess.
I do not want him as president.
I believe Biden brings the needed experience and heart that we desperately need. With Biden and a strong VP and Cabinet, America can be restored to good health. And of course a democratic majority in both houses of Congress .
1
I will never vote for Bloomberg. Trading one racist NY billionaire for another is not an option.
If he’s the Democratic candidate, I’ll be writing in my dog for President.
4
Bloomberg is just another authoritarian and we have had enough of that under Trump. The most disturbing revelation of this article? "the NYPD — which Bloomberg once called his “own army” while also weirdly claiming that it was the “seventh biggest army in the world” . Let's not exchange on fascist for another.
4
I am finding this trend of bringing up Bloomberg's stop and frisk and how it relates to young black boys and men disturbing. What about the black girls and women who were affected by this? Why is no one at the NY Times shining a light at how black girls and women suffer from violence at the hands of black and white men? Ray Rice pummeling his wife unconscious and nothing being done to him; Snoop Dog calling for violence against Gayle King for an interview she did years ago and asked a question about Kobe Bryant's rape case are just a small part of the larger picture especially for women in low income areas. Do we not matter in the eyes of Mr. Bouie and M. Blow. Personally I would love to see a well researched and written article about that instead of continuous articles about Trump and Bloomberg. We matter too.
6
I am not stating that Mike Bloomberg is the perfect candidate. But....he is spending his own money, beholden to no one; unlike the current occupant of rhe WH (whose name cannot be spoken!). So, let's get real folks, the Messiah is NOT going to run for office. Everyone carries baggage.
5
I am a former citizen of Chicago, a city in which entire neighborhoods are losing population because the deadly violence cannot be contained. If a heavy police presence and stop and frisk are necessary to preserve the peace and convince people to remain in their communities, then I support both politicies.
13
The resemblance extends far beyond the race issue.
But actually, it's difficulty to figure out if Bloomberg is more like Trump, or more like John Gotti.
Like Trump, he is a horrid autocrat, who believes that his dictate is your command, and seeks to crush anyone who gets in his way.
Like John Gotti, he hands out cash to all sorts of people who he believes will smooth his path to total control.
Black People? Bloomberg is the embodiment of the old saw, "Urban Renewal Means Negro Removal". If you harass "them" enough, maybe they will get out of the way of your Real Estate Developer pals; which brings us back, full circle, to Donald Trump.
People are critical of the techniques Trump used to rake in cash - but Bloomberg made his fortune by creating a Wall Street information monopoly built around fixed income security pricing - information which he "locked up" control of, by forcing people into "You got no choice but to deal with me" situations; this time, full circle, back to John Gotti.
Trump or Bloomberg - you may get to take "your choice" in November, but in reality, there will be no choice at all - it's Billionaire DNA either way, with a giant dollop of gangsta' added in.
5
Bloomberg is not Trump except for a rather myopic view on urban issues.I don't believe he's a racist and I know that he would be a smarter and better president.
He is not my first choice but if it comes down to him against Trump there is no question which one I would support.
5
Trump subsumed the Republican Party. Now, Bloomberg threatens to do the same to the Democrats.
Money corrupts. But billions corrupt absolutely.
3
I lived in NYC and I am not a Bloomberg fan, but like Giuliani, both men were confronted with a city that was confronted with very high murder rates involving black and Hispanic young men with no solution in sight other than a localized response from local law enforcement as no amount of money for social programs were working.
6
A brutal and racist approach to law enforcement, appalling comments to his female employees over the years, an imperious, technocratic approach to governance with no apparent empathy for people - hey we can forgive and forget all that.
Campaigning for GW Bush, enthusiastically backing the Iraq war, spying on his Muslim citizens, supporting Israel’s bombing of Gaza and moving the capital to Jerusalem - forgive, forget, move on.
He now says the Iraq war was a mistake, but done by honorable people who believed the reasons they stated for going to war - so forgive and forget already.
Seems like there is a lot in Mike’s background to forgive and forget, but he is a billionaire. And gosh darn it, he “earned” that $60 billion by the sweat of his brow! How much of that is he currently sharing with the media in ad revenue? Oh, right! It’s like $350,000,000! I wonder if that will buy him any favorable coverage?
Well, I guess in the spirit of becoming a better person, I will forgive and forget and vote for Bloomberg if he gets the nomination. But I will fight tooth and nail for Bernie Sanders until then.
4
Bloomberg demonstrated authoritarian and illiberal (i.e racist) propensities in office, whatever he has spent his millions on since. It would indeed be ironic if the Democrats ended up with an even richer NY billionaire, with at least some of the other's appalling blind-spots. Most notably, failing to appreciate and celebrate that America is a multi-racial society composed of all races colours and creeds who should be treated as equal under the law.
3
Bloomberg has apologized for stop and frisk. That's a first step. The second step is apologizing for using language that criminalizes an entire swath of the population based on race and age as opposed to based on suspicious behavior. While other readers say "But it IS true that the criminals are minorities between the age of 16-25," they are neglecting to mention that it is ALSO true that the majority of minority people between 16-25 are NOT criminals, but instead students, children, friends, the kid down the block who just held open the door for the person behind him. Criminals look like criminals because of the way they act and the choices they make, not because of the color of their skin or their age.
If we mimic Bloomberg's comments in Aspen, a civil liberties advocate could say the following "Ninety-five percent of your racists— fit one M.O. You can just take the description, Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops. They are male, white, 65 to 75.”
While this statistic might be true, I imagine many men who fit this demographic would take umbrage at being characterized this way and would take legal action of they were "thrown against the wall" and frisked because of it.
While I would rather see Bloomberg in office than Trump, in order to be a completely different candidate, Bloomberg should do the one thing Trump has never done: have the guts to put himself in someone else's shoes, honor that person's experience and admit when he hasn't done this in the past.
3
What do the people who lived where stop and frisk was implemented say? Did they feel safer? What did they think about their black and brown families and friends who were stopped and frisked? It’s still the same dilemma security vs freedom.
I’m a brown law abiding woman who never in a million years thought I’d be stopped for anything. I’ve been stopped twice, and it’s two of the most fear and humiliation filled experiences of my life. I can’t imagine what it’s like for Black and Brown bodies repeatedly targeted for this sort of thing.
For no given nor apparent reason. I cannot understand why anyone would think this is a good idea.
When Bloomberg was mayor, where was the majority of crime — and especially violent crime — being committed?
Stop-and-frisk was not Bloomberg’s creation. It was tested in several cities and found effective. Then, the results were circulated to all law enforcement around the US. Numerous municipalities adopted it.
Quarantines are harsh an unpleasant, but governments employ them to stop outbreaks. Why? As yet, we have nothing better.
1
Statistics are all nice and good, but living in New York City today most definitely feels less safe than under Bloomberg. Mr. Bouie may disagree with me there, and I am not sure he hangs out at 125 Street in Harlem as often as I do (I reverse commute from NYC by Metronorth) to get a sense for that subtle yet very real shift in feeling. You can recite your comparative stats all you want, but the reality in the street is still going to win the argument.
12
I had many students--many--who were stopped and frisked. Regularly. Young black men, mostly. I also remember, on more than one occasion, asking to accompany a young South Asian Muslim male student who was targeted by police for interrogation. I'm sorry, but, I listened to their stories and nothing they said or did justified their arrest. Nothing. This was a vastly wasteful project by the Bloomberg administration. It just seemed designed to humiliate and harass. The young black men in my classes were inevitably stopped and frisked on more than one occasion. It was like a routine humiliation.
I am of two minds about Bloomberg's candidacy. On one hand I respect the effectiveness of his campaigning, especially his ads that capture the weaknesses of Trump in a way most of the other candidates have failed to do. But, I am bothered by his similarities to Trump. They actually have a lot more in common than don't, and that's not a good thing if we want to rid ourselves of Trump-ism forever.
I went to Bloomberg's Twitter account to check out his ads and found something disturbing. Just as Trump's black acquaintances were either antisocial boxers or rappers, Bloomberg's black acquaintances seemed to be entirely violent victims or perpetrators of crime. Then I saw Geoffrey Canada and felt some joy. There's a good man, trans-formative educator. But then I realized his endorsement likely came with a donation. I can't prove that but it seems likely.
6
@kim
I meant, victims or perpetrators of violent crime. Excuse me.
1
If it was indeed statistically true that 95% of murders were committed by male, minorities, ages 16 to 25, it is not racist at all to simply state the truth. If, hypothetically, 95% of murders were committed by people wearing glasses, it would not be prejudicial profiling to have a lower threshold to stop people wearing glasses. It's just a more efficient use of limited resources, and people wearing glasses should understand that their being stopped more often is reasonable, especially if most of the people being murdered also wear glasses.
7
Must we grant Sanders the nomination because he doesn't have anything to live down because he has sat in a political bubble for the last few decades? Even though he is likely to lose the general election? I'm sorry that Bloomberg has this legacy to overcome, but whoever is likely to beat Trump at this point is THE ONE. Nothing else matters. It would be one thing if Bloomberg were still defending the policy, but he has admitted it was wrong and has apologized for it. To me, in this current political situation, that should be enough.
11
This may be "the lesser of two evils" (I'd disagree with an "evil" tag for MB, here, but I'll honor your opinion). Truth is, he may very well may be the only candidate able to beat Trump.
It's impossible to overemphasize the importance of that.
2
Mr. Bouie sees all matters through a lens of race - relevant or not, reasoned or not, and usually lacking real analysis. I want all people of any and every color to prosper and contribute to the greater society. Dr. King understood these matters and would be an appropriate model for us in the present day. I will continue to check out what Mr. Bouie has to say, but will hope for a more robust contribution.
7
The fundamental question is, " Will minorities be safer under Trump or Bloomberg?" The answer is obvious. Trump is incorrigible while Bloomberg has acknowledged his past transgressions and apologized. Unlike Susan Collins who said Trump has learnt a lesson but Trump has only become more emboldened to nonchalantly abuse his Office. To beat Trump every Democrat should join hands not run each other down. I know Blacks and minorities are caught between a rock and a hard place. But the choice made should be to oust Trump from Office. Whatever it takes.
3
I am not a supporter of Bloomberg in the primary, and echo Jamelle Bouie’s data driven denunciation of stop and frisk. Where I part ways is the comparison he and his conservative colleague Ross Douthat make to Trump. I think this comparison does a disservice to the voters who may ultimately decide between these two candidates in the fall.
My number one priority is my students safety and education. I teach in a majority Hispanic district with a sizable Muslim and white working class population. Our school thrives despite the divisions Trump is sowing which do percolate down to our kids. I want ICE and school shooters out of our schools. I want our sizable Latino and Syrian populations to reunite with their family members Trump has either deported or prevented from coming here in the first place. I want a president who not only believes in the science of climate change, which my coastal community is on the front lines of, but will put considerable resources towards stopping it. I want a president who will expand health care coverage, protect reproductive freedom, and expand job and education opportunities to these low income kids. Mike will get those things done. Like the Times, I’m torn between Warren or Klobuchar for my primary vote (it’s time for a woman) but Mike is someone who can beat Trump and govern well. My students deserve a leader like that.
4
I take your point. However: how would this play out at the presidential level? Federal law enforcement are seldom involved in solving or preventing street crimes. I agree that it is a huge problem if ICE engaged in similar behavior in a Bloomberg administration. The Black Lives Matter arose out of the actions of local police, not the FBI.
And unlike Trump, Bloomberg seems to understand separation of powers and will accept court rulings. I will not vote for him in the primary. If he’s the Democratic nominee, I will work for his election.
3
I’m starting to get a sense that some political commentators are confusing cause and effect, which is essentially the nature of the mistake with stop and frisk. Bloomberg seems to have the “bias for action” that has infected many corporate types. Thus, his analysis of crime in NY may have been statistically correct, but it misunderstood the causes that resulted in the effects he cited. Moreover, he mistakenly simplified how his policy could correct the issue it was designed to fix.
Crime isn’t caused by the neighborhood in which one lives. It is the conditions under which people in neighborhoods with higher crime are forced to live that increases the likelihood of crime. Those conditions are a much more complex mix of social and economic factors that deny equality of opportunity to the residents. While Bloomberg’s analysis was accurate in its limited context, it ignored this complex mix of factors–racism and inequality, poverty, poor schools, lack of jobs, etc. Because of his “bias for action,” Bloomberg instituted policies that, to some degree dealt with crime, but did little to solve the underlying issues that caused the crime.
It seems that current opinion wants to label Bloomberg a racist. Trump has clearly provided ample evidence he is one, but perhaps Bloomberg is more clueless than biased. He mistakenly looked for a win with a simplistic program, and should be judged by that error. For the larger national audience, at least, the jury is still out on his racism.
4
How to explain the rising Bloomberg star save for panic, shortsightedness, fear of mass movements and complacency of centrists happy with just a trim to the current system? Trump has to go. But if he remains or is defeated this year, Trumpism and GOP totalitarianism will persist. Long term security for democracy requires fundamental changes to our system led by a progressive party rooted in the 95%. Could a One Percenter candidacy like Bloomberg's spell the end of the Democratic Party as we know it? Would that be such a bad thing? Do we want our best option to be Clinton's Mass Incarceration or Obama's Squandered Crisis?
5
Mr. Bouie is an important voice here. And - as someone who's knowledge of Bloomberg comes mostly from his recent commercials - I'm glad to have read this piece.
10
Stop and Frisk is a permanent stain on Bloomberg's record, one that can never be cleansed by money, and the desire to beat Trump.
Democrats need to focus, instead, on the real contenders, not the oligarch, even if he is, unusually, on our side. Bernie, Warren, Buttigieg, Klobuchar. They are the runners, and they need to be evaluated, decided upon, and voted for, according to their strengths.
It's as simple as that.
10
There are reasons why stop and frisk was less likely to yield weapons in stops of minorities that have nothing to do with racism. First, the high crime areas were, statistically, mostly in minority communities. Police patrolling these areas knew that those areas were high crime, and had a lower threshold for stopping people. Second, knowing that there was a high police presence, people who might otherwise be carrying weapons would refrain, which was the whole point of the policy, and therefore is actually evidence of its success. The idea that the policy was a priori motivated by racism is understandable given the impact on those communities, but the truth is that the policy was motivated by the goal of reducing violent crime, and those communities were where the crime, and its victims, were. And it was those potential victims - predominantly minorities - who were the preferential beneficiaries. It was an unfortunate unintended consequence of the policy that many innocent people were traumatized, but I'd rather suffer being stopped and frisked than suffer being stabbed or shot to death.
5
I do feel uncomfortable about Bloomberg's history re stop and frisk. But do I fear he'd be anything like Trump, or even a step worse than the other Dem candidates? Absolutely not.
5
@Koho
Here's another thing to think about. Before Bloomberg came into office term limits for the mayor of New York City was two terms. He successfully manipulated the political process to get a third terms.
Cleary he has shown he will violate democratic norms to suit his desires.
Does anyone here truly believe that Boomberg is "sorry" for his alleged racism or that he has "grown" in his wisdom of leadership. Give me a break! I'm from Missouri and would like to see him come down here an operated a GPS guided combine and calculate the best time to plant based on crop rotations and soil analysis. And while the corn is just "popping up" make needed repairs to all kinds of electronic and hydraulic machinery. That statement he made about farmers was indeed a laughable moment!
13
Mr. Bloomberg may not be perfect. Who is? Are you? Mr. Bloomberg is a man that comprehends when he has made a mistake and owns it. What does Trump do? He just tells another lie or ignores it and pretends it never happened. Let’s all try to be adults here and set our difference of opinion aside for the welfare of our country and beat Trump, with whom ever is the Democratic Nominee. Resist.
4
No. He 'owns' up only when he is running for office. He's had years and years to make amends. But he didn't.
8
The rate of murder and violent crime came way down with stop and frisk. That helps us all. Is there a way to keep the benefits of the program while still addressing the race-based stopping?
4
The biggest problem with that policy is that reinforced the thought that white people are not as dangerous as people of color or a visual ethnicity that is non-white.
It also reinforced the thought that only blacks and minorities are the only ones carrying unlicensed weapons in NYC. As a lifelong New Yorker, I can assure you that is not the case and if we started slamming while people against walls and frisking them you would be horrified at what you would find and the stats that would follow.
But I guess that's Ok because they're white.
11
Boulie , Blow, Warren and Bernie will likely reelect Trump by this false characterization of of Bloomberg as a racist and evil billionaire boogeyman. Bloomberg is not a racist. The policing focus and crack down in New York was in high crime areas and dramatically reduced the murder and overall crime rates. Granted he sensitivity , humanity and cultural sophistication of the police officers and government officials involved in this policy was sorely lacking and cost of the reduced crime rates achieved was unnecessarily and unjustifiably too high. But this was due to a lack of social and cultural sensitivity and not due to overt racism. Bloomberg should acknowledge this. However Bloomberg is not responsible for the USA's history of racial discrimination , minority poverty, economic warfare on minorities, educational neglect and other social ills created by racism, but he should express more sensitivity to those ills and be very specific as to how he intends to address and correct them. He is the only presidential candidate on either side of the political spectrum who can effectively move congress forward to address this issues. Electing a radical bloviating politicians of the far right and far left will accomplish nothing.
4
Bloomberg will siphon Delegates away from Biden, helping pave the way for Sanders’ nomination.
6
Extreme wokeness has now become not just analogous to religion, but is itself a new religion. Tribal, dogmatic, illogical and unhinged. On the topics of race, gender/sexuality and Islam, many self-described liberals have collectively lost their minds - this article serving as yet another example.
As a classical liberal who has some connection to the ideas of the enlightenment, I invite fellow travelers who still value rational thought to dismiss this as ideological bluster.
8
This is so good. Congratulations. This is exactly the kind of well-written and thoughtful opinion piece the Trump team has been hoping for and counting on from the great op-ed writers at the NYT. The check is in the mail. Keep up the good work.
8
Bloomberg made mistakes. He’s apologized. Let’s accept the apology and move on. The ENTIRE democratic way of governing is under attack. Trump needs to face a real billionaire to put him in his place. We need to stop being political snowflakes in the face of destroying everything from the rule of law to the right to voice opinions about race. Michael Bloomberg will defeat Trump. We can deal with race issues after he’s president.
3
Past Leaders have made mistakes FDR the Japanese Internment Lincoln the suspension of Habeas Corpus affecting civil liberties.Lets not have a purity test.
Among the Democrats running who can defeat Trump in a General Election it's not Biden nor Sanders.
He can make insensitive remarks inappropriate at times. Once during St.Patrick's day he mentioned inebriated Irish men hanging off balconies half true some were falling off.
He is not buying a election though Joseph Kennedy did that for his son. No he is using his private wealth to get on a National stage and state his positions. We have had wealthy men run in the past and they did not win.
1
Replacing one oligarch (Trump) with one of his oligarch golf buddies (Bloomberg) is a terrible idea. I can’t believe people are actually supporting Bloomberg.
5
The implication in this article that Bloomberg is a bigot is not borne out by the facts. His view that most crime occurred in neighborhoods predominately occupied by minorites was factually correct. The decision to devote more police effort to those neighborhoods was rational, as was the decision to search those whose conduct was suspicious. Bloomberg is not a bigot. And Bloomberg is the candidate most likey to beat Trump, who clearly and proudly is a bigot.
6
Good lord.
Will they ever stop?
Put the mirror down. Step away from the mirror.
Please.
Pretty please.
Just put the mirror down.
It takes a billionaire to be able to break through this wall of mirrors in an echo chamber of dull people intent on losing an election.
5
What the writer may not understand is that Bloomberg's stop and frisk policy will be a net plus in the general election. Most Americans do not think it is racist to bring down crime in big cities.
3
Racism wins then
2
Just come out and say it, Jamelle. You want Trump to be re-elected so people read your columns complaining about racism in America. It appears there are very fine people on all sides of this dispute.
2
The former Mayor Michael Nutter of Phladelphia (my city), who is a black man, is Bloomberg's political director. He believes Bloomberg's contrition is real and that the stop-and-frisk escalation was, in the first place, a wrongheaded but right-hearted attempt to reduce the murder of black men - who comprised 52% of all murder victims in 2015 - by guns. Not "racial control;" - murder control.
The dignity of black and brown bodies is not acknowledged when gun violence against them is treated as business as usual. S&F was, as it turned out, unconstitutional, and it was definitely ugly and traumatizing. But it was not motivated by animus against black men, according to Mayor Nutter, but by its opposite.
Many commenters here are decrying "purity tests." I take that phrase to really be a question about whether non-POC politicians have the capacity both to have been wrong (which Bloomberg was, by his own admission) and forgivable. Can one commit a wrong action on race without being considered intractably and forever racist? Can current positions mitigate?
There is a school of thought - call it Coatesian - that reframes ignorance as malevolence. Its benefit is that it focuses our eyes on truths that need seeing; its disadvantage, once they are seen, is the risk that it lets the past strangle the future in its crib. Its difficulties in translation are Trump's meat and drink.
One incontrovertibly true thing about Bloomberg is that he learns lessons - and very quickly. Hear him out.
6
I think it would be very helpful if Mr. Bouie talked about how he was stopped (stop-and-frisk) by NYPD, detained in "The Tombs" and sent to Riker's Island during the Bloomberg administration.
4
Jamelle, when you attack Bloomberg, you might as well endorse Trump’s re-election. Only Bloomberg can defeat Trump.
5
I've lost more money to Wall Street crooks than from muggers.
4
Maybe if there was less black on black crime, stop and frisk wouldn’t have been necessary. Stop playing the victim card and admit there are serious problems in minority communities that are still unresolved regardless of what political party is in the mayor’s office.
4
Obama likes Bloomberg and does a good job describing his administration's, accomplishments, positions regarding gun control, creating jobs at good wages, and charitable activities in a radio ad.
"Stop and Frisk" was inherited from the previous administration, and was eventually stopped by Bloomberg.
Single issues will be the death of liberty in this country. Calling Bloomberg a racist in simply inaccurate. Nobody is perfect as a candidate, and Bloomberg comes across as a caring human being. Don't just believe me, ask Barak Obama what he thinks..
2
Seems to me Mr. Bouie, that you are working to get Trump re-elected. Are minorities and people of color faring well under his Presidency? I think not.
2
This is set up on a false premise. Is Trump racist? Yes.
Is his governing motivation racist? Not entirely, although non-white Americans may understandably think so.
Trump's actions are much wider. He wants to dismantle the whole liberal democratic state - constitutional protections, the rule of law through independent courts, pluralism - and replace it with an authoritarian state that pays lip service to democracy but is designed for the greater good of Donald Trump and his cronies.
To that extent, whatever Bloomberg is, he is not that, and comparing Trump to him is as dangerous as the people who ludicrously but effectively claimed to see no difference between Trump and Hilary Clinton.
They, in the name of some kind of ideological purity, helped hand Trump the Electoral College. Please, please, let's not do that again.
5
Mr. Bouie, with all due respect, focus on the forest, not the (admittedly ugly) tree.
1
We may be entering the 2020 elections with the 2020 vision that a Known Devil (Trump) is better than an Unknown Angel (Bloomberg)?
1
I am not sure that Bloomberg is the best guy to beat Trump. So far he has campaigned as the Madison Avenue version of himself. He has positives and has put his money behind liberal causes and politicians. But the press must flush out his entire record as mayor. There were policies other than stop and frisk that benefited the Uber rich at the expense of poor and ordinary folk. He zoned Manhattan into fantasy island of the rich, causing homelessness and displacement. He was no friend of labor. Some of his homeless policies were actually cruel.
Trump is a master manipulator. He is at once a phony populist and faux plutocrat, amoral lying charlatan and favorite of evangelicals. He is a hypocrite whose tactic is to relentlessly go after the hypocrisy of his opponents. His point is not so much to denigrate his opponents views or policies, but to neutralize their attacks on him as being hypocritical. He is a welll rehearsed showman.
Bloomberg is a real plutocrat, misogynist, autocrat and defender of policies if not racist were damaging to people of color based upon flawed, prejudiced beliefs. Trump will have a field day pointing to MiniMike’s mega hypocrisy as he touts historically low minority unemployment rates. Bloomberg will be neutralized from attacking Trump on those traits which render him unfit for office. His late apologies ring hollow.
Up until now Mike has got it done with slick advertising. To beat Trump he will have to get it done by defending his 12 year record.
1
I just don’t understand why Obama and Eric Holder didn’t come in and put pressure on Bloomberg to end stop and frisk. Maybe they were happy that an average of 50 black/brown NYers were no longer getting slain each week?
2
Bloomberg taking stop and frisk nation wide.
1
Better the devil you can tolerate. Trump vs. Bloomberg? There is quite a difference.
Bloomberg would like to see you stopped and frisked.
Trump would like to see you jailed or deported.
Both bad, but one worse.
2
The one good thing about Trump 2.0 aka Bloomberg is the truth about Democrats and white liberals is now crystal clear to black people who weren’t paying attention or wanted to give the benefit of the doubt. If you didn’t know, now you know.
If Bloomberg is the nominee, there is no reason for blacks to turn out and vote for a man who is merely a better dressed Trump. He neither minimizes nor eliminates the dangers we are exposed to under the Trump Administration.
1
As a white man, I see our government's failure to honor the poorest families and all families among us by insisting on excellence in parenting, health, nutrition, and education.
The buck stops right on our governments desk. They should demand that we be the best and brightest citizenry on the planet from the bottom up. They do not.
Republicans prefer a dumbed down citizenry, easy to manipulate. Only the Democrats try to care but are often blocked in their efforts by the Republicans.
For this reason alone, please do not vote for any Republican candidate. Vote for anyone else but rid the country of Republican thinking for the next cycle and let's take our country back.
Republicans have recently proven themselves to be a treasonous pack and they need the time to get their train back on the right tracks for all Americans.
1
There's a false equivalency here. Trump is a bloated rascist who took a full page ad out calling for the execution of innocent black men and has never apologized for it or anything. Bloomberg was following the procedures of his predecessor, worried like all NY pols to keep the corrupt NYPD on his side, and has since apologized about it ad nauseam. If you still can't accept this, have a blast with Trump 2020 thru 2034
4
Why would any person want to support a candidate for POTUS who excused away a racist police practice as 'stop and frisk?
Why would any person respect a convenient political apology by a person who expressed deep pathological bigotry?
It is offensive and it has the stench of the narrative of 'soft bigotry' and low expectation for Bloomberg and his apologists to pitch this Bloomberg is the best option for Black Americans as some lesser of evil than Trump.
Black Americans know bigotry up close and personal
BLM
3
To my untrained simplistic civilian mind, it does indeed seem like Mr. Bloomberg is indeed a racist. That's a shame, and I really don't like that, and both Mr. Bouie's and Mr. Blow's comments really give me pause. But I keep coming back to the same conclusion - there's no evidence (yet) that Bloomberg is a white supremacist or white nationalist, unlike the status quo. And given the current environment, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
So go Bloomberg! (or Go Sanders!) (Or go Wet dishrag in my sink!)
trump is no billionaire. why do you think he hides his tax returns? a liar from the beginning.
5
I passed a church, its bulletin board proclaimed “All imperfect people welcome.”
NYT and its readers seem as though they are waiting for the perfect candidate who has never sinned. Sorry Jesus isn’t running for President. We'll have to settle. We always have, and survived since 1789. Washington, slave owner, and brutal general, lashing soldiers almost to death, but got the country off to a running start. Jefferson has a sexual relationship with his slave. Lincoln was in conflict with his soul concerning slavery. Theodore Roosevelt had Aryan thoughts concerning people of color.
We’re not going to find a perfect candidate. Our main objective, rid ourselves of the ignorant tyrant in office.
2
Mr. Bouie: How can the devestation of Nader (i.e. Bush arrow to Araq war arrow to 9/11 arrow to Paris, Madrid, London, etc attacks) and Bernie (pulling votes from Clinton) not educate you, the intellectual elite at the very least? Realpolitik! Just stop! Don't play the race game now! We don't have the luxury!
1
Stop with the Search for Purity, Democrats! Do you think Republicans squabble over these things? No they keep their eye on the prize: “Trump is not perfect, but we can appoint life time conservative judges who will make the country in our image for decades to come.” Time Democrats did the same. Or do you want 4 more years of trump?
I am not a Bernie fan, nor am I sold on Bloomberg. But if either one wins the nomination, I’ll vote for him! Neither one will be able to do anything meaningful with a Republican Senate. But it will send the trump crime family packing and initiate a change to the awful nightmare that is the current administration! And if our selection of President doesn’t alienate too many people ( like I’m afraid Bernie will) then maybe we have a chance of wresting the Senate away from the traitor Republicans!
3
Too pure to vote Mr. Bouie?
Certainly your editorial lacks a conclusion. After all the diatribe about what is undoubtedly valid concerns, any editorial about a candidate today has to end with one sentence and one sentence only. I will vote for "candidate" or I will vote for Trump. There is no third answer. Like it or not this is foxhole time and you are either for or complicit.
2
At the end of the day, this man is trying to buy the presidency in the same way Lori Laughlin tried to buy her daughter a spot in USC. This disqualifier is higher on the Electability Flowchart than whether he's blatantly racist or disgustingly misogynistic.
3
I'm fairly confident that under a Bloomberg administration, white nationalists will not be emboldened to march and chant "Jews will not replace us." Democrats have to stop cannibalizing themselves. While waiting for the perfect candidate, we have the least perfect administration this country has ever seen.
2
Not you too Jamelle.
Please don't put Trump and Bloomberg on the same level.
If you call Bloomberg a racist and he is the one who becomes the Democratic candidate >> then you can be absolutely sure that the people who think of him as racist (because people like you say he is) will not turn out to vote.
That is one more vote for Trump.
Can we Democrats discuss the candidates without tearing down any of them??? Please?
2
Why does the author avoid the simple documented fact: people of color commit more crimes.
1
Because it's not simple. Nor documented. Nor a fact.
1
I thank you so very much. I've been saying the exact same thing about him. In addition to 'stop and frisk,' Muslim surveillance; let me identify other areas where his thinking on authoritarianism and superiority shows up.
1. The 16 ounce soda sale. In an interview following his disastrous loss on this issue, he stated that the Commissioner for Health & Hospitals had given a report on the huge rise in the budget; he inquired; she stated, diabetes. The soda ban was his conclusion and directive. The sugar lobby didn't hesitate and went to work. Perhaps, if he had concluded that conversations and public information with those who are diabetic (or family members) could have had more positive outcomes. I think most of us have some idea of the outcomes of diabetes and many may be encouraged to do better.
2. Charter Schools. These are not a panacea for low performing schools, nor do they have any of the qualities or characteristics of private schools (like his daughters attended, though they are selective in their student body population). The majority of Charter Schools take resources from public schools, leaving them more vulnerable to provide quality education. Other options were/are available that don't include shareholders. If Charter Schools could provide new or innovative educational paradigms that would be integrated systemwide, then yes. But, as they are established, and Bloomberg supported, they leave the most vunerable children, even more vunerable.
There are other issues.
2
I think that Bloomberg is the only candidate who can beat Trump. He has the money it will take and the record to show
his willingness to spend it. The way he ran New York, especially
stop and frisk will be argued but in the end the question will be
whether we want to risk four more years of Trump or live to
fight some of these very important battles another day.
5
Well Stop and Frisk is pretty much done and the statistics say we are much safer. However visit the neighborhoods where crime is still too high, where Gangs control the Projects, where innocent women, men and kids are shot and drugs are sold openly are ask whether almost eliminating the policy has gone to far.
The NYT always makes the focus on race rather than the small number of individuals who commit the majority of serious crimes.
3
The Democratic nomination contest is now between Sanders and Bloomberg.
The election is likely to be a contest between Bloomberg and Trump. The never-ending Democratic campaign has successfully cannibalized the serious candidates, leading to an apocalyptic Battle of the Monster Trucks.
1
Character should count, and both Trump and Bloomberg both fail when it comes to race and when it comes to women. That should prove fatal to Bloomberg's candidacy given the importance of "black and brown" Democratic voters turning out in record numbers in order to defeat Trump. We Democrats need a ticket that passes the character test of civility, decency and integrity and that will also unite the Democratic Party. As of now, that would be a ticket of Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren or Warren and Pete Buttigieg.
1
@Paul Wortman You forget that a vast amount of Americans, including a majority of white women who voted for Trump, don’t care about character, and that’s a significant reason why we got him as President!
1
I'm afraid that Mr. Buttigieg did not during his time as mayor treat the black and brown residents of South Bend with the respect that he afforded the white residents. As result he lacks credibility with minority voters and their allies.
1
Almost any serious criminal justice expert understands the economic roots of criminal activity. This is a huge difference between Trump and Bloomberg (or any Dem). While he clearly made mistakes in his past law enforcement efforts, his policies will do much more to address the root causes of crime / poverty. Assumedly, his criminal justice reform plan is more progressive than Trump's as well, although we'll have to see what he says at the debate.
I am not saying he is the right choice, but all these Bloomberg = politer version of Trump articles do a great disservice to our national discourse (which is already in dire straights.) It also makes it seem like criminal justice is the only thing that matters. It is important, but it is one of many important, interrelated issues that impact Americans.
2
What Bloomberg's successful run shows, and Steyer's, and Trump's, is that party affiliations are meaningless. These individuals, and both parties (for whom other candidates are also billionaire funded via proxy) use identity politics to manipulate people into thinking otherwise. Vote for a woman, bc voting for a woman funded by billionaires is truth to power. Pitting one put-upon feeling minority against the other is American politics. Citizen's United cemented this rhetoric -- of both parties -- but for better or worse, codified that money was the highest power of us all.
3
Bloomberg may be eligible for some redemption due to some positive contributions he has made and can continue.
However the severity of his sins makes him ineligible to become the political/moral leader of our nation.
Bloomberg's redemption can make progress by his continuing financial support of institutions and movements to improve human equality and well-being.
Bloomberg's redemption can continue by withdrawing his candidacy, but continuing his media exposure of Trump's lies and con games.
2
Money influence with no restrictions is corruption.
Trump won't change this and neither will Bloomberg.
Warren will.
6
@Clayton Marlow
No, Warren won't, because she is not going to get the nomination or the presidency.
On the other hand, it may take a self-funding multi-billionaire president to put forward real election campaign financing reform. There's no reason to believe Bloomberg wouldn't want to do that.
5
Dream on. We've heard this one before. Just wait. The rich will save us.
1
One of the main arguments in support of the claim that (in effect) Bloomberg is a racist is that the S&F policy was unconstitutional. In 2013 the "S&F" policy came for the NY supreme court, where judge Scheindlin wrote that she was “not ordering an end to the practice of stop and frisk.... they (the police) could continue if the city complied with court-ordered remedies ...". Her opinion was based on the Terry v. Ohio ruling by the SCOTUS ("stop & frisk" based on reasonable suspicion"). The problem was/is with the interpretation of what constitutes "reasonable suspicion".
Another issue the author (and others have) is that it enforcement was predominantly in minority-dominated areas. However, Bloomberg has stated that he put more officers in areas with high crime rates, not in areas with large minority populations.
His current statements regarding S&F can be interpreted in two ways: he still supports it, or he describes the rationale he (and others) had for S&F given the information they had at that point in time.
He has apologized for the S&F policy in his days as mayor. Victims can accept that apology, or not. As non-victims we should follow their lead
4
Jamelle--I love your writing, but you know what, I will vote blue, no matter who. I need to know we can beat Trump. That is our bottom line. We don't have the luxury of being so terribly picky right now. Splitting hairs over who said what or did what 6-10 years ago is not going to sway me from voting for Bloomberg if he becomes the nominee. Also, hearing many relatives and friends relay what it is like in Europe today, I can tell you that our political naivete around someone like Bernie actually being able to beat Trump is absurd--he will be our spoiler if he is the nominee. Just as Boris Johnson handily beat labor in Britain. There are simply too many Conservatives, evangelicals, hardcore capitalists and Fox news zombies who will believe all the rants about how Bernie will turn our country into a socialist state. So, let's quit bashing ANYONE on the Democratic ticket and fight the real bad guy, shall we?
12
But Theresa May, the moderate, lost the majority to Corbyn's Party, and her post to Boris Johnson. Seems like being moderate is much more hazardous than to be an extremist.
2
Incorrect . The core of Trump's base is quite small. Working class Americans of all races, along with POC can beat Trump. The votes are there for Bernie or Warren if we don't defeat ourselves. Turn off MSNBC and talk to actual people. Most of us like the democratic Socialism of Universal Healthcare. We don't like Socialism for the corporate elite. Don't ask us to wait. We can win.
1
Mr. Bouie, you need to decide, if it comes to it, whether you will vote for Trump or Bloomberg, either by omission or commission, and whether you will use your power of personal persuasion to help elect Trump or to help elect Bloomberg.
We know that Trump is running. The question is whether you think Bloomberg is worse or not.
7
Not the question. The question is are there winning issues we can unite around which will build a majority for change in November. An uncouth authoritarian elite vs. a sophisticated authoritarian elitist is not a choice we can accept. Work for a better future.
1
@Dennis
One can only choose between available alternatives. If the choice is Bloomberg or Trump, I pick Bloomberg, however much I prefer Warren to Bloomberg.
1
Did you miss the part that there are four viable democrat candidates (with Bloomberg at the door). We won't accept your false choice between Trump and Mr. B. See you March 3rd.
1
Democrats should all come together to send a strong message to the DNC and Democratic members of congress. All should just hold their nose and vote for Trump. If in the end the electoral map is completely red then the Democratic party will realize what they have been and continue to do is damaging not only to party but Americans. Trump will likely win anyway why not make a profound statement that may have an affect on subsequent elections.
3
Apologies don’t work well when delivered years after the fact. Holding to stop-and-frisk for 12 years suggests a level of commitment that goes beyond policy choice. For a mayor to keep the same policy in place in the face of opposition from police leadership and growing evidence of its uselessness suggest something other than good governance at work.
The issues Bloomberg needs to address require more than an apology. Those were cheap words uttered without cost by the former mayor. I don’t know what Bloomberg could do or say to atone for such injustice, but a presidential campaign when one is a candidate is not the place nor the time.
4
While your points are well taken (and I am a HUGE fan of your op-ed pieces by the way!) Mike has indeed admitted it was a huge mistake. But as a mayor coming from his Bloomberg workstations company Mike was not driven by ideology so much as DATA.
His thinking was that the data showed a situation which he then supported the CONTINUING of a program arlready established by his predecessor Rudy Giuliani to address it.
The results were abhorrent! And here I agree with the arguments against him. But as we've seen, as recently as last year when a man was choked to death during of situation where police didn't back off from his cries of not being able to breathe, NYPD (and many PD's) often have individuals who either from stress or out and out personal animosity, have at times taken things too far.
Take for example Amidou Dialo who was turned into a slice of Jarlsberg when police riddled him with bullets LONG before Mike was Mayor. That's the culture of the NYPD (whose reputation took a deserved hit). Not the Mayor.
But the buck does stop with the Mayor. And Bloomberg failed in this regard for too long which he finally admitted.
Has Trump even ONCE admitted he was wrong? Never.
5
Just more cliche nonsense.
Identity politics, moral panic, cliche victimization complaints which everyone buys simply because it's in the media is killing the Democratic party, and quite literally, the country. Look what it got us -- Trump.
10
@Rich
A Bloomberg nomination will get you four more years of Trump as well.
Excellent analysis by Mr. Bouie. Mr Bloomberg's autocratic streak runs deeps. I highly recommend the late great Christopher's Hitchens's essay "I fought the law" (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2004/02/hitchens200402):
"This current Niagara of pettiness and random victimization may well be Bloomberg’s attempt at a wannabe reputation as heroic crime-fighter and disciplinarian. Who knows what goes on in the tiny, constipated chambers of his mind? All we know for certain is that one of the world’s most broad-minded and open cities is now in the hands of a picknose control freak."
3
I'm really excited to exchange one morally-empty billionaire for a smarter, richer, just as morally-empty billionaire.
3
Have the Democrats become so desperate that they would vote for a Republican to represent their party? Bloomberg is not a Democrat. Even as recently as 2016 he supported Republican Senator Pat Toomey in a crucial swing state election in Pennsylvania. Guess which party won in Pennsylvania? If you think he’ll help down ballot Democrats think again. If you want a moderate Democrat look no further than Klobuchar or Biden. At least they always supported the Democratic Party.
6
Democrats should stop bashing your own allies and vote together for whoever is the nominee. You might win your battle but you are losing the war.
6
James Bouie acknowledges that Bloomberg has been along-time supporter of liberal causes. He states so up front, then dismisses the strong case for nominating Bloomberg to focus on a terrible policy, stop and frisk.
That policy was, as Mr. Bouie acknowledges, based on numbers. Statistics showed gun violence was often committed by young African-American men, against African American victims. The statistics do not explain the socio-economic conditions and institutionalized racism that drive such crimes. Bloomberg’s immediate concerns were the facts, not the causes, of violent crime.
Bloomberg is a statistics-driven, bottom-line focused wonk . Had the numbers suggested that gun violence was being disproportionately committed by middle-aged white ethnics in Staten Island, I am confident that it was this population that would have been targeted for “stop and frisk.”
Bloomberg failed to consider the consequences of stop and frisk on the community. He probably figured that getting frisked was better than getting shot - a failure to consider intangible consequences.
Bloomberg was an excellent mayor and these failures are, to me, not deal-killers. I would ask him: (1) how will you consider the intangible costs to a community in implementing any policy, including an anti-crime policy and (2) why did it take you so long to recognize that stop and frisk was being abused and had failed, given the stats?
7
@RMC -
Exactly. And as a statistics driven wonk Bloomberg would understand the logical fallacy that 95% of criminals being black does not imply 95% of blacks being criminals. It is just more convenient that way since the majority of citizens don't have that grasp of basic logic.
1
@RMC, if he was such a great numbers guy, how did he miss the fact that 87 percent of those stopped were released without being arrested or given a summons? That is, they were innocent. A policy with a 13 percent success rate is a bad policy. Unless his goal was not fighting crime, but intimidation of minority youth.
The ability of Mr. Bouie, Mr. Blow, and many others to talk endlessly about policing and race without ever talking seriously about crime is just astounding. African-Americans commit violent crimes and property crimes at a much, much higher rate than any other racial or ethnic group in the country. That's an incontrovertible fact. It's also an extremely important one, when talking about race and policing. If you can't bring yourself to acknowledge it much less discuss it, it's no surprise that all you have to offer are ad hominem attacks.
11
If I was a white guy living outside of NYC I can see why Bloomberg is such an attractive candidate. He may actually be supportive of my single issue concern whether it was gun control or climate change or etc.
But if I was a black male, my issue would be to able to walk down the street without worrying about "getting thrown up against the wall".
Its easy to overlook the flaws when you don't fear you will be affected by them. That's exactly how we got where we are today.
5
Trump can say and do the most horrible things without apology and Republicans applaud or accept it. Bloomberg made a bad mistake with good intentions and some Democrats would rather have Trump win than accept Bloomberg's apology. This is why Trump will probably have another 4 years.
11
You equate "crime control" with "racial control". The former is a valid goal; the latter, blatant racism. Please do not conflate the two.
Thank you for the statistics on "stop and frisk". I will assume they are accurate. If so then Mayor DiBlasio was correct to either stop the practice, as he did, or at least significantly amend it.
But to blame Bloomberg, or any other official, for trying to control crime by, in this case, continuing a policy in place when he became Mayor, is unfair. And "spying" on the Muslim communities? That was "spying" in the same way President Obama "spied" on Mr. Trump and his campaign.
Trying to develop sources of information within that community, in the wake of 9/11 and ongoing terror threats around the world, strikes me as both smart and proactive.
Let's cut to the chase: are you suggesting that prison populations skew toward people of color because of racist policies by organizations such as the NYPD?
That's what it sounds like to me.
Is it not possible that Mr. Bloomberg was correct? That the majority of violent crime in NYC is committed by young males of color aged 16-25? And if so, is that not where you would focus your resources if crime prevention or rapid arrest after a crime was your goal?
It would be mine.
Is that "racial profiling"? You can call it that. Or you can call it "risk assessment and abatement".
It sort of depends on how you color it, doesn't it?
7
Mr. Bouie, you should have at least talked to people who have previously worked for Trump and Bloomberg. In that case, you would have known that your assessment of Trump is correct, and that of Bloomberg is totally off the mark.
There's only one question that you have to ask yourself: If given the choice of Trump or Bloomberg, who gets your vote?
10
In life and in politics, one has to consider how much and why one hates so much. I am brown and a woman with children. While I have not experienced stop and frisk, we have had more than our fair share of being frisked in airports. When I felt irrationally afraid, was when my gangly, young teenager with his wispy mustache and beard would be asked to stand aside. Really I wanted him clean shaven after that, hoping it would be easier on him. When this happens, it is unfair to the individual no doubt, but we live in a community. There is no perfect law. In times when foreign terrorists are all similar looking to us, why would I begrudge the suspicion and resentment people exhibited towards us? It kept us as a country safe. Similarly, you speak out of years of resentment against the caucasians who did wrong by the black community. But as a mother I feel you are looking for revenge, not for empowerment of your community. When laws are made, there will always be unintended consequences after it's application. Racism is something that we face daily. But I like to think positive. Believe in hope. Believe in a good future.
I say vote in Bloomberg and your revenge should be the positives you can bargain for the black community, for the brown community, for everyone. Leverage when you are in a position of advantage for the future. The past is done with.
10
Brilliant. What we need is a purity test to satisfy every pundit who wants to comment. While racism is evil and must be eliminated from our social fabric, trashing Bloomberg will not help; instead, we'll make sure the Democrats nominate someone completely unacceptable to most of the country and not acceptable enough to get the electorial college votes. In other words, to insure we have a candidate that passes every purity test we'll get somebody that Trump will defeat and will make sure Congress is Republican again. Good plan
4
The one thing positive you can say about Bloomberg's stop-and-frisk policies that the motivation was based on reducing crime. But it was apparently applied with a racial bias and was far too aggressive in a democratic country. But for Trump, the basic motivation is white supremacy and he is an authoritarian. And it should not be forgotten that he is also strongly backed by the religious right which wants to impose Christianity on entire country. Trump is all about fascism. While there may be some common characteristics between Bloomberg and Trump basically they are completely different and it is the stark differences which are really important and people need to clearly understand the difference between fascism and democracy.
2
Criticize Bloomberg if you will and, particularly critique his current policies and electability against other Democratic candidates.
But, comparison to Trump doesn't work. Cherry picking facts and searching for parallels only generates a false equivalent.
Trump is for Trump and his own money and family. He LIES about his policies and then turns around and has the Senate create laws that will enrich his contributors and enthrall his base. Meanwhile Bloomberg has contributed vast sums of money to real solid liberal causes. Trump used his tax free foundation as a tax free method of paying personal bills.
Trump has terrorized Congress into bowing to his every whim even if it means essentially conceding the Constitution to Trump's personal interpretation.
There is no parallel, so cut the histrionics and criticize Bloomberg if you will, but cut the rabble rousing tactic of calling Bloomberg another Trump. Let Putin run for American President, then you'd have a parallel.
4
Jamelle- get real- the objective, mine at least, is to win an election, not to win a debate. This isn't college. This is life.
You might be as right as you think you are, but history and elections don't care about how right you are.
In four to eight years, the country will drift the progressive way.
Don't ruin it for the rest of us by getting Trump reelected.
Deal with reality and not with rhetoric
2
Bloomberg took office less than 120 days after 9/11. This was a city under siege at that moment, and no one was in the mood for any niceties.
I agree stop and frisk was Bloomberg's doing, but it was also his entire police force saying that it was necessary and effective. Obama also continued aggressive enforcement actions from immigration to drone strikes,no doubt for the similar reasons. It became so blatantly racist by the end of his mayorship that only pure stubbornness kept him from acknowledging reality.
But the thing is, when you have people that are guided by reason and facts they have the ability to recognize when they are proven wrong. Political expedience notwithstanding, it was the preposterous De Blasio of all people who irrefutably proved that stop and frisk deserved no credit whatsoever for the precipitous decline of crime in NYC. Bloomberg gets that, I believe, even if the NYPD still doesn't.
Bloomberg optimist that I am, I want to believe that he will commit his Presidency to erasing this, the greatest stain on his legacy -- specifically by using Federal law enforcement to protect people of color from predatory police. There are worse places in America for people of color than NYC, and those places need 'law and order' more than anywhere else. The only thing you have to trust in to believe this is his vanity.
He apologized and has established an unassailable record for doing good in the best spirit of the Democratic Party.
Get over it.
5
@Robert
Is he also going to apologize for fundraising for Rick Snyder, who pushed for policies that lead directly to the Flint Water Crisis?
Bloomberg & Co. represent the fallacious misnomer that equality of opportunity exists in the United States.
3
"But New York City’s “mean streets” have become some of the safest in the nation. With a murder rate of 3.4 per 100,000 last year, the city that never sleeps, teeming with 8.5 million multiethnic residents living on top of each other, was comparable to sparsely-populated states such as Montana (with a murder rate of 3.5 per 100,000 in 2016), South Dakota (3.1), or Wyoming (3.4)."
It is a fact that NYC is safer today then it was 10 years ago. Some programs worked better then others, but identifying the problems and trying different methods has worked. The "Broken Window" policy worked a little. Stop and Frisk probably didn't. More police officers trying to be nice to people in troubled areas has worked.
Give Bloomberg some credit. He managed one of the most complicated and populated city in the world, and did a pretty good job. He made his billions honestly, and has give his money away to some fantastic causes.
Crucify him for being tough on tough neighborhoods? Not fair.
2
So many Democrats willing to sacrifice the future for a pyrrhic victory.
God forbid Trump is reelected, but if he is columns and comments such as this will share blame.
2
Ben, Florida,
There is a big difference between President Trump the billionaire and Mike Bloomberg the billionaire. President Trump did not buy his way into the presidency and spent half the amount that Hillary Clinton did during the race. Mike Bloomberg has spent close to $400 million on ads and is willing to spend billions. He is buying his way into the presidency and yet has not done much campaigning and has not appeared in even one debate yet. This is questionable.
We have not heard any of Mike Bloomberg’s proposed policies and yet President Trump made very clear what his policies were from the very start of his campaign. President Trump participated in the debates right from the beginning. He also got into the Republican presidential campaign immediately unlike Mike Bloomberg who waited until quite late. The Democratic nomination committed changed the rules so Bloomberg could participate in tomorrow’s debate. Other candidates did not qualify but they bent the rules for him. I guess money talks and he is willing to spend as much as necessary to become president.
Mike Bloomberg is an avowed racist where President Trump is definitely not a racist. He has had black leaders at the White House and is in full support of minorities. Mike Bloomberg said too many whites were being stopped but not enough blacks and minorities. He also said throw them against a wall and search. If this is not racial profiling, nothing is. Mike Bloomberg should never be elected.
1
I wouldn't vote for Bloomberg if the democrats nominate him. He will be a much higher risk of another war in ME, this time with Iran. At least by now we know Trump isn't a warmonger, even with all the pressure he gets from his largest donor who is one.
Bloomberg had the arrogance to push himself on NYers for a 3rd term. Plus, no short men are going to win against Trump, that means Bloomberg and Buttigieg are out.
2
I believe Trump is racist. He's the "I have a black friend" candidate. I'm not so sure about Bloomberg. I think his primary goal was advancing a private-public partnership in gentrification and development that Bloomberg saw as more beneficial than any personal liberty. The goal is obviously detrimental to minority communities. Bloomberg obviously knew his goal would disproportionately impact minority communities negatively. He's in no way innocent.
However, he wasn't trying to be innocent. He was trying make "safe" playgrounds for trust fund babies so their parents would build in the neighborhoods where he wanted them to build. This was the cost-benefit analysis. Minorities are perceived as criminals whether they are responsible for crime or not. In attacking minorities, Bloomberg was actually soothing prejudice in the development community. Solving crime had nothing to do with it.
I doubt very much Bloomberg cared about the racial identity of the people he was persecuting either. He cared about the people who cared about racial identity. He needed to convince them the neighborhood was "safe." Which brings us back to Trump. He's one of those developers who sees race as dangerous. That's why he formerly supported stop-and-frisk. We can go on from there.
James Bouie acknowledges that Bloomberg has been along-time supporter of liberal causes. He states so up front, then dismisses the strong case for nominating Bloomberg to focus on a terrible policy, stop and frisk.
That policy was, as Mr. Bouie acknowledges, based on numbers. Statistics showed gun violence was often committed by young African-American men, against African American victims. The statistics do not explain the socio-economic conditions and institutionalized racism that drive such crimes. Bloomberg’s immediate concern were the facts, not the causes, of violent crime.
Bloomberg is a statistics-driven, bottom-line focused wonk . Had the numbers suggested that gun violence was being disproportionately committed by middle-aged white ethnics in Staten Island, I am confident that it was this population that would have been targeted for “stop and frisk.”
Bloomberg failed to consider the consequences of stop and frisk on the community. He probably figured that getting frisked was better than getting shot - a failure to consider intangible consequences.
Bloomberg was an excellent mayor and these failures are, to me, not deal-killers. I would ask him: (1) how will you consider the intangible costs to a community in implementing any policy, including an anti-crime policy and (2) why did it take you so long to recognize that stop and frisk was being abused and had failed, given the stats?
Additional statistics showed that (1) stop and frisk was not working and that
1
Putting police where the most crime exists makes sense. Stop and Frisk does not, unless the same can be done to the Kushners and Melania.
Comparing Bloomberg to Trump is preposterous. Trump is a con man who targets minorities and offers them as scapegoats for his mark's grievances and for his enrichment. Yet you conflate these two men by writing that Bloomberg sought " . . . to control the city's black and brown people." I think he sought to control crime and reached for(and sustained) a bad policy to do so. He has apologized and worked strategically and rationally for American values that are unrecognizable in the Republican Party. Accept it or do not, but vote for him in the general if he is the nominee.
The primary goal- the only goal– is to defeat Trump. If that is true, you should vote for the person best suited to accomplish that goal. Bloomberg has demonstrated his ability to use media, organize a campaign and seems to me the best person for that job. If his baggage suggests in the future he is not, then we should vote accordingly.
Circular firing squad again here ... forsaking President's Obama's sage advice about Dems attacking their own for past imperfections, whereas Republicans understand that winning is everything. However, Bloomberg understands: his massive advertising blitz is attacking Trump, NOT fellow Dems. That's leadership, realizing that defeating Trump is the only thing that matters, especially for Black voters.
2
I'm not sure why Jamelle and Charles are flogging a dead horse here. Are black and brown Americans going to vote for a Republican? Highly unlikely. Is NY going to go for a Republican ? Again, highly unlikely as the last time was for Reagan. Bloomberg doesn't even need to campaign here....
All these vote blue no matter who posts are then surrounded by who can look in the past and find the most fault with each candidate. In the false claim of debating the merits, the Dems are in reality writing the soon to be upcoming Republican attack ads.
If Trump is the existential threat to mankind that the unhinged Left continually claims he is, then the Dems need to unify and focus on what candidates says they are going to do and stop having them apologize for what they did 20 years ago.
The optics of the Dems is absolutely awful. They complain endlessly about the unfairness of a system that makes some people rich, yet have 2 Billionaires still left in their party's search for a nominee. Which matters more to them ? They are really two parties trying to share a single party name. They should split into two parties: Democratic Socialists and just Democrats. The tent is to big to establish a unified voice and message and reason to vote for them.
1
Methods that are ineffective AND raced-based should not be tolerated. Bloomberg is NOT a racist, however, and I don't think he should be dismissed outright, or that a few ill-advised choices or statements outweigh all the good he has done.
How can statistics be racist? Young black men are unfortunately responsible for vastly more violent crime than their percentage of the population. The FBI's violent crime statistics make that clear. It's very sad but ignoring this is no way to address it.
2
New York is and will always be a chaotic place, and any white New Yorker who claims they don’t feel safer when police are around is probably lying. Bloomberg’s controversial use of policing made a lot of New Yorkers feel safer. The trade-off was that those policies were openly racist. Was it worth it to pursue them in spite of their racism? There are many reasons why it was not: for one, perpetuating incarceration rates for black and brown youths hurts everybody.
But to me, the surveillance he maintained over Muslims is even creepier, and the thought of the continued rise of corporate surveillance coinciding with a Bloomberg presidency gives makes me go pale.
Bloomberg is a Neoliberal - as Mayor, according to Juan Gonzalez - he enforced a policy that led to:
"privatization of public parks, privatization of public schools through expansion of charter schools, massive subsidies for commercial development in the city while rents skyrocketed, this is classic neoliberalism"
He has no popular support of "base". He has run exclusively a money driven campaign and purchased political support and silenced political critics with his money.
The thought that he could buy the Democratic nomination is a sickening and deprived display of corruption. Bloomberg is doing as much or more damage to democracy and the credibility of institutions as Trump. This is way beyond an issue of race and racisms.
3
If the black & brown community desires another 4 years of Trump-Pence-GOP subjugation, they should follow Mr Bouie's myopic and self destructive approach towards Mr Bloomberg.
Mr Bouie displays a willing ignorance of the accomplishments of President Lyndon Johnson in the area of civil rights. As a representative and senator, LBJ occasionally voted with segregationists and repeatedly assured his black supporters they must trust him and support him as POTUS. Their trust was rewarded and Mr Bouie is living example !
Purity is not a condition we Democrats can demand of any candidate. However, rational thought, successive record of accomplishments, and a long list of philanthropic activity supporting progressive agenda, must be the requirement. A few stumbles along the path of life are balanced against the multitude of good.
Excellent article by Mr. Bouie. "...there’s no indication that he has really changed; no evidence that he’s dropped the commitment to racial control." Also--despite his alleged supporters flooding the NYT comment section in recent weeks--no evidence whatsoever yet that he is 'the one to beat Trump.'
1
Bloomberg's opportunistic run is both deeply disturbing and lethally dangerous to real progressive values. He's betting that, like conservative Christians in 2016, liberals will hold their nose and vote for their own version of Trump -- an oligarch who may deliver short-term results, even as he perpetuates everything they despise.
I implore my fellow progressives not to vote for the "Trump of the Left." Yes, he has the checkbook to get things done in the short term, but at what cost? If the White House can be purchased on a lark and a politician's questionable past -- to put it mildly! -- can be all but erased by his checkbook, what kind of future will we be inviting?
Please, voters, stay the course and support candidates that have demonstrated real liberal values, as well as the blood and sweat equity of a real campaign. There are no shortcuts here.
3
we are living in the time of Citizens United and dark money.
Mike Bloomberg is the only candidate whose source of campaign funding is fully known.
2
It is amazing to me that the top two Democratic contenders are two "Trump lights". Bloomberg, with his truly odious history which in a lot of ways mirrors Trump's MO, and Sanders, who yesterday raged at his shrieking base criticizing the Democratic Party he joins just to run for president. Sanders and Trump share cult-like bases, full of a sense of victimhood and need to avenge their poor put-upon, denied leader. I was disgusted to read about the actions by Sanders supporters toward leaders of the Culinary Workers Union in Las Vegas. If I didn't know they were Sanders supporters, I would have assumed they were Trump supporters. Just one of the reasons I like Buttigieg is because he's calm and soothing, sane, he doesn't shriek, no anger. And explain for me how it can be that Bloomberg's approval has risen amongst African-Americans despite Stop-and-Frisk, among other things, but Buttigieg has been shut out of any considering by this group because he fired a black police chief who had broken the law? Can't we please return to some sanity and calm introspection? When a mayor doesn't fire a police chief who breaks the law, he's called corrupt. Whatever. It's all so exhausting.
Jamelle, I think the people Bloomberg appoints as president, and the Congress he would work with, would provide a measurable check on him. The guy has gotten key endorsements form African American leaders because they believe strongly in his ability to govern all Americans fairly.
The redlining and stop and frisk comments have become a drumbeat at the Times, an endless criticism that allows no chance at redemption.
Bloomberg has clear faults, and made terrible decisions with stop and frisk. But your piece today lacks the total context , and I am not alone in expressing this opinion.
1
@NR
He has brought and paid for endorsements from black politicians.
Don't fall for the okie-doke.
alleged liberals gnashing their teeth, pulling their hair and rending their garments over Bloomberg's candidacy are either not who they say they are or have an agenda other than defeating Donald Trump and the GOP on Nov. 3 2020.
Since leaving City Hall at the end of 2013, Mr. Bloomberg has become the single most important political donor to the Democratic Party and its causes.
Mr. Bloomberg spent more than $100 million helping Democrats take control of the House of Representatives in the 2018 midterm elections.
Mr. Bloomberg has spent at least $10 billion on his charitable and political pursuits. The vast majority has gone to philanthropy, for causes that reflect his personal interests and passions, including $3.3 billion to his alma mater, Johns Hopkins University.
in 2019, the year he declared his presidential candidacy, Mr. Bloomberg’s charitable giving soared to $3.3 billion — more than in the previous five years combined.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/15/us/politics/michael-bloomberg-spending.html
2
If democrats voters keep looking for the candidate that looks perfect to each of them, and if the candidates keep criticizing the others and pointing out their supposed deficiencies,Trump will have no problem beating whoever oppposes him.
He will only have to quote the other Democats criticisms to appear as the best man.
An incombent president has enough advantages as it is, without providing him with additional ammunitions;
Please no more squabling, no more ego. Decide, time is running short
If you continiue to look for the best, you will only get the worst, Trump;
2
Bloomberg was clearly wrong in saying that 95% of homicides were committed by minorities. The actual figure - per NYPD statistics for 2019 - was 93.2%.
6
IMO if you support the lifelong (and not just "in name only") Republican Michael Bloomberg for the Democratic presidential nomination, you forever forfeit your right to complain that Bernie Sanders is "not a Democrat."
2
I have no reason to like Bloomberg. He seems like a terrible choice, He is the oldest of all possible candidates. He is buying his way into the race. He has authoritarian tendencies. And yes, he is a racist. Do not downplay it. Apologizing for being a racist doesn’t make you not a racist. You have to stop being a racist. Also, I seriously believe he pays people to support him. When I was in second grade, another kid pointed out a kid from the other second grade class. “He buys his friends. If you want money.” I never joined a fraternity when I had the chance. I do not buy my friends and I don’t like those who do. I also will never support someone like Bloomberg who pays people to support him and carry him into the election.
2
I like Mike.
Mike came into office facing a 6 billion dollar deficit. He left with a 3 billion dollar surplus.
He stopped smoking in restaurants and public places.
He created more bike paths for New Yorkers.
Air in NY was best in nation for a large city.
He saved countless black lives and removed guns off the street with stop and frisk.
Rezoned dismal, dark areas like Williamsburg, Greempoint, LIC
And others where now over 250,000 people and business exist and work and pay taxes.
He has donated over 100,000.000 to Democratic politicians helping to elect more women to office.
He has donated millions to gun control.
He supports same sex marriage.
He has supported Planned Parenthood with money.
Crime was down during Bloomberg’s time and prosperity was up.
Sorry Jamelle, you are flat out wrong.
7
Enough sophistry already! Mr. Bloomberg's stop and frisk policy was effective albeit ill-advised and he has apologized publicly. Why can't you accept that?
Donald Trump is the worst president in American history and presents a clear and present danger to our democracy. Bloomberg is the best and -- in my opinion -- only candidate who can defeat Trump. Your column not only is myopic but also very destructive to saving this country.
I implore you to read your colleague Thomas Friedman's recent column supporting Mr. Bloomberg and reflect on the damage you are doing. Perhaps you could follow Mr. Bloomberg's example and write another column reconsidering your position and apologizing for what you wrote?
4
Do you really think Republicans are sitting around saying, "let's remember that Trump did this, and this, and this..."? Nope, they are focused 100% on supporting Trump's re-election so he can continue to forcefully fulfill the conservative agenda. That means amassing a GOP war chest with hundreds of millions of dollars from wealthy donors and special interests. Meanwhile, we Democrats sit around and tear Bloomberg to shreds because he's one of the wealthiest people in the world. Why does that disqualify someone? Not all billionaires are like-minded robots, just as not all middle class Americans have the same values and priorities. Mike's brilliant managerial skills and entrepreneurial genius resulted in self-made billions. These are skills we need in the highest executive office. And God forbid, he's made mistakes. Do any of these NYT columnists or Facebook armchair liberals really think they could flawlessly act as chief executive for a city of eight million people, or build a company of 20,000 employees, or give away billions only to causes that no one will ever criticize? These are unrealistic standards. I beg all of you to stop with the self immolation.
5
It should come as no surprise that so many people view Bloomberg as the "anti-Trump", especially when thinking of his stance on climate change, gun control and other philanthropic causes he's thrown his money at over the years.
But unfortunately it has also blinded them to his very racist actions and utterances -- something that most people of color, especially those of us here in NYC are loathe to forget.
And the reason why this should come as no surprise is because people love to quite crime statistics, especially when they uphold the same old ingrained racist beliefs that people of color are somehow preternaturally disposed to breaking the law.
Hence Bloomberg's logic about "Ninety-five percent of your murders, murderers and murder victims --fit one M.O.", without taking into consideration just how bigoted that sounds and only caring about it when it came to his next run for higher office because he needed the Black vote.
That's why his recent apology to communities of color came across as so hypocritical and false.
It's also why I will never cast a vote for him, because in too many ways he's a mirror reflection of the current occupant in the White House.
And there's no sense in stopping one crime by committing another.
2
Mr. Bouie,
I am surprised, saddened and puzzled by your response to Mr. Bloomberg's statement about murders, that the perpetrators "are male, minorities, 16 to 25".
I can't understand why you are so focused on the 'minorities' part. Aren't you offended by the blatant, anti-male sexism of the statement? Aren't you offended by the blatant, anti-youth ageism of the statement?
Or are you offended because the statement is true, which an examination of convictions for murder in New York City proves beyond any doubt.
Dan Kravitz
2
Both leaders see the same problem. While it is problematic if you are an educated Black or Hispanic, clearly there are a lot of folks White, Black and Brown not pulling their weight. We don't need any more. And why the cries of racism with 'stop and frisk?' Didn't YOU benefit from the policy as an upper class what-ever-you-are from lower crime rates?
2
Would you prefer Trump being elected for 4 more years? Why don't you write about the good things this (or any democratic candidate) has done for minorities? This whining is going to cost us the election. If it isn't the minorities, it is the bankers, if it isn't the bankers it is the centrists, if it isn't the centrists, it is the women... Everyone wants the perfection! We need to unite in our aim to get rid of Trump, the most corrupt president who has ruined our democracy, we need to concentrate not only getting a president in the White House, but most importantly must also get the Senate BLUE. When there is much to do, this bickering is only hurting democrats. Media is to blame.
2
I cannot believe black voters are supporting this guy.
Bloomberg's a very old, very, very rich white man, so his racial attitudes are similar to Donald Trump's. He's just been better at hiding it.
If people keep buying his act, his ego will ensure that Trump gets re-elected.
The last thing this country needs is a billionaire president.
1
So you think we are better off with Trump? We need a president, anybody, who believes in democracy to prevent us from losing everything we believe in. None of the Democrats is perfect, but we can work for improvement with any one of them. There is no chance of improvement with Trump. We may need Bloomberg’s machine and money to get rid of the fledgling dictator. I’m very sorry it’s come to that but it has. So just hold your nose and vote against Trump
1
"Trumpism" connotes a coherent, consistent ideology. Narcissists don't have that.
I joined the Dems in 2016, repulsed by Trump. Didn't know, then, that Dems like to eat their own.
God help us.
iI Bloomberg is such a racist, then why he is not and has never been popular on the right? Why? Bloomberg was mayor of NY long before Trump decided to run for president. I don't remember racist groups marching in support of Bloomberg. Probably because he would have kicked them not very kindly. But Trump gets the support of these "fine people". Bloomberg is the only one who can defeat Trump. He will never control the Democrat Party the way Trump controls the Republican Party. Bloomberg is not a danger to democracy, Trump is. I will vote for Mike.
1
Jamelle Bouie’s conjecture that Michael Bloomberg may possibly turn out to be a Trump style racist must be weighed against the alternative of four more years (or more) of actual Trump racism, as well as Trump economics, Trump environmentalism, and the possibility of a Trump fit of pique leading to a Trump war. I would risk an imperfect Bloomberg vs. any of the hodgepodge of other Democrat contenders who are all likely losers to Trump.
OH, and he also lowered crime for people of all races, made NYC a better place. It's maybe time we all took a step back and realize that no candidate is going to have a 100% perfect record, and that's OK. Stop doing Trump's work for him, and let's stop tripping over ourselves to see who can be the most righteous.
1
Bloomberg has the stature to step into the Oval Office. He has the independence (because of his makeup and his fortune) to pursue his deeply held policy beliefs (gun control, environmental rescue, reasonable health care programs); and he has the moxie to stand up persuasively to the bully and liar in the White House. I believe he has grown out of his misguided racial attitudes. Remember, Lincoln's record on race was pretty dismal before he issued the Emancipation Proclamation and grew into perhaps our greatest president
1
Yeah he has made significant mistakes. But you went to a ridiculous extreme. There can be no doubt the Bloomberg is in because of Trumpism but the idea that he will create a Trumpist liberalism is beyond ridiculous.
You forget to mention his charitable giving which is not remotely racist and if you took a poll of New Yorkers there would emerge a reason for his 3 time reelection. He's a technocrat who seeks to make things work.
But the biggest hypocrisy will be seen when the hapless democrats fail to decry his advertising against Trump if Bloomberg doesn't get the nomination. He is the only person calling out publicly and persistently the intellectual vacuity, the endemic lies and the criminality of the current threat to Democracy.
1
Bloomberg has to be held accountable for his racist record, just like Biden had to face allegations of Hunter Biden's entitlement. I am willing to forgive with an honest change. I am just not sure that we are seeing this with Bloomberg.
1
Was Stop and Frisk wrong? Mr. Bloomberg rightly pointed out that most victims of gun violence, not just most perpetrators, were minorities. How many Black Lives still matter because they were spared by the removal of guns from the streets?
Meanwhile whites, as Mr. Bouie notes, were only stopped "on the basis of actual suspicious behavior." But if "suspicious behavior" includes dressing, speaking, and carrying oneself in a hostile, threatening, thug-like way . . . well a lot of young blacks in poor neighborhoods look as threatening to the police as they intend to look to each other.
Mr. Bloomberg was right that crime statistics are strongly skewed on a racial basis. And Mr. Bouie is right that that alone would not be enough to justify stopping black men with no specific reason to suspect them of doing anything wrong. And probably very few black men in business suits or black fathers walking with their wives and children were stopped.
But when a young man intentionally signals "gangsta" with his clothes, his posture, and his scowl, the police NEED to take notice, whatever his race.
2
I believe Mr. Bouie here even before Bloomberg or his people respond - he knows what he's writing and it has been seen by editors and copywriters and his colleagues and therefore I give it a high level of credence.
1
It's enormously frustrating that so many liberals equate impact with intention. The fact that a certain law or policy disproportionately "impacts" a certain group, does not per se make it a racist decision. Eliminating the elite high school admission test will impact Asians. Does that make its advocates anti-Asian racists?
Similarly, law enforcement tactics will, by definition, impact those in high crime areas. If those areas are mostly black, that's who will be impacted. And anti-terrorism efforts will impact Muslims if their groups are the most fearsome threat (as it was after 9/11). Again, impact is not intention.
1
I find it difficult to accept the arguments of a NYT columnist who won't read the reporting of his paper's newsroom reporters.
"Bloomberg’s Billions: How the Candidate Built an Empire of Influence"
By Alexander Burns and Nicholas Kulish Feb. 15, 2020
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/15/us/politics/michael-bloomberg-spending.html
1
This is the most cogent anti-Bloomberg piece I've read. Should he win the nomination I'll vote for him--I strongly believe a 2nd term of DT, fully untethered, would be a disaster. But I'd be voting holding my nose. I guess my question is would Bloomberg scale-up his profiling and discriminatory tendencies to the national level? I'd think not but honestly don't know.
1
An armadillo would do well against Trump. The Democratic Party and the media is submarining Sanders and Warren. Buttigieg and Bloomberg are like conservative Republicans in the Nixon Administration.
1
Mr. Bouie, you fail to mention the other evidence of Bloomberg's character. Perhaps you were afraid to mention Bloomberg's friendship with Netanyahu, his avid support of human rights abuse against the Palestinian people, and his support of violations of international law in Palestine.
1
Here come the false equivalency accusations from the press. We already saw those 2016. Remember Dowd's columns. Worked out well didn't it.
1
Yes, 80% of those "stopped and frisked" were black and brown. Also, 80% of perpetrators of violent crime were black and brown. What's the problem? You have an emergency, quite appropriate to respond with emergency countermeasures. Bloomberg's support among African-Americans is growing rapidly. It's not at all apparent that nonwhite communities favor some sort of progressive socialism promoted by old white people.
1
Mr. Bloomberg is no Trump and for you or other identity politics types to claim it is ridiculous. He won three terms as Mayor in a liberal city. I suspect many of those black and brown residents voted for Mike, a fact you would never admit.
Under your hero, deBlasio, violent crime has ticked up. Your colleague Ms. Gay on the Ed. Board of the Gray Lady blames it on the weather or some vague illusory reasons. Police were just subject to assassination attempts. Police are being spat upon, or water tossed on them and told to stand down and make no arrests.
I agree that most persons of color are law abiding but even you grudgingly agree most violent crime in NYC is associated with young black men 18 to 30. Police arrest those suspected of crimes, and District Attorneys prosecute based upon admissible evidence. Our justice system has been perverted by Barr and Trump and their enablers, not Mr. Bloomberg.
2
Pretty sure he’s the only New York billionaire in electoral politics
@Eric Trump is the only Florida billionaire in this race.
Yes, 80% of those "stopped and frisked" were black and brown. Also, 80% of perpetrators of violent crime were black and brown. What's the problem? You have an emergency, quite appropriate to respond with emergency countermeasures. Bloomberg's support among African-Americans is growing rapidly. It's not at all apparent that nonwhite communities favor some sort of progressive socialism promoted by old white people.
1
Unfortunately looking at the New York’s Muslim community was an understandable reaction to 9/11 - which was an attack on the city by Muslims. In fact, it was the second attack on the World Trade Towers - we forget about the 1997 garage bombing. So instead of waiting around for the third major attack the NYPD used undercover and other efforts to try to determine and stop future threats. Falls under the category of stopping domestic terrorism of al kinds. Nothing wrong with that
2
Bloomberg's actions saved many brown lives.
his stop and frisk policies occurred in neighborhoods that actually showed, statistically showed, the vast majority of violent crimes.
you write "s, Bloomberg’s actions as mayor reveal that he was someone who also saw black and brown people as threats to the security and prosperity". Well, sir, is that racist that he put more cops where the crimes occurred? Or is that just good police police?
Is it racist to admit that the vast majority of violent crimes did occur in certain neighborhoods? Or is merely the numbers, and numbers don't lie.
it is actually intellectually dishonest to ignore the reality. And to ignore the many lives these imperfect policies saved.
3
I am guessing that Bloomberg in his racially oriented acts was trying to solve a problem, not motivated by racism, by the arithmetic (maybe faulty) about where crime originated. Similarly, I am guessing that Trump is not a racist (he doesn't have an ideological bone in his body), he just realizes that the Electoral College is biased towards racist areas, so that's who he panders to. Bloomberg is a pragmatist, out to solve problems, who loves being in charge. Trump is an egoist, not the least interested in solving problems, who loves being in charge. Excuse my amateurish psychological analysis.
2
What Bloomberg needs to do to offset his past is, if he gets the nomination, to run on a ticket with a Person of Color such as Stacey Abrams.
1
Agree. But what do u do if u choose between the two, if Bloomberg wins the nomination!
I'm an American citizen (born in Chicago), in my mid 60's. I was among the first wave of women (in any numbers) who entered the legal profession in the 1970's. I am a woman of color (Middle Eastern ancestry).
And in my going on seven decades, I thought I had seen it all until 2016. I lived through the Civil Rights and Women's Rights era. My brother is a disabled Viet Nam War vet. And all through this, I thought we had made some progress in social justice. Nothing near perfection. Of course not. But progress, nonetheless.
Fast forward to 2016. I've heard more slurs directed at my family since then, than I'd heard the six decades before. "You don't belong here". "Go back to your country". My family is regularly racially profiled at airports. We are now hyper aware of our surroundings when we leave our homes, as are most brown-skinned people in this country, given the exponential rise of hate crimes since 2016.
And I know Mr. Bouie understands all this. I also know this is the primary season, but to compare Bloomberg to Trump is a bit too facile. Both have said racist things. Both have said sexist things. But only Trump is proud to have sexually assaulted women. Only Trump has said that neo-Nazis and the KKK are some very fine people. Comparing the two is like saying pneumonia and lung cancer are both lung diseases.
And I also remember 1972 very well. Voting for the person I "believed in" in the primaries was a disaster. And so much more is at stake now.
2
Mr. Bloomberg is buying an election. Mr. Bloomberg represents the benevolent dictator, the rich know best, great man theory of republicanism. The press are bombing the socialist while having no idea what socialism is. Before their very eyes socialist corporations don’t pay taxes and the infrastructure is crumbling but boo hiss anything for citizens. Why is that word seldom used in America? Citizens. Are billionaires worth it? They find a trick, made a fortune and now demand obedience?
You will be even more sorry after the saviour billionaire rules and you can’t find out what the Republican centrist is doing?
Bloomberg may be a plutocrat, but Trump is a psychopath.
Trump’s psychological state presents an imminent danger to America and to the world. So say a group of 650 psychiatrists, who recently submitted a petition to the House Judiciary Committee. https://dangerouscase.org/petition-to-the-judiciary-committee/
This is a key passage:
“What makes Donald Trump so dangerous is the brittleness of his sense of worth. Any slight or criticism is experienced as a humiliation and degradation. To cope with the resultant hollow and empty feeling, he reacts with what is referred to as narcissistic rage. He is unable to take responsibility for any error, mistake, or failing. His default in that situation is to blame others and to attack the perceived source of his humiliation. These attacks of narcissistic rage can be brutal and destructive.”
Unfortunately, Trump's outbursts are likely to get worse.
We need to get rid of Trump and his GOP apologists.
Vote Blue, no matter who!
2
How is Bloomberg any better than Trump? Seriously, Trump will run circles around him. He can run on criminal justice reform and take enough black voters away from the Democrats or at least make some stay home.
A Bloomberg nomination would be a DISASTER.
1
That's how he appeals to the "working class whites" everyone is always hand-wringing about.
1
African Americans aren't stupid. They want to defeat Trump as much as anyone. They, more cogent than pundits suddenly arrayed against Bloomberg, recognize and differentiate true inverterate racism. None of the white Democratic nominees , Warren, Sanders, Klobuchar, and Buttigieg are untainted, but they're as quick as Trump & Associates to point to Bloomberg's purported inadvertent racism. The other Dem nominees know -- as does Trump -- how Bloomberg is the only one likely to defeat Trump. African Americans want to defeat Trump and back a winner as much as everyone else. What will Mr. Bouie (and Blow, et al) say in 9 months with Trump and Barr and Pompeo and Devos celebrating his re-election over Sanders or Biden or Pete?
1
As the father of a black boy, I look forward to a piece by Bouie or Charles Blow setting forth, with specificity, what they would have done differently from Bloomberg. A sure fire way to get Trump re-elected is to say to a moderate swing voter, as these writers are saying, “Yes, the vast majority of violent crime when Bloomberg took office was being committed by young men of color, but stopping and frisking young men of color was akin to imposing apartheid!” — with not even a hint of what other tactic should have been implemented in place of stop and frisk.
1
Blunt language in our time...Bloomberg is the liberals Racist ... his policies as mayor not only were oppressive in and of themselves as this column illustrates, but the lasting effects were and still are horrific in terms of how the policies have had long lasting affects on the cosmology and demographics of NYC...Yes some neighborhoods of NYC are safer than pre Bloomberg, but at what cost to the folks who lived there. I come from NYC. I walked the streets, rode the subways and socialized as a kid on the streets of NY from age five to 17 when I moved to college...The NY of today is nothing like the NY of then...Bloomberg is partly to blame for these offensive, direct, oppressive tactics of change... reference... https://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/08/the-human-impact-report.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1Q24sy9fIq3V0RE673haPRnC-DtELSxtZKTC23ypoWlDDnytxhfD0oQNA
1
Listen up, I'm going to tell you why Bloomberg is surging:
He's a fighter. He fights back in a way that unlike the other candidates. He's not apologetic about fighting back. There's a huge swath of liberals who are sick and tired of polite Dems who don't know how to fight. It's that simple. All can be forgiven with a candidate who knows out to fight a bully.
1
Bloomberg used statistics that are real in the attempt to tackle criminality. He prescribed short term solution was wrong. But he has invested in longer term solutions such as gun control. I was not a victim of stop and frisk. I do not know how his apologies are felt by those who were. But he seems to have honest regrets and apologies at this point. As opposed to the president that apologizes for nothing (central park five? rental practices? outright verbal racism? outright policy racism on latinos?). The push back on Bloomberg is necessary right now, more so from his primary opponents than from opinion writers, to properly test him for the general and verify the honesty of his apology. But I for one cannot begin to understand how someone would put Bloomberg even in the same ball-park as Donald Trump. That's just incredibly stupid and inaccurate.
2
It’s easy to forgive and forget if you didn’t suffered the consequences. I would like to see how many white folks are writing about forgiveness vs black folks. The black/brown folks have suffered and they are the one who have paid the price for racial injustices. It’s difficult to forgive and forget such things if you’re at the end of the rod. White folks can easily forget and forgives since they were the culprits and haven’t lost anything.
I will not forget and forgive until Bloomberg goes to every black/brown person he has harmed through his policies and begs for their personal forgiveness. Only they can absolve him. Maybe he can start today and he might still have time to get forgiveness from every beautiful soul he has scarred before Election Day. By only following the high moral road, maybe one day, he can free his soul.
1
I didn't live in New York under Mr. Bloomberg's mayoralty, but what he says about crime is spot on here in St. Louis today.
There were nearly 200 murders in this medium-sized city last year, the vast majority of which were Black-on-Black crimes committed by young men of color. Now, in early 2020, we've had about a dozen young Black children who caught bullets in the crossfire.
I don't know what the answer is to this horror, but it must be really terrible for all of the hardworking people who live in these terrorized neighborhoods. I guess Black lives only matter (no demonstrations have I seen in response to the recent carnage) if they end vis-a-vis a White cop's gun.
2
I don't know how it is in New York but here in Saint Louis which has one of the highest crime rates our Public Safety Director Jimmy Edwards addressed the crime situation at a 2018 MLK Day. This is the way NPR reported what he said: "During his address at the Martin Luther King Day event Edwards said all but one of the city’s 205 murder victims in 2017 were black and all the people caught and accused of those crimes were also black." He was lambasted to no end, never mind that he is African American never mind that he was a highly regarded circuit judge for 25 years. When will we address this problem in an honest way?
3
The irony is that many African-Americans actually support what Bloomberg accomplished with stop and frisk. Yes, they understand that there is some racially discriminatory element, but they also understand that their communities were being ravaged by crime, and stop and frisk contributed substantially to reducing that crime rate. The "pundits" love to talk about it in a negative light, but they don't really want to share what many voters are saying.
3
I am guessing but likely the prime beneficiaries of the stop and frisk policing strategy were minorities. Regardless, there appears to me to be no columnist with a more "unapologetically" racial vision of the American nation than Mr. Bouie. A white female student is allegedly killed in Morningside Park by a 14 year old "of color" with nary a peep from Mr. Bouie et al. I can only imagine the combustion if the color of this apparently non hate crime were the reverse.
2
Let’s cut to the chase scene Mr Bouie. If Bloomberg is the Democratic nominee will you vote for him?
2
Would Bloomberg's "Stop and Frisk" policy have been still in force, maybe Tessa Majors wouldn't have been massacred, neither that French tourist had the throat slit. That was a good public safety policy.
3
Trump and Bloomberg are practically identical twins. And neither of them will be elected as the President of the United States November 3, 2020. Vote.
1
You say Bloomberg has a "commitment to racial control." Actually, he had a commitment to criminal control and terrorism control, that was misdirected in his policies. Your attack of the spying on Muslims although reprehensible, ignores two attacks on the World Trade Towers, one being 9/11. Do you know why a swath of Democrats are centrists? Experience, memory - our first memories of air raid drills in kindergarten, knowing kids now have shooter drills; memory of landing on the moon, of the Vietnam War and the draft, of both Kennedy assassinations, of the starvation in Bangladesh...We learned about history as well lived it. We know good men make mistakes...big mistakes sometimes, and if we painted them all our former leaders with your brush we would have a history littered with nothing but the worst of men. Good men should be judged by all their actions, and you have been fair in giving Bloomberg credit where due; but think about who he gave his money to...was it only white male candidates? White causes? Good men make mistakes, sometimes serious mistakes. Bad men make nothing but mistakes. Be careful in attributing a bad man's intentions to a good man who has made mistakes.
Thanks for this courageously thorough and clear exposure of Bloomberg’s racial and class animus. I was appalled at the delusional and morally confused reaction of well-educated liberals to Charles Blow’s equally courageous column on Bloomberg yesterday. No. This nation is not better off with a sophisticated intelligent white neoliberal white male misogynist racist than an ignorant uncouth one. Abandoning our moral values to beat Trump will yield no victory.
1
Well, we knew this was coming. Expect more articles like this as Bloomberg or Sanders gains strength. Bloomberg is really liberal, although he's not, and Sanders version of socialism really isnt socialist, although he's called himself one his entire life.
Bloomberg really wasnt that great a mayor. The vast majority of policies that gave the appearance that he as a good mayor he just inherited and continued from Giuliani. What were Bloomberg's? Stop and Frisk, the big soda ban, and buying a third term as mayor. Not that great when you think about it. He used 9/11 as an excuse to raise taxes, then never lowered them. Hes an authoritarian.
My goodness. The things he has said about African Americans and women are disgraceful. They would have ended any candidates campaign, Republican or Democrat. Whats worse, is the Democrat Party brands itself as the party of inclusion, equality, and social justice, then changes the rules midstream, the very same rules that forced out all the minority candidates, for an old white billionaire. But its all ok just because he's running against Trump? And he's got billions he's willing to spend?
I mean really, how far are you willing to stretch your beliefs? So we can be micromanaged to death by a billionaire who thinks he knows us?
Mr. Bouie joins Douthat, Blow, and Krugman in the circular firing squad that is Democrat politics.
Bloomberg is our best chance at beating Trump in November.
2
I don’t think we should be taking black and minority voters for granted in order to court possible republican converts with Bloomberg.
1
Michael Bloomberg is slightly less racist than Trump, but equally corrupt. Pick a topic in his legacy as mayor and it’s always the same: anti democratic, abusive and exploitative. We don’t want his money. Let it sound it in other places and run for prime minister in other countries
1
I don’t understand the Democratic mindset at all. A gallon of gasoline has been thrown into your house, set afire, and you are sitting around debating whether to use a 100 gallon supply of water—which has a little oil residue in it—or not. You also have a couple of two-quart containers of pure water and you are wondering also if you should stand on principle and just use one of the tiny containers. Unbelievable! If I wasn’t familiar with the names of some of these writers I’d believe that Trump’s people were pushing the narrative—and I’d expect to see more Russian derived English errors.
Do you think the country can afford to squander this chance to oust Trump? Or maybe you think the country is going to rise-up and elect Bernie by a landslide? I have a two-word reply to that prayer: Jeremy Corbyn. Now that was a landslide!
It is time for Democrats to abandon the circular firing squad formation tactic. Is Bloomberg perfect? No, but at least the country won’t be heading back to 1619 again.
1
The view from Virginia must be somewhat different than it is for those of us who actually live in NYC. There were many, many black people who had to live in high crime black areas that supported Bloomberg's willingness to confront crime where it was the worst. His stop and frisk program was a good faith effort to reduce that crime in those areas. Bloomberg is not racist and shame on you for judging him. You remind me of the 'holier than thou' crowd that actually said if the police were "fair" they'd stop and frisk white people on Madison Ave.
2
Whatever you have to say about Bloomberg it would be a welcome change from Trump. None of the other Democrats have a chance to beat Trump. It's time for America to be less polarized and have a bi partisan government. I hope he picks a liberal Republican as his running mate.
Bloomberg shouldn't be solely judged on the basis of the racial lens. The good he has brought America far out weights past mistakes. It is short sighted to dismiss Bloomberg. I think he has repented and admitted his past errors to the black community. He is the only Democrat that could beat Trump. At the end of the day Jamelle isn't that what you want. Why bite off your nose to spite your face.
1
For me, it is about electing a leader who understands climate change. Mike has a proven record fighting coal power. He has poured millions into it. He gets it. Plus...He is beholden to... No one. I can't wait for this self-made smart billionaire to take on the "born on third base" con man currently in the white house. And then with a female VP who understands the importance of a woman's right to privacy, imagine the VP debate with genuflector in chief Pence!!
1
“...he also doesn’t share the president’s criminality, corruption and complete contempt for constitutional government.”
Wait until he becomes president....
I am sure with a Supreme Court Justice Barr, Justice Paul, Justice Cotton, and Justice Gaetz, minorities will find a new day full of unicorns, rainbows, and roses. The air and water will be cleaner. Your social welfare programs safe, and Obama care will be replaced with Trump care. Voting rights will be sacred.
Mike is flawed, but quickly learns, and apologizes for his mistakes. An abasement tour by all the Dems for all of their past sins serves only Trump. Dust yourselves off and get over it.
1
The really big news today is Sanders' poll gains. But the Times despises Sanders and would rather have this Republican billionaire. You are helping him just like you helped Trump in 2016.
2
Thank you Jamelle Bouie.
Most racists don't act like Trump, blurting out one stupid comment after another. Most racists speak softly and use the system to keep people of color in their place.
It wasn't so much the Klan that stopped blacks from voting in the South for nearly a century after the Civil War. More important were the words spoken softly and privately from outwardly nice and respectable people:
1. like the boss, who threatened to fire the man who voted;
2. like the landlord, who threatened to evict the family of the man who voted.
3. like the owner of the country store, who threatened to deny credit to the man who voted.
The Klan was only the part of the racial iceberg above the surface of the water, poor people hired by outwardly nice respectable people to do the dirty work of dividing the working class.
Bloomberg is in the tradition of the boss, the landlord, and the man who controls credit. He can afford some very slick TV ads, but he should not be trusted.
3
Bloomberg does not fit with the principles of the Democratic Party. He is an infiltrator, and must be exposed as such.
3
@Greg you are incorrect. Mike Bloomberg has donated millions of dollars to Democratic and human causes and candidates which I believe in. Women’s rights, climate change, stopping coal fired plants, retraining coal miners, better college availability to low income students, the list goes on and on. Do your research.
1
Mr. Bouie I agree with your premise!
Michael Bloomberg is if anything a greater threat to democracy in the American Republic than Donald Trump.
Why would the American People trade one (incompetent and undisciplined) racist, sexist, autocrat for another (competent and disciplined) racist, sexist autocrat.
Michael Bloomberg has all the potential being the incarnation of Trump's attack on American Democracy on steroids.
2
NYT: one article -or opinion- after another attacking Bloomberg, pretty much non-stop. Hard not to notice. The one candidate Trump really fears. How many times this week will Bouie need to express his biased opinion?
2
These revelations look very bad for Michael Bloomberg. He has said some very derogatory things about blacks and minorities. He has had some policies that are clearly racist and they are inexcusable. I wonder how he will wiggle his way out of this one when he appears tomorrow on the Democratic presidential debate stage. There is no way he is getting around this. His billions will never buy him out of this fiasco. He is finished. He is a blatant racist and should never get any where near the White House.
2
"It’s [bloomy], the other New York billionaire in American politics, who is currently campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination."
I increasingly loathe bloomy with every fiber (especially since the Times' buried-lede report that he effectively hushed Emily's List...hmm, sounds familiar), but he was right: the loser in the White House is not even a millionaire! Don't spread such a lie to the contrary.
Demand instead that both PROVE it—with their tax returns.
1
Along with Trump and McConnell, this is another neofascist that I put on mute every time he appears on radio or television.
2
If the Republicans were stuck on a purity test the way we Democrats are, Hillary Clinton would be president right now. 
2
No more sexism. No more racism. No more militarism. No more plutocracy. Translation: No more Trump or Bloomberg.
Go Bernie!
3
Misguided, over the top as Bloomberg's stop and frisk tactic was, one ought to remember that he garnered 50% of the Black vote as a Republican mayoral candidate. That, in and of itself, should tell you something about Bloomberg's ability to whip Trump.
Trump is the object we all need to focus on. With him in control, everything is in danger of going down the toilet.
1
In the name of calling out racism, a false equivalence redux. Bloomberg is a rational man, he can both apologize and change his POV. He is not a malignant narcissist, not an ignorant blowhard con artist, pandering to thugs, white nationalist militias, international kleptocrats and his own self-interest.
Bloomberg may have misused the statistics of crime- he may have to promote clear new & better policies for reducing violent crime, beyond gun reform. Poverty, educational inequities and financial services would be a good start. But it cannot be in the interest of black, brown and Muslim folk to demonize imperfect 'liberals' prematurely. Obama slow walked to Marriage Equality...but got there.
2
Bloomberg is a Trump with a globalist agenda. Probably smarter than Trump but with no charisma.
2
Bloomberg is easily as racist if not more so than Trump and clearly his hatred of non-whites is at the core of his worldview. A vote for Bloomberg is a vote for racism and authoritarianism, he is no solution to Trump.
2
Well, Mr. Bouie, if you didn’t like Mayor Bloomberg, you’d better buckle-up for President Trump’s second term!
2
If you wag your liberal finger at Trump voters for supporting a racist, sexist, fill-in-the-blank-ist candidate, you should finger-wag in the mirror if you vote for a guy who blamed the 2008 financial crisis on the elimination of redlining.
If you’re voting on the basis of “who can beat Trump,” you are letting Trump dictate your vote.
Vote for the person you believe in. All of the candidates are imperfect. Period. Bloomberg doesn’t have my vote, even if he’s bought Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and everyone else.
Best case scenario. Bloomberg loses Democratic bid and runs as a third party who siphons votes from Trump. Klobuchar wins! One can dream.
2
Thank you Jamelle, I completely support everything you have to say. I am appalled by the number of people saying they will support Bloomberg.He is trump with polish and big bows on.I will support any of the other candidates.I will not vote for Bloomberg,ever.
2
The fact is that young men of color are disproportionately responsible for violent crime in the US (by a factor of eight). Is that fact "racist"?
2
“A disproportionate number of those convicted of violent crime may have been young men of color, but the vast majority of young men of color weren’t involved in violent crime or any crime at all”
Mr Bouie, I recommend a course in statistics. The vast majority of neither black, nor white, men don’t commit crime. That’s obvious. But you admit that a “disproportionate” number of blacks DO commit crime compared with whites. So a scenario : you are a cop and you heard there was a robbery around the corner. Next, a black youth walks towards you on one side of the street, and a white youth on the other side of the street. What is the statistical probability, based on your assertion above, the black youth committed the robbery, and what is the probability it was the white youth. If you were the cop, who would you stop and frisk? Who would you bet on? If you were a statistician, which you clearly are not, you would pick the black youth. That’s what Bloomberg was advocating. Could be the whites do more crime in a city, in which case you would stop and frisk the white youth. It’s simple statistical probability Mr. Bouie. Not racial animus.
2
I'm as white as they come, and I could see that the Giuliani/Bloomberg policy of stop and frisk as racist and ineffective. I jaywalked through midtown daily just to get to work faster - what would have happened if I had more melanin?
Bloomberg doesn't believe that anyone with less than $ a billion is worthy of his attention. He was a horrible mayor & would make a horrible president. He's the only democratic candidate I would absolutely not vote for in order to get rid of Trump.
1
I share your concern. He should have owned the harm these policies created a long time ago. I work for his nonprofit on gun safety and I have to say that he has done more to create a diverse and equitable organization than I ever saw in my 32 years working in publishing. The organization is training all of us about micro aggressions, identifying your bias and why diversity in any organization is important and makes it more successful. I have to think this direction is supported by him. If he is willing to learn how to look at the world differently and keep learning how to be better then I am less concerned.
I am sympathetic to Mr. Bouie's complaints, but in fairness, Bloomberg's stop-and-frisk policy wasn't driven by racial animus, but by a totally data-driven attempt to keep New Yorkers - including the young black and brown men who are more likely to be victimized - safe.
Like Willie Sutton, who robbed banks "because that's where the money is," Bloomberg put his "army" of overbearing cops in black and brown neighborhoods because the data showed that is where the crimes were happening.
Put another way, I am less bothered by Bloomberg's motivations for stop-and-frisk, as I am that is exposes perhaps a single-minded, slightly authoritarian streak.
Nonetheless, I will be voting for Bloomberg come Super Tuesday with great enthusiasm - and keeping a close eye on him when he becomes president.
3
When I lived in NYC in the fall of 1993, at the corner of 4th St. and Avenue A, drugs were sold at every corner and Tompkins park was home to the transient homeless. The police had their hands full. Were they wrong to profile young black males. Perhaps. But their aim, as was Bloomberg's, was to make New York a better place to live. Blacks should be grateful that Bloomberg has devoted his life to helping them. Far more than the former mayor of the all-white Burlington VT. The Times columnists Blow and Bouie do their cause and their followers a disservice, I think, by condemning a man who has done so much to improve the lives of all New York residents. He is now trying to continue that work by running for president.
2
Democrats can’t help themselves, it’s just amazing. Obama’s admonishment of a “circular firing squad” fell on deaf ears.
2
The racism and anti-Muslim bigotry of both Trump and Bloomberg are symptoms of toxic democracy.
As a 73-year-old lifetime New Yorker, I can say unequivocally that, all things considered, Mike Bloomberg was the best mayor during my lifetime. His policing policies saved lives whether you want to admit it or not!
5
Residents of neigborhoods of color justifiably desired and demanded that government take control of the streets. Bloomberg's "stop and frisk" was an attempt to do that.
The question is whether it was constitutional, and whether it was effective. The courts have said it was not constitutional, and data says it was not effective.
So what is government to do to address their citizens' justified desire for safety, and freedom from rampant crime?
The focus should never have been on an entire race and age group - Bloomberg made an error in judgment and in data analysis, and seems not to understand this error in data. Saying that most criminal are men of color does not mean that most men of color are criminals.
So his "solution" was not only a violation of civil rights, but bad policy. For a man who made billions by selling data, this error is inexcusable. One wonders if he is as bright as we are told he is.
The questions remains: what can government do to reclaim the streets and re-establish order without rounding up the vast majority of innocent citizens?
1
“He may have been a Republican.”
Yes, he has been a Republican from 2001 till 2007, & he has been a Democrat and an Independent. Bloomberg has been a filthy-rich & shifty political-manipulator by deceitfully changing parties since 2000!
2000 Bloomberg the Democrat
2001 Bloomberg the Republican
2007 Bloomberg the Democrat
2009 Bloomberg the Independent
2020 Bloomberg the Democrat
1
@I Gadfly
And Sanders?
1
Bloomberg's erroneos statements regarding " redlining of neighbors" causing the collapse of the real estate market is /was totally race based. No correction has been uttered by him or his surrogates. The underlying causes of the housing bubble are complex.Factors include tax policy ( exemption of housing from capital gains)historically low interest rates, tax lending standards, failure of regulators to intervene, and speculative fever. (Mainly white collar crime ushered in and never punished)
Bloomberg's blaming the victims strategy ,stop and frisk policy of black and brown citizens as a method to solve the problems in 'their' neighbors.
American people, without cyber interference from Russia, will judge the field, and make an approiate decision. Are we a lawful nation or a country run amuck and lost.
No American wants a heavy handed police force or president.
Can we move on past stop and frisk? It was a very different time and place. "Tough on crime" rhetoric was fashionable and both parties supported it equally. No more purity tests! Let it go and look to a better future.
2
How about writing a column informing us about the good that Bloomberg has accomplished. Oh, about the lamenting of Bloomberg using his wealth to finance his campaign. Of course the other candidates are required to spend much time and energy in raising funds from small donations to large contributors.
The only difference is the Bloomberg has it and will spend it and the others solicit for it and spend it. The wealthissue is a red herring.
1
I am another black man who has lived and worked in or around NYC since 1998. I have never once been stopped nor frisked. I would argue that some of my friends have a similar experience. It's obviously a good idea to diligence our representative for the top office. This being said, if people are really about changing how we're currently being represented in the WH and abroad let's be efficient and block out the noise.
2
What is interesting about this op-ed, and the ones by Mr. Blow, is that they focus on one issue and from only one point of perspective. Society is multi-dimensional and thus individuals need to be looked at for all of their qualities and faults and not just one aspect of their lives. While Mr. Bloomberg may have some faults, he also has done much good. The crime rate in NYC came way down during his administration and the economy improved tremendously. While stop and frisk was problematic, it also produced results that helped improve neighborhoods. Lets not forget that he has also contributed millions of dollars to causes that have improved society in many different ways. When all we do is look at one issue, it is easy to find fault in everyone.
4
I’m a white woman in my 40s. If properly collected data showed that my demographic was responsible for a big proportion of the crime perpetrated in my region, I’d expect increased surveillance. Admittedly, I wouldn’t be happy about if, but I’m not sure I could come up with a reasonable argument against it.... I’m not saying that the data Bloomberg was acting on was accurate ( I don’t know either way), but if it was, then his response seems pragmatic and data-driven.
4
What to do is straight forward. The same election season plan has been expressed by myself and many others in person and on various comment threads: Vote for somebody other than Bloomberg in the primary, but vote for whoever the Dem nominee is in November, even if its Bloomberg.
I have not seen or heard anyone suggest a better course of action. Give your time, money and vote to whoever you think is best in the primary but vote Dem in November regardless of who is on the ticket.
2
Mr. Bouie: you have condemned Bloomberg for his insensitivity to race. Yet what are your remedies for black on black crime, gang violence and drugs? Yes, decent education, decent jobs and two parent households are the ultimate solution and must be pursued. But in the absence or insufficiency of those remedies NOW, what do parents do to protect their children from gangs and gun violence?
Bloomberg's language describing this policy was insensitive and he has apologized as he should. If the policy was random, based solely on age and race as you suggest, that's wrong. If on the other hand it was targeted based on intelligence gained from crime statistics,undercover agents, confidential informants, etc. that's a wholly different story.
So Mr. Bouie if you were the Mayor or Police Chief responsible for keeping communities safe, what policies would you advocate--not tomorrow, or next year or five years from now but TODAY and TONIGHT. What actions would you take TONIGHT to begin taking the streets and neighborhoods back from those who prey on others regardless of race. Stop and frisk perhaps? If not, what?
4
I find it hard to believe a white man of a certain age -- say, 70 or older -- does not have some racial bias in his background. Not everyone was a Freedom Rider.
But the fix now is to explain the evolution and apologize for accepting hard answers to easy questions.
I don't know Bloomberg. Not everyone revolves around New York. But unless I hear him explain his past, I will vote for someone else.
But... if he's what we end up with, Mike before Donald.
I lament the thousands of black and brown youth who'll be unable to vote for him after he buy$ the Democratic nomination. Many of them were caught up in his raids and were found to have weed in their pockets and nothing else, were later charged and maybe even thrown in jail...
1
Jamelle Bouie you are 100% correct and you should add that their vision of America in the World and involvement in the Middle East is an extension of the same thought process and special interests. For both of them Obama and his legacy would be a nuisance, and the Constitution is something convenient only when useful. So, in essence, if Bloomberg becomes the Democratic candidate many Democrats will stay home and give the electoral college to Trump.
1
@AKA
thanks for contributing Bannon's talking point of the day.
1
While debating stop and frisk, past and present, let's not forget another disturbing element in this candidacy. Michael Bloomberg is now at 19% in a major poll and will be debating Wednesday night. How did he get there ? By advertising all over.
He's spent $1million per day on Facebook ads. Think of it. One multibillionaire is transferring funds to another multibillionaire at the rate of a million dollars a day and is rewarded for it. Have they set up a special wire transfer number with the Federal Reserve so this can go smoothly without too much overhead? Will Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Zuckerberg set up a permanent video conference link? Where are the rest of us?
1
Democratic writers & pundits: “He’s not perfect!”
Republican writers & pundits: “Nobody’s perfect but he gets the job done, ammarite?”
And this is how Trump gets 4 more years.
4
Imagine this: Bernie Sanders has won the Democratic nomination and is running against Trump. What will be the central narrative? This will become a referendum on Bernie Sanders and whether socialism is right for America.
What do you think will be the outcome of such a referendum? Do you see a majority of voters in swing states going for Medicare for All and other signature Sanders policies?
Hint: think about the UK election and why Jeremy Corbyn lost so badly in spite of having a cult following.
Now imagine this: Bloomberg (or anyone else) wins the nomination. The general election then will be a referendum on Donald Trump.
What do you think will be the result of that referendum?
Bloomberg's policies are progressive and realistic. He can get them passed. Do you want to follow the dream of a revolution? Or do you want a change in the White House?
Think about it.
5
@Ken
Sorry, I cannot and will not vote for Michael Bloomberg under any circumstances. He's a narcissist, a racist, and a misogynist.
I'm willing to give this man a chance to show that he has grown and evolved. He has a lot of positives, most important being that he has the clout to beat Trump. If he screws up, he'll be voted out in the next election. Democrats, let's not make perfect the enemy of good. Let's not hold our candidates to impossibly high standards that no Republican can ever meet, and that Donald Trump can't meet in even any one single random hour of his entire adult life.
3
@Dan
Bloomberg "growth" and "evolving" is all about political expediency, nothing more.
As Maya Angelou once said "When people show you who they are, believe them."
Dear Fellow Citizens for Replacing the troll
All of this assessment and debate is intellectually, ethically and politically very interesting.
But, If you want to replace the troll then stop making it about YOU and start thinking about the key states and the swing voters who will determine the outcome of this election. You must know by now that there is a sliver of the population that will again decide the number of Electoral College votes the candidates get.
Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania et al. will NOT vote for Bernie. But they may vote for a guy who has a progressive message on many issues and a money spending record to demonstrate it, as well as a record of effective business and government management, as well as less big spending and more pragmatic policies.
So, while I enjoy the ideological debate, this is a very pragmatic matter and decision. It is not about you, unless of course you live in one of those critical states the Democrats need to win the Electoral College. And if you note where each of the Commenters are from, it may tell you something. We all must suspend our ideological fantasies and handicap this race with objective analysis and informed wisdom to best judge which candidate can be successful where the Dems need them to be.
My personal objective analysis is that is Mike Bloomberg.
I believe we can change, grow and develop as people.
It is my job to help leaders do that. I believe MB has changed and grown, still imperfect, but improved.
6
@Richviews
For your's and everybody else's information Bernie Sanders won primaries against Hilary Clinton in Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin in 2016. He's currently ahead of Trump in nationwide poling. Let's just pump the brakes on the fear and hysteria of moderates and let people vote for who they want to based on their own beliefs and values.
Funny how all these apologies are coming out now, that hes a candidate. He had plenty of time to apologize before, but never did.
Youre getting rooked and sold, by a billionaire that is bombarding you with ads. If he spends enough money, and you see enough of his ads, over and over again, you'll buy what hes selling.
Have a coke and a smile!
My Pillow is the best pillow you'll ever own!
1
@InvestAndProsper I haven't seen one single ad because I don't watch TV and I'm not on social media. So not even one ad. But I've read about his policy positions, and I've seen a few of his speeches. Overall he's 100 times better than Trump, and he's got good positions on a lot of key issues, and he's got NY moxie, and a ton of money to line up as many cannons as needed to heave mother lodes of negative advertising on Trump, which like or not is how our system currently works.
3
Great column, and an old story.
Regarding recent Democrats running on the basis of their tough-on-blacks creds, we should perhaps begin with the Big Dawg: Bill Clinton executing Ricky Ray Rector when he only had half a brain, and Hillary Clinton on "superpredators." But more recently
--Mayor Pete and his terrible record in South Bend
--Prosecutor Klobuchar sending an innocent Myon Burrell to prison for life
--Joe Biden against busing, and delivering a heartfelt eulogy for Strom Thurmond--while lying about his participation in civil rights marchers, and allowing Anita Hill to be smeared, and disallowing witnesses for her.
--Even Kamala Harris, that "progressive prosecutor," covering up exculpatory evidence that might have kept a series of black defendants out of jail.
On the other hand, a 21-year-old Bernie Sanders being loaded up in a police van after protesting against racist housing practices at the University of Chicago.
1
@Jim Holstun
Thank you for posting this and given people a clear contrast between the candidates.
People are going to have make a choice, either stand for something, or fall for anything because people are playing on their fears.
1
@Jim Holstun
Bernie Sanders—a 40 year career as a politician in a state with a population of 94 percent white folks and 1.29% Black or African American.
1
When asked why he robbed banks,Willie Sutton famously daid "Because that's where the money is." The fact is that the bulk of crime took place in minority neighborhoods; it's sad that the causes were institutional racism, poverty, and hopelessness, but those are the facts.
Violent crime as defined by 7 major felony offenses decreased significantly 2002-2013 (Bloomberg's tenure),according to NYPD stats.
Don't forget that this policy was in the wake of 9/11, when a large number of NYers--and the rest of the nation-- were caught up in fear and willing to sacrifice some civil liberties for the presumption of safety.
2
They continued to,decline after the unconstitutional and harmful stop and frisk tactics were curtailed; Bloomberg’s egotistical,belief in his infallibility kept him from understanding the real harm it inflicted on innocent New Yorkers of color, even after a Federal Judge laid it out in detail.
1
@george
Based on the Bureau of Justice Statistics:
"The annual number of persons prosecuted for commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) cases filed in U.S. district court nearly doubled between 2004 and 2013, increasing from 1,405 to 2,776 cases"
Here is the demographic info on the offenders: "Most suspects arrested for CSEC crimes were male (97 percent), were U.S. citizens (97 percent), were white (82 percent), had no prior felony convictions (79 percent) and were not married (70 percent). CSEC suspects had a median age of 39 years, and more than half (56 percent) had no more than a high school education."
If 97 percent of the offenders where male and 82 percent where white, then the probability of a suspect being involved commercial sexual exploitation of children of being a white male is about 70 percent.
So I'm sure you wouldn't mind if the police just randomly came to the home of white men, confiscated their electronic devices and conducted forensic searches, and searched their homes for evidences of commercial sexual exploitation of children.
Remember : When asked why he robbed banks,Willie Sutton famously daid "Because that's where the money is."
As a white person I would never tell a black or brown person what to say or think...I will never walk in their shoes...ever.
But I can give my "outsider" view. And that is on Michael Bloomberg's worst day he is still a far better choice than the vile bigot in the White House.
7
I always appreciate Jamelle Bouie's thoughtful analysis on race. I have been a fan for years. I became a Slate Plus subscriber so I could listen to all of his podcasts about race, slavery and Reconstruction before he joined the NYT. He has taught me a lot about race and myself. Mr. Bouie--I am a huge fan of yours! But I disagree with what you are saying about Bloomberg. I am a public defender. I have been dealing with race based stops my entire career (30+ years). America got it wrong. We continue to get it wrong. James Forman, Jr. talks about it in his book Locking Up Our Own. I would rather have someone like Bloomberg who is late to this discussion than Trump who still thinks the Central Park Five are guilty.
4
Mega-billionaire Michael Bloomberg will not receive African-American or Latin-American votes on any significant scale in a general election. He will also not receive many (if any) progressive votes.
In other words, he will lose not only the electoral college (like Hillary did), but also the popular vote.
Americans who want a right-wing billionaire as president already have their candidate.
6
@Observer Oh really? He probably has my progressive vote. And I'm definitely not alone.
1
Once again: If Bloomberg is the nominee, the only alternative to him is four more years of Trump. Which does Mr. Bouie find preferable.
Well?
8
@Michael Gallagher
If that is the choice, then Trump is going to win. Hilary Clinton lost with 60% black voter turnout and over 90% of the black vote. Whatever black voter turnout is Bloomberg will never get 90% of the black vote.
Realize this, black people have survived racist white people in America for 400 years. Trading one racist for another is not a winning proposition. Black Americans will survive Trump.
I read the 2013 report by the Public Advocate. All very impressive but it missed the most important point. There was no data to relate stops in precincts to crime in precincts. Certain precincts had much higher stop rates, those precincts also had higher minority populations. What the report leaves out is where was violent crime occurring.
Violent crime is very localized in NYC.
3
Criticism of moderate/centrist democrats and their GOPLite policies is not a purity test rather it is a fair analysis of the failed and out of touch policies of the Democratic Party establishment that have neglected the base and if not fully considered will result in almost certain defeat to Trump.
2
... and here they go again... for Democrats no candidate will ever be pure enough. He or she has to walk on water and must never have said or done anything that doesn’t hurt anybodys tender sensibilities.
Across the pond we had to learn, that the US has become an unreliable and erratic partner to deal with. I hope, the countries in Europe will get their act together - there is so much to be taken care of (defense, laws, protection of the environment) and there is now point in trying to work with the US anymore.
The Democrats will make sure, tRump will get a second term.
6
The problems of racial and religious discrimination, and of violence, especially in urban areas, have festered in America for decades, and solutions to those problems have eluded every current and former politician. To suggest that Bloomberg is the liberal equivalent of Trump, or possibly worse, and as such is unworthy of becoming president, is to make an unjustified moral and political judgment. The other Democratic candidates have hardly mentioned their history of dealing with these problems or their plans to solve them, leaving Bloomberg as the only candidate with a track record of trying to contain these intractable problems. At the debate tomorrow, after Bloomberg has been confronted with his failings as mayor, I hope the questioners, in fairness, will confront all the other candidates about what they have already done to curtail the problems mentioned above and what they plan to do about them as president. Criticism of candidates is expected, but it should be spread equitable for all of them.
Mr. Bouie,
Enough already. Bloomberg advanced a policy that worked. However, stop and frisk eventually crossed constitutionally limited lines, and needed to be stopped and it was. Go ask the members of the black and Hispanic communities where crime rates in their communities plummeted as a result of stop and frisk if they viewed the tactic as racist or Bloomberg as a racist. FYI - his approval rating among NYC black population is about 59%. How is that possible?
Again, when stop and frisk veered into racial profiling (because it didn't start that way), it became a mistake and had to stop.
But it was not a policy that was created or implemented based on racism, and suggesting Bloomberg is the equivalent of Trump, even on a conceptual level, is wrong.
Racism is a terrible thing. It is a criticism that should be leveled at someone with great restraint because in doing so unfairly, it simply pits people against one another. The best way to reduce and fight racism is to bring people together.
2
Whether Mr. Bouie likes to admit it or not, the inconvenient truth is stop and frisk likely helped to lesson violent crimes and murders in the very communities he portends to be defending. The law might not at all have been pretty, but bigotry did not create it - senseless, repeated drive-by shootings of innocents did. It’s a travesty that we live in a world where such intrusive laws can be argued to be the lesser of two evils. But that’s the world, sadly, that we seem to have created for ourselves. If it happens that certain communities are where high numbers of violent, gun-related crimes are concentrated, should it really surprise that S & F would be applied more often there? Laws end up being more visible where they’re most needed, and where they’d do the most good for the public. To me it’s not all that different from financial regulations being applied more vigorously and visibly on Wall St., where concentrations of financial infractions are known to occur, rather than on more outlying or suburban areas around the country.
1
If Bloomberg really cared, he'd give his billions on getting the Senate back, not messing up Biden's chances of beating Trump and bringing back decency to the office.
But I don't think Bloomberg truly cares about anything more than buying power and perpetuating the Oligarchy that allows people like him to buy their way into office, minorities and democracy be damned!
2
Naomi Klein wrote a book called The Shock Doctrine about how the ultra-rich systematically exploit states of emergencies to destroy democracy and further enrich themselves.
Naomi Klein just tweeted that Trump is the state of emergency and Bloomberg is the Shock Doctrine. She requested that we, the American people, not fall for it. I'm not going to. I'm voting Bernie.
6
@Innisfree
Bernie Sisters and Bros need to commit to defeating Trump not electing a man thrown out of a commune for talking too much and three years before the Soviet Union collapsed declared it was the future.
If they aren't one and the same will you actually vote on Nov. 3rd?
2
of course we, as a people, don't like what Mayor Bloomberg did with Stop and Frisk. It was horrific and, thank God, it's OVER.
Key word there...OVER. It appears he is aware of the wrongness of the policy. Whether it was the day before he entered the campaign or not, he has apologized, unlike Agent Orange, who still supports that policy. While I realize the damage done to those stopped and frisked, to harp on it when it's over and when this man could end our national nightmare seems to be counterproductive. If he can beat Trump, I'll vote for him.
2
I'm not for Bloomberg, period. I don't want a billionaire to buy the Presidency. Still, since he is now beginning to make policy recommendations, he can address the redlining and stop and frisk policies he has repeatedly endorsed. Strong candidates need to be able to do more than apologize. They need to be part of the solution.
As I understand it, the policing policy was fundamentally geographical: certain blocks--not even neighborhoods--were statistical outliers for crime. That suggests an increased police presence, but a dedicated and discipline one trained not to stop innocent people. Color and race were not the criteria. But they can become one in a thoughtless and even mildly racist society. And ours is much more racist.
So we need not only a policing policy but a real estate and geographical policy committed to the improvement of the lives of struggling people, even in high crime areas. That would be an even greater battle with the entrenched white voters who want their neighborhoods pure.
Fighting that battle might say something about Bloomberg's change of heart. But who is willing to fight that battle while running for political office? That's a comment about the rest of the campaign field.
2
@Stephen
Mr Bloomberg should publicly state the facts of stop and brisk. The request to make neighborhoods gun safe came from the people living in the neighborhoods. Mr Bloomberg made the only tough decision that would guarantee a reduction of gun violence. Frisk, check for guns, regardless of whose feelings got hurt. Reeducation, pumping billions into neighborhoods would not have gotten the guns off the streets, instead would have attracted more guns to the loot fest, because there would have been more money and drugs on the streets.
3
This is a different time. The sins of his past are bad. However, he can redeem himself by clearly and strongly explaining his current viewpoint and his policies should he win. He also needs to make his apologies. But, he is an important candidate and if he is the one who can beat trump, then all should unify behind him. Picking a running mate like Stacy Abrahams would be great.
1
I'm not sure I see much difference between Trump and Bloomberg other than that Bloomberg is literally trying to buy the election and is at least as autocratic as Trump, if not more so. Biden doesn't have a shot at this point and I could be happy with either Amy or Mayor Pete. I don't think I could ever vote for Bloomberg. He scares me more than Trump does which says a lot.
5
Here is one difference. Bloomberg supported a law (stop and frisk) that many of us found to be awful. Trump considers himself completely and utterly above all laws.
It's this type of inane, absurd and ever-stringent "Purity Tests" that will give us 4 more years of Trump.
20
Mr. Bouie is quite right. It's important to add to his critique Paul Krugman's point that Michael Bloomberg buys into the right-wing story of how the financial disaster of 2008 came about (a narrative that depends on racism as well as a complete failure to accept what actually happened). Even more important, we need to keep in mind another similarity between Mr. Bloomberg and Donald Trump: well-documented sexism of a sort that shows not merely prejudice, but an outright contempt for women. Keeping women "in their place" is a major part of the MAGA program (there's not room to go into why so many white women support Donald Trump despite the prejudice that he makes no effort to hide, but a brief answer seems to be that racial fear "Trumps" other concerns). Being at least somewhat sane on issues like climate change qualifies Mr. Bloomberg as "liberal" only if we use that word to mean someone who imagines that they're progressive but who's clueless about their illiberal prejudices.
2
I’m a fan of Mr. Bouie’s column and usually find myself in full agreement, but he loses me almost immediately here with the assertion that the lens through which we must understand Trump is his racist efforts to marginalize people of color. To be sure, Trump’s overt racism is part of why we must limit him to one term, but it’s only a part. Mr. Bouie’s attempts to make it the whole is as wrongheaded as when environmentalists ignore racism in candidates committed to fighting climate change. There is a reason Bloomberg is surging in the polls and it’s not just the easy explanation that he’s spending millions on PR. Clearly, Democrats are uneasy and increasingly concerned that not one of their candidates - not Bernie, not Mayor Pete, not Klobuchar - can defeat Trump. And I suspect they’re right.
4
Let’s not sell our souls or kid ourselves that a Billionaire is the only one that can beat a billionaire. Yes we need to get rid of Trump but not at the expense of reinforcing the ongoing plutocracy that has washed away our middle class and its values. I will vote blue regardless of who gets the nomination but not so sure much of the energized base will show up especially the minorities that have been neglected by the centrist democratic policies. Look at minority turnout in Michigan in 2016 if you have any doubts.
5
Malcolm Gladwell’s Talking to Strangers covers this well. Stop and frisk citywide is a terrible idea but in high crime areas it is one of the few solutions to bring down crime. Policing by circling the block alone does not solve high crime. Stop and frisk still exists nationwide in the form of traffic stops, which can be done for just about any reason, such as failing to signal hundreds of feet before a turn. Racial profiling is employed by individual officers given these tools but not all officers. Bloomberg gave officers the tool not the racism. As a leader Bloomberg probably reviewed the same studies that other police forces misinterpreted, as discussed in Gladwell’s book, and was trying an option for a problem that was not going away on its own. I don’t think it’s wise to judge Bloomberg’s character on this topic without perspective. Attributing the racism of individual officers to Bloomberg because he gave them a tool and they misused it is unwise. Use of stop and frisk citywide was also unwise and should have never been employed. For the city blocks that plague residents, fearful to leave their homes, stop and frisk may not be a terrible idea, as I gathered from the detailed discussion in the book. Do you have a better one?
4
Is this who people are willing to support because they’re afraid of free healthcare and fair taxation of the rich under a president Sanders?
Sounds like the billionaire kool-aid is working on both sides now.
12
There’s nothing that Sanders promises that can be achieved in this world or the next.
1
We’re at peak neoliberal rot.
1
When we assess candidates, I think we’re using the wrong criteria.
The real questions and criteria are: what would a [insert candidate name] presidency actually look like? What kinds of policies would they back? What kinds of federal judges would they appoint to the federal judiciary? What would they do about climate change? Health care? Gun violence? Will they interfere with our justice system? Will they continue to cut taxes for the rich/corporations? Will they continue to dismantle our environmental protections?
And then, compare that list to that of the current administration’s.
Forget about ideology, the noise (or lack thereof) surrounding a candidate, or anything else. Just consider what would ACTUALLY happen should person X become president.
If you do this with Bloomberg, he has Trump beat in spades.
It’s not complicated, and reality doesn’t care about your opinion.
6
@Alex The question right now isn’t whether he’s better than Trump, it’s whether he’s better than the other Democratic candidates. That’s a clear no from me.
6
@Chris I agree that he's not better than the other democratic candidates (I'm a Bernie supporter myself), but the question indeed is will the democrats rally around him in the general should he become the nominee? Plenty of people think he's just another dangerous plutocrat, a la Trump.
2
@Alex
Why don't you answer those questions for Bloomberg?
If you go by his mayoral record, Trump has him beat in spades simply because he's too incompetent to enact all of his vision.
Do you think Bloomberg is going to appoint judges that curtail Citizens United or the equal treatment of women in the workplace?
Do you think he is going to appoint his cabinet from qualified people? Is that what he did with the education secretary in NYC, and any number of other positions?
2
J Bouie is wrong, his comments are one sided and biased. Bloomberg has taken accountability for a policy that local black communities sought, increased protection in their neighborhoods. Did it go too far? Yes..and when was the last time you heard a politician admit responsibility for something?
Mike can beat Trump, Mike can help the environment and will provide pathways to citizenship for DREAMERS.
He can work with Republicans and bring the US back into a leadership position dealing with national security, energy and education.
7
@AVL
"Bloomberg has taken accountability ...."
His phony apology just before announcing his candidacy is one thing.
More importantly, has he renounced his blatant support for human rights abuse and violations of international law in Palestine?
Nah, he’s right and you’re willfully ignoring the facts. Bloomberg only ended stop and frisk after the courts forced his hand. And he only apologized when he decided to run for president. Anyone judging his actions objectively will come to the same conclusion: he’ll say anything and buy off anyone to become President.
1
He will be asked - he will explain - and he will change.
2
@Leonard Wood
He shouldn't need to be asked. He shouldn't need to explain. He will NOT change.
As someone who grew up attending AL-ANON a lot of these excuses for Bloomberg’s abusive behavior are disturbingly familiar.
1
Mr. Bouie conveniently focuses on the RATE of finding guns or contraband rather than the absolute number of instances. In terms of numbers, 4,639 Black New Yorkers had contraband, 2,877 Latinos did, and 1,172 Whites did. S&F was focused on high crime neighborhoods, which are disproportionately Black and Latino. That’s the reason why the number of stops are skewed towards those populations.
One more point: the Di Blasio report uses disparate impact as the basis for its conclusion that S&F was flawed. Disparate impact is a bad standard to apply when the underlying population has characteristics that aren’t uniformly distributed. The simplest way to understand that is by stripping out the race component from the S&F data and focusing only on gender. The vast majority of all crimes, but particularly of violent crimes, are perpetrated by men.
7
There is one very glaring omission in this piece by Mr. Bouie - he offers zero alternatives as to who can actually beat Trump - the most important thing facing America today. From what I've seen in the primaries so far, all of the other candidates would be chewed up and spit out by Trump and his henchmen. It will be a nasty brawl - we know that. Bloomberg has already landed strong punches on Trump, and he is quickly building support.
General Grant was a flawed person, but he saved the union, and helped end slavery. When people complained to Lincoln about Grant drinking in the field, Lincoln supposedly asked exactly what Grant was drinking, and ordered a barrel of it sent to every general in the Union army.
This is not a time purity tests.
10
All true, but ultimately the choice is between Trump and someone else, and my choice will be for the someone else. I hope it's Warren, but if it's someone else, that will be the one. That's what the French did, from moderate right to Communist, when they voted overwhelmingly for Macron (pretty autocratic himself) over fascist Marine LePen, and that's what Americans need to do.
3
"Although he never articulated it in these terms, Bloomberg’s actions as mayor reveal that he was someone who also saw black and brown people as threats to the security and prosperity ..."
Stop and frisk was a serious mistake. All the same, at that time it reflected the priorities of the entire city. Communities throughout the city and their leaders, including communities of color, supported this and other such policies which we now know were mistakes. I know. I lived in New York before he became mayor. The New York of today is nothing like the New York of that era. Today it is as safe as Minneapolis. At that time, for example, folks were routinely mugged in Midtown during the middle of the day. Comparing Bloomberg to Trump is like comparing the frontrunner Sanders to Stalin. The claim that Bloomberg will continue to perpetrate the racism and bigotry of the Trump presidency is silly. Yep, we must debate his entire record including this policy, but this mistake is certainly not worse than the mistakes the other candidates have made. For instance, how many times did Senator Sanders vote against gun control? And how many gun fatalities in communities around the country did those votes contribute to? That was also a grave mistake, but it is not a mistake Sanders would make now.
6
Bloomberg’s support for stop and frisk, redlining, and surveillance and infiltration of the Muslim community show his belief that systemic racism is practical. To become a multi-billionaire, he routinely dealt with uncomfortable truths, making him refreshingly blunt for a politician. Whether he is personally racist is irrelevant. As President he will uphold institutional racism in criminal justice, housing, education, and hiring because It’s always worked well for business.
3
If the NYT keeps rehashing the history of every potential opponent to Trump, tearing into every candidate on a daily basis, and thereby feeding the Trump reelection campaign great material for attack ads, then the Dems will most certainly lose in November. You should help create unity at this point and just let the people decide who they want in the normal primary process. And, let's please make a distinction between Trump, the trust-funded NYC billionaire and Bloomberg, the self-made NYC billionaire if you must continue to focus ad nauseum on their bank accounts.
7
While the data proved this policy to be less effective than expected, it's important to remember that it was implemented to address the rising crime and unnecessary deaths in minority communities.
What is the purpose of piling on this man who has spent much of his own personal wealth and time trying to improve things for working class Americans.
I think it fair to assume that Bloomberg's contributions far outweigh this one regrettable policy. That's why he was mayor of this city for three terms.
Yes, stop and frisk was an unsuccessful policy but why spend the time trying to tar and feather Michael Bloomberg when Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani and most of the Republican party still embrace stop and frisk.
4
It's discouraging and draining to see so many try to justify Bloomberg's choices. Stop and frisk is disqualifying for many people. His comment that class sizes should be doubled is disqualifying. His comments that hospitals should reject a 65 year-old with cancer because they're too old and cancer has no cure are disqualifying.
Turnout is the key to victory for Democrats. I wouldn't trust that Bloomberg plus 'pragmatism' will drive turnout.
4
Then we’re doomed.
I ain’t votin for sanders who I consider is a fraud
1
Bloomberg has apologized for his actions. Trump never apologizes for anything and even if there’s a hint of remorse we know he’s lying.
Nobody is perfect - Biden has his share of skeletons in the closet - and it’s quite a stretch to compare Bloomberg to Trump especially with all of the good he has done.
6
Can the NYT please consider running a single comprehensive article outlining every decision that was wrong-in-hindsight, imperfect or otherwise might not pass muster with the purity/PC police for EVERY democratic candidate and just get it all out of the way so we can move forward. I understand that innocent victims of "stop and Frisk" are probably never going to be converts---and I get that. He made a decision at the time in order to reduce crime and should have also considered the potential negative impact on innocent people in high-crime communities. Things should have been handled differently, and I do believe he realizes it. That being said, can we please stop focusing on trashing every candidate and actually learn what they think about critical issues and try to coalesce around someone who can get Trump out of the White House? James Carville is actually right you know.
5
Well, there are vitally important issues at stake, most of all action on climate change. Debates about stop-and-frisk are trivial in comparison. And I lived in an AA neighborhood in Brooklyn in the late 80s, and based on that experience, I would assert without question that black males age 16-30 are in fact disproportionately likely, by far, to be violent criminals. At some point law-abiding tax-paying citizens also have some basic rights to security and safey.
5
Based on recent history we can and we have done a lot worse than Bloomberg.
He correctly identified the problem where violence in the minority community was concerned. He came up with the wrong answer to it, his diagnosis, however was correct.
4
Another MAJOR difference between Trump and Bloomberg: Trump spent his entire life focused on only one thing: making himself rich, powerful and famous. It should come as no surprise that he acts in the same manner as president.
On the other hand, Bloomberg has given away tons of his own money for causes he believes in: combating global warming, advancing gun control, and pushing for voter rights. Even Bloomberg's critics have never suggested that he became mayor of NYC to enrich himself.
Bloomberg has a strong history of working for the benefit of others. Trump has an equally strong history of working solely for his own benefit.
4
Over the past 3 years I've often wondered if Democrats would support a racist, anti-democratic candidate if they thought he would help them "win" (much as Republicans have supported a racist, anti-democratic president who helps pursue their goals). Unfortunately, we're seeing that for many Democrats, like Republicans, they will cast aside many of their most basic values in order to pursue what they perceive as electoral victory. It is incredibly depressing to think there are Democrats who will support this racist, who is doing everything in his power to buy the election and undermine democracy, particularly when there are so many alternatives. People, look in the mirror: Do you really want to live in a country run by oligarchs?
3
@Andy Dwyer the democratic party has swung so far left and out-of-touch that bloomberg is our only hope this late in the game.
Bernie will only create closet trump voters. Biden has no shot. Warren has no shot. Buttigieg cannot pull the bible belt. Trump may have won already.
Also, remember that Pelosi is one of those oligarchs. She has done more than her part to make being a Democrat a bit of an embarrassment.
I look for honesty and integrity in politicians, those who might be least attracted to corruption.
Bloomberg is strong on those qualities, willing to admit, albeit slowly, that the 'broken windows' premise possesses implicit racial bias.
His record is not perfect, but he is willing to admit mistakes. In a field, politics, that is inferently corrupting, he does seem less susceptible than many.
He adds to this race. His candidacy should not be discounted because, as a human being, he is not perfect.
2
Purity tests and division on the left will hand another four years to Trump, at which point we’ll never have anything resembling a fair election again.
Stop and frisk was wrong and a failure, and that’s why it was thrown out by the courts. But a diverse Democratic administration and Congress in 2020 won’t be bringing in that sort of approach. Meanwhile, on some of the most important problems facing us, especially climate change and guns, Bloomberg’s policy positions are the best in the race.
The fact that Mr. Bloomberg appears to have what it takes to combat Trump’s money, disinformation and racism machine in a general election matters. Does Mr. Bouie think minorities will be better off under this openly white supremacist Trump administration? Vote blue, no matter who.
2
Liken Bloomberg to Trump on racism? That's a real stretch. There's no comparison, Mr. Bouie. Can you imagine Bloomberg fanning the waves of racism on the far right the way Trump has? Or say that there were "good people on both sides" at Charlottesville? I'm disappointed because I expect more dispassionate analysis from you. Make the case for similarities, yes. But be reasonable when you draw conclusions.
2
In the more than three years since Donald Trump was installed in office, Democratic party loyalists have been howling about the "threat to democracy" posed by Russian oligarchs "meddling" in US elections. Now that one of the planet's wealthiest oligarchs, Michael Bloomberg, is blatantly trying to BUY the presidency, the acquiescence from so-called "Democrats" is embarrassing. "Stop-and-frisk" was not only racist and unconstitutional, but it was also indicative of the aristocratic disdain Bloomberg and his billionaire ilk have the rights and basic humanity of working class and poor people. His ascension would suggest that the American "experiment" in democratic rule is over, and that a New Feudalism is on the rise.
2
You’re going to get a lot of white liberals/Democrats pontificating to black/brown people why they should forgive and forget because “perfect is the enemy of the good” and “Bloomberg is the only that can beat Trump,” etc. Saw it in one of your colleagues Op-Ed’s. Disappointed but not surprised.
It’s fascinating to watch this occur as if black/brown people ought to simply vote for someone who has a reprehensible record in their communities. A record at least on a state level that mirrors the current president’s national record in some respects and in rhetoric. Very convenient for Bloomberg to be apologist now.
I suspect what many white Democrats want in their return to “normalcy” is a return to normalcy for THEM. Not for everyone. Because of course, this country has only ever been “normal” for some, and in New York, life was not normal for brown and black people. I doubt it will be under his precedency.
I also agree that were two billionaire men to be the candidates in this election, it really reveals the country’s public office as being a space where money in politics takes its final form. A confession of truth perhaps, but a precedent that will continue to repeat itself. The results will be detrimental.
3
"However, there’s no indication that he has really changed; no evidence that he’s dropped the commitment to racial control." What would you accept as a change in Bloomberg? He has apologized a number of times. He believed the statistics that indicated most crime was occurring in black/brown neighborhoods. Extreme poverty leads to crime, no matter what color you are. e.g. Appalachia. People do change, sometimes for the better. His philanthropy has helped all colors of people, not just white. Let's give him a chance to prove he's a better man than he was.
1
If we defend Bloomberg’s racist remarks and misogynistic remarks (see Sunday’s Washington Post article for example), then we lose all credibility when we criticize Trump’s racism and sexism.
I’ve read lots of comments that we can’t afford purity tests. Not wanting the Democratic nominee to be a racist or a misogynist seems like a pretty reasonable demand to me and not a purity test.
I will not vote for Bloomberg. I will vote Green Party if he is the nominee. Call me whatever names you want, but there are worse things than four more years of Trump. Mr. Bouie has clearly articulated a concern that I have been trying to figure out how to express:
“Given his record, he’s someone who might try to consolidate Trumpism — moderating its hostilities into less disruptive form — rather than reject it wholesale.”
4
He doesn’t share the president’s criminality,corruption and complete contempt for constitutional government. So says Mr. Bouie. It seems to me these are three very good reasons to support Bloomberg.No one said Bloomberg is perfect.But he has apologized for past mistakes. And he can defeat the greatest threat to American democracy. King Trump.
2
@Milton Lewis, I concur completely with your contempt for the current kakistocracy, and enjoy your alliteration. Personally, I will vote blue no matter who.
1
@Bill Thanx. But credit the alliteration to Mr. Bouie.
In the more than three years since Donald Trump was installed in office, Democratic party loyalists have been howling about the "threat to democracy" posed by Russian oligarchs "meddling" in US elections. Now that one of the planet's wealthiest oligarchs, Michael Bloomberg, is blatantly trying to BUY the presidency, the acquiescence from so-called "Democrats" is embarrassing. "Stop-and-frisk" was not only racist and unconstitutional, but it was also indicative of the aristocratic disdain Bloomberg and his billionaire ilk have the rights and basic humanity of working class and poor people. His ascension would suggest that the American "experiment" in democratic rule is over, and that a New Feudalism is on the rise.
1
Well, we keep going over this: I think it’s the fourth column in the Times this week that trots out the numbers and turns them into a big hammer. All the writers gets out the same brush and paint the same color on the former mayor’s skin. We get it. Not too mention we litigated all these issues already in the mayoral election.
Jamaal Williams was even on TV laying the crisis of education and the crisis of housing at Bloomberg’s door, which I found interesting since Williams himself has been serving for years and Bloomberg hasn’t been mayor for years.
I’d certainly call stop and frisk a failure, racial and unnecessary, Bloomberg himself has called it that, but in this election, THIS election, not even an election but more of a national triage, what’s required is a grand coalition, a full-spectrum assault from Sanders to Bloomberg, not a lets air out every candidate’s sins and beat our chests in woe. Voters are sick of it.
We haven’t had much substance these last months. Warren has detailed her policies but Biden is vague, Sanders is vague, Buttigieg is vague, Klobucher is vague, and Bloomberg hasn’t even been tested on the debate stage yet.
So yes, stop and frisk, we got it, and Muslims in post 9/11 NYC. Sure. If you want to be nasty and forget Tuesday morning September 11th and what it felt like so you can score another point, Mr Opinion. But please, no more lectures. We’ve heard it all. And we’ll cast our vote.
1
I do not understand the logic of the author's statement about the efficacy of stop and frisk. He states it was inefficient for a simple reason, that the vast majority of young men of color weren't involved in crime at all. I certainly would agree with that. But wouldn't it also be true of Caucasian young men as well?
If a group, however delineated, is disproportionately responsible for a thing, random stops would find a disproportionate representation among that group. Stops that over-represented that group would net more of those responsible for that thing. Has someone seriously said this is or was not the case?
The point of stop and frisk was that it wasn't based on suspicious behavior; presumably, police actions based on suspicious behavior did not change.
The fact is that using a selection criterion of skin color was not and is not right, and that should be argument against it. If in fact the numbers show that it was not efficacious, that is another argument, and we should make it. But making claims about those numbers without showing them is foolish.
1
The author of this piece should have acknowledged that stop and frisk should not have been used on anyone instead of indicating that it should have been used on white people who are no more likely to have been illegally in possession of illegal guns and drugs. Also, the author could have pointed out that New York’s draconian gun laws lead to many unnecessary arrests.
How long are we supposed to ignore the exponentially higher rates of violent crime in minority-majority neighborhoods lest we be labeled racists?
This is a matter of considerable importance to me as I grew up in the Baltimore area in the 1980s and 90s and now live in a minority-majority neighborhood in New York where someone was shot in the head at point blank range and killed, instantly, two weeks after I moved in, right around the corner from my home.
What Mayor Bloomberg did with Stop & Frisk was a violation of the civil rights of thousands. But it was not born out of racism. It was an attempt to save lives in minority neighborhoods around New York City...and crime did fall throughout his tenure at City Hall to historically low levels. I know...I saw it happen on my doorstep.
Whether this trade off was worth it is a matter of debate. But if you asked me if I'd rather be stopped and frisked like I am before I get on a plane or enter a nightclub or courthouse or government building or get by brains blows out like the guy around the corner from my apartment, I'd gladly choose the former.
4
Bloomberg's biggest mistake so far in his campaign is to have utterly rejected stop-and-frisk. He should have apologized for those instances where it was abused but insisted that, like any other policing method, it needs to be done within reasonable bounds. And that it should properly be called stop-question-and -if there is a reasonable suspicion-frisk.
BTW, Mr. Boie, what I am saying is agreed to by the majority of Democrats. They just won't dare say it to your face.
2
I take no issue with any of Mr. Bouie's statements. It is solid reporting. I also agree that Bloomberg's policies were shockingly wrong.
Logically, it does not follow that under Bloomberg the federal government would be run as it has been under Trump. I think that a Democratic takeover of the government would restore the rule of law and our system of checks and balance. I don't see any similarity between Bloomberg and Trump in terms of traits that predict how civil rights would be protected. We have seen just how fragile our Republic is. The reality remains that it is imperative that Trump not be re-elected. Then the long arduous process of repairing the damage can start. If it must be; Bloomberg would be acceptable because he would not attempt to monkey-wrench the United States Constitution.
2
Thanks for your analysis. I wouldn't trust him on the racial issue or on any other. All of New York City did poorly. Manhattan became a playground for the rich. "Affordable" housing a joke. He's like Trump also in that he distracts people. He focused on quality of life issues like soda (which I am sure was driven by race and class prejudices) while making NYC safe for himself and real estate developers. He bribes people legally like not for profits to support him. It will be a bad day for the country if he is chosen.
1
@KM I told the leader of the food pantry where I volunteer that I would not give out soda on my shifts because it's poison I don't want children or undernourished, toothless diabetics drinking. Just because the food bank gives it free doesn't mean we had to accept it for the people we want to nourish. That was Bloomberg being a nanny, not a racist. To say his soda policy is racist is just ridiculous.
1
Mine may, admittedly, be too strong an impression from your column, but my conclusion is that you think Bloomberg sort of "racist lite" as compared with Trump's overt racism. If accurate, I do not share your view on Bloomberg, and though it is admittedly easier for me as a white man, I accept his apology. That said, I fully respect your opinion.
Bloomberg is in my opinion the best qualified and intelligent candidate period. The man made a 60 Billion dollar fortune by gathering and analyzing data. It seems to me prettty logical that he instituted the policy because the data suggested this will help stop crime and take guns and criminals off the street. You think a person of color who had been stopped and frisked left his piece at home. Maybe we will never know that but I think it is a very effective deterent that if you get caught and face 5 years of hard time for gun possesion just maybe you don't take a gun out into the streets.
3
"they should fear for the implications of giving four years, period, to Bloomberg".
Really? Compared with Trump and his GOP henchmen in the Senate, you should "fear" someone with otherwise enlightened policies on gun control, health care, education, etc., who can actually compete financially with those adversaries who would destroy America piece by piece?
Purity will be the death of progressive America, if you cannot tell who your friends are, or at least cannot let them help you. Bloomberg will not win the nomination, but please welcome him to the coming battles. You need his policies - which for the most part are YOUR policies - and yes, his resources. Otherwise, at a minimum you lose the Senate - again - and nothing happens.
Wake up.
4
You know what this reminds me of? "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" by Ursula K. Leguin. The underlying premise of that story is a society kept happy and prosperous and peaceful, as long as there is also a child there who is locked away and brutally tortured and starved. Everyone's happiness depends on the sacrifice of this one innocent child.
Under Trump, we ALL share in the misery.
Under Bloomberg, only black and brown people are left to feel the misery.
Isn't that BETTER, some of you howl?? The majority of people will be better off! The Earth will be better off!
Of course it is. For YOU.
Some of us, though, don't think that is an acceptable deal.
I choose to walk away from the Omelas.
4
Ifs:
If he ran as a Republican, he might have stopped Trump.
If ultimately, the evil that spawns men like Trump is cutthroat capitalism and its love of the economic pyramid where a few oligarchs at the top lord it over the rest of us, then Bloomberg cannot be anything but a tool of income inequality.
If I were a black man, I would be super attuned to racism and racial dogwhistles and would never in a million years vote for him. Stop and frisk destroyed many lives.
If making money were a major indicator of political talent and overweening love of the poor and the powerless, the Senate would both be chock full of multimillionaires and also deserving of the admiration of all.
If Bloomberg had anything that resembled the sense of the ordinary person on the street, he wouldn't have endorsed George W. Bush for President, and said of the Iraq war..."Don't forget that the war started not very many blocks from here".
Actually, the George W. Bush thing says it all for me.
Hugh
We need to see Bloomberg on the debate stage instead of TV commercials and memes on social media. I'm disappointed in people for thinking Bloomberg is the best we have to defeat Trump without really having heard from him on the debate stage. Yet, we all have to face the reality of our own choice for candidate may not be on the ballot come November, I'm disappointed again that I might have to choose between two candidates with a history of racist policies and sexist attitudes... but I can't not vote.
As a Black Man, I am sensitive to Mr. Bouie's fears. I admit that as I become older, I tend to be more conservative, compared to my liberal, care-free days. I do admit, too, a classical liberalism bent that is skeptical of the state's role in individual's life.
Still, I remember the days, when, a recent immigrant to NY, living in East New York, and attending Thomas Jefferson High School, young Black and Latino males engaging in mayhem, spilling blood and spreading fear in the neighborhood. One would not have needed to be racist, or imbued with an authoritarian, statist bent to have felt the yearning for order, for sparing the lives of young people, mostly Black and Hispanic - Puerto Rican, to be more specific, males. In fact, other than in their squad cars, police officers were not that visible, when their presence might have curbed the drug dealing and the senseless killings.
That said, Mr. Bloomberg needs to contextualize his law and order policies . Also, he needs to outline his vision of racial justice, of equal opportunity. For example, the U.S. government is, particularly in foreign relations, intelligence, rule of law, etc., a fairly exclusive club, with a sprinkling of nonwhite. Under Trump, unqualified inexperienced white youngsters proliferate - Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump; shockingly Ms. Hope and another fellow whose name escapes my memory, are shockingly in their second go around. When will nonwhite Americans have equal access? These issues are salient!
404
@PAL ESQ USMC This is a fantastic response: Well-written and cogent, and delivers what many people need to hear. I am not African American, but I do think Bloomberg's attitude is reminiscent of the patronizing, rich (and yes, often white), set of the party. I am in international development and see that the US desperately needs grassroots development that actually listens to the people. Bernie's the only one to do that (maybe Warren, but she's a long shot, by now). But our lack of philosophical roots in social democracy will not allow for true equality.
18
@PAL ESQ USMC
Well written and makes a great point. Frankly, if stop and frisk had been uniformly applied (i.e., they stopped a random set of young males - regardless of ethnicity) the policy would likely remain in place with great support. It would have been less efficient (because the NYC PD inclination to stop certain racial profiles over others is borne not out of racism but of efficacy - the officers in the NYPD are a substantial mix of various ethnic groups and genders and they targeted those groups where the success rate of finding drugs and guns was higher), but constitutional. Once people understand how stop and frisk went off course, with racial profiling, they will realize Bloomberg wasn't racist or biased at all . It may have been unconstitutional, but it doesn't equate to racism or bias.
14
@PAL ESQ USMC
The US government has not had native language speakers in its ranks until recently. The whole foreign intel/policy show has in the past been advised by amateurs who did not understand the country of their assignment. That is heavy duty racism. Adding people of color, just to practice equal opportunity is not effective either. This country simply needs to ignore skin color, sexual preferences (like they do not have place in the working world), and all the other baloney that occupies American minds.
10
The Trump Liberal or the Sanders Conservative?
Bloomberg is not the future for Democrats
2
Either asking or telling his subordinate to "kill" her fetus certainly doesn't help either. Not only is it an outrageous comment, but it strongly implies that if the woman were to have her baby and take off time from work, her status in the company would be diminished.
I wonder if she was she one of the 40+ women who settled with Bloomberg and his company for sexual harassment? And there were probably a lot more that did not file lawsuits.
4
@Erik
I wonder if the story is true.
1
It’s fun watching Democrats eat themselves alive. Bloomberg might be the best chance you have at beating Trump because Sanders certainly will not, but all you woke progressives just cant fathom voting for a rich, white old guy. So much so you are sacrificing your chance to beat Trump. Turns out the average American prefers a rich, white old guy compared to your preferred candidates like Warren.
4
I am not so sure, Americans prefer the rich guy. We can check it this election.
1
My most important question about Bloomberg is: Did he use his office as mayor to enrich himself or his cronies to any degree whatsoever?
"Yes, Bloomberg might be the one to beat Trump at the ballot box. But he’s also the one who might put a Trumpist stamp on American liberalism."
Good point.
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 GOP ideology these days the art of his deals, which essentially are unpredictable but okay with Republicans, however haphazardly they come out.
A Republican until seeing this opportunity for himself to save the nation, Bloomberg has the Democratic Party about halfway down his gorge already. However, the nation has little patience these days, even writing off Biden after two all-white states voted for candidates who fail to excite minority voters who know Biden well.
The kicker, IMHO, is the fact 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 buys a big organization filled with bright people and deep pockets to buy voter data, target ads, and get the vote out.
If it is Bloomberg, he must 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.)
Don't tell us, Mike. Show us!
@Dennis
A Trumpist stamp would be if the Democrats take someone of color and place him/her in a position of trust and importance. That is what dictators do, it's either family, or race, or some factor other then merit and suitability for the job.
The Democrats have many inverse racists, as the Republicans have overt racists. The country's ideal however is abolishment of racism, skin color does not matter, what you do is the measuring stick. And, no, banning measuring sticks is not the trick either.
It's not about being anti-Trump.
It's about beating Trump.
Ask this ... is Bloomberg a man of better character, vision, approach to a fairer America and life record than Trump?
Even Obama was imperfect.
So, it's about who's less imperfect?
3
Bloomberg is not the only Dem option. There are plenty of others which are less flawed.
Look how Bloomberg manages D&I at his organization. He’s done a lot and deserves credit for his efforts.
1
So, who is the perfect Democratic candidate for President who can beat Trump, Mr. Bouie? All of them have their faults. Bloomberg has admitted that he was wrong about stop-and-frisk, unlike Trump, who has never admitted that he was wrong about anything. Bloomberg has pledged that he will propose a public option for the Affordable Care Act; he supports a woman's right to choose; he will fight climate change; he won't be putting children in cages at the border; he won't be cozying up to Putin and endangering our national security and that of our allies. Likening him to Trump is seriously wrong. Wake up, Democrats! The perceived perfect candidate is the enemy of the good one. If Democrats continue down the path of shooting down any candidate who is not perfect, in their minds, we will lose the election and Trump will be President until 2024. Our number one criterion for choosing a candidate should be who has the best chance to defeat Trump in November.
2
History repeats itself.
Democrats sniping and threatening each other.
Bernie Bros vs. the rest of the party.
Moderates vs. progressives.
People threatening to stay home if their candidate does not get the nomination.
Our party is big tent and passionate but not always practical.
Understand what this election means...four more years of a dictator in training.
'Nuf said.
7
I agree with Marta. I am seeing the repetition of the phrases "purity tests" and "identity politics" in comments supporting Bloomberg and minimizing stop-and-frisk far too often. If he can buy all of those ads, I wonder how much comments like these cost?
No Trumpy conspiracy theories required here. The Bernie wing of the party is trying to tear down every other candidate with identity politics and purity tests. The use of those tactics results in people discussing the use of such tactics, thus the frequency of the terms “identity politics” and “purity tests” in the conversation. That said, if one wants to touch on identity politics, it is downright Trumpy that you choose to believe a Jewish candidate is paying for support.
1
The author has a clearly biased presumption of how Bloomberg would use the presidency if he were to prevail in the 2020 election. As a democrat, you must seriously consider the disruption that will occur if you give Trump 4 more years!
4
We’re not going to make racial progress with Trump and Republicans in office. Or progress of any kind. Does anyone really think that Bloomberg is going to become Trump if he wins?
2
Bouie writes:
"However, there’s no indication that he has really changed; no evidence that he’s dropped the commitment to racial control. But even if he has, liberals outraged at Trump’s racism should feel similar anger toward Bloomberg’s record in New York."
So, what would you like him to do? What has to happen?
From the tone of this editorial, I would say that there is nothing that would appease Mr. Bouie and Mr. Blow for that matter. To them, Bloomberg is a symbol of racial oppression.
People forgave George Wallace. Now that's some serious racial oppression.
Bloomberg's statement that most violent crime is being committed by black and brown males age 15 to 25 is being used as proof of his racism. That happens to be a true statement. It is not racist to accept the reality of a crime statistic. In Kansas City, we have terrible murder rates being committed by that same demographic. Who protests these murders more than any other? Black mothers. They are devastated that their beloved sons are getting gunned down in the street, often for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Why does this happen? Gun are why. Guns are everywhere. Bloomberg wants to get the guns off of the streets. Doing so will save more lives than any editorial painting him as a racist and fueling animosity toward him. Bloomberg bears no resemblance to Trump.
736
@Bruce Rozenblit
What do they want? They want him to drop out of the race. It's not a big ask.
44
He beats a lot of resemblance to Trump: His policies that were declared unconstitutional, his disrespect for minorities and women, his disrespect for the laws (third term when limit is two) his switching parties. Even your arguments in defense of Bloomberg reminds the arguments of Trump's supporters in defence of Trump.
45
@Bruce Rozenblit
I never forgave George Wallace. Why in the world would I? (Or Strom Thurmond or Jeff Sessions for that matter.)
I always admire your points of view, even when I don't always agree with you. But with so many great candidates this year, why do we have to say about one of them that at least he's not as bad as George Wallace or Donald Trump? That's a pretty low bar for President of the United States.
61
It’s clear that Bloomberg has flaws, but to call him Trumpian is not only false, it’s ridiculous. Bloomberg has used his money to promote liberal causes for years (well before entering presidential politics.). His commitment to fighting climate change, promoting gun control, supporting women’s issues, supporting African American mayors with his institute, supporting arts institutions, etc, are evidence of his actual priorities. These things should matter as much as policy mistakes and unfortunate statements. There is no perfect person out there. Let’s please not “but her emails” all of our potential candidates. I, for one, will be voting blue in November, whether it’s my first choice or 6th. How about you? Ralph Nader in 2000 and Jill Stein in 2016 got the purity votes. How well did that turn out for liberal causes (or for the country as a whole?)
6
But he also promoted Bush to Presidency, he also introduce the unconstitutional law, he made remark that offended minorities and women, he bend the law to fit his ambitions. He is in many respect very similar to Trump.
“Given his record, he’s someone who might try to consolidate Trumpism — moderating its hostilities into less disruptive form — rather than reject it wholesale.”
This seems dubious, bordering on false equivalency. Bloomberg’s racism is that of the typical privileged white man of a certain age harboring erroneous assumptions about minority youth. This man (I am one) sincerely thinks of himself as enlightened and tolerant, is open to self-examination, and wishes to rid himself of lurking prejudices, conscious or unconscious. This might not accurately describe Bloomberg’s thinking. I’m no mind reader.
But surely there’s a difference. Trump and his most ardent supporters have no interest whatsoever in addressing their racist tendencies, nor even appearing to be doing so. They call such efforts “political correctness” (as opposed to mere decency and the cultivation of empathy)—and thereby give themselves permission to air their ignorant hatred unrestrained.
Surely the latter manifestation of racism is far more harmful and dangerous. Nor have I much reason to believe that Bernie Sanders, in his own racial assumptions and attitudes, differs significantly from Bloomberg. And, finally, the former NYC mayor saying publicly that stop-and-frisk was wrong is surely a far cry from Trump and his ilk refusing utterly to admit any culpability for advancing racist ideas and policies.
4
The sudden embrace of Bloomberg by the establishment Dems is a real mask-off moment for the party. If he manages to buy the nomination then Trumpism has already won, regardless of what happens in the general. RIP DNC.
6
Let's hear it clean and straight from those supporting a particular Dem candidate: which Democratic candidate(s) will be worse than Trump?
2
Great! Now if Bloomberg is the candidate, we have our reason to stay at home in this next presidential election, allowing Trump his next four years. Let's hear from black women, black mothers, in these neighborhoods with higher crime rates -- did they wish to see rigorous police enforcement? Is the genesis of Bloomberg's policy in part that there were many voices from neighborhoods where women and older residents didn't feel safe, asking for rigorous policing? Are we supposed to ignore statistics that show that crime rates were higher in some neighborhoods where stop and frisk policies were then implemented, and pretend that stop and frisk grew wholly out of Bloomberg's animosity towards young black men? Also, I believe the statistic regarding a white man being twice as likely to have a gun is a national statistic, and therefore is not relevant to a highly localized program intended to find unlicensed guns.
5
The writer's criticism of Mr. Bloomberg is unfair for a man who's principles are to do what's right.
Your comparison of Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Trump's views on minorities is offensive, and heightens tensions in a Country already decimated by a racist President.
Your article incites divisiveness and more hatred. That's not Mike Bloomberg.
He may have thought, at the time, based on his own studies or expert opinions, that Stop and Frisk could reduce crime.
Your statistics and those of then Advocate, Bill deBlasio, our lackluster Mayor, can easily skew the numbers.
NYPD statistics reflect 96 percent of shooting victims are black or Hispanic, with a very sad 89% of the murder victims are minority. Statistics also also reflect 70% of robberies in the city are caused by minorities.
The numbers of minorities stopped will most definitely exceed those of non minorities stopped - and it stands to reason when a non minority is stopped, there is a higher percentage of those yielding weapons.
I take serious offense to using statistics in a biased fashion and the writer of the Op-Ed only reflects one side of the story.
While the results of Stop and Frisk may not have yielded the numbers of arrests initially expected, the Mayor was trying to lower crime in our city - he thought he was doing the right thing.
Mr. Trump doesn't care about doing the right thing Mr. Bouie - maybe you would rather see Mr. Trump in office another 4 years, instead of Mike Bloomberg - I don't!
18
Let’s not replace neofascism with neoliberalism (or whatever else you want candidate x to be to win). Consistency and commitment to democratic values should matter the most.
Bernie 2020
4
Anyone with a record has flaws. Note the Klobuchar history as DA, Biden's votes in his senatorial career, Bernie's record with women, and Mayor Pete's issues with the African Americans in South Bend. The choice will be between the better of two candidates. All things being equal it is more important to beat Trump than anything else. If he wins, you likely get another Supreme Court Justice like Gorsuch or Kavanaugh plus four more years of Trumpian outrages and potentially control of both house and Senate. That would mean McConnell and Graham and Jim Jordan dominating congress. Democrats need a candidate with coattails. We need to get real here before it's too late. This is feeling more and more like 1972.
10
This is unacceptable behavior and should not be tolerated in any politician. However, you clearly identified the difference between Trump and Bloomberg that is most telling and puts the lie to your comparison - "Bloomberg has apologized for stop and frisk". No matter how politically expedient the apology was, the willingness to publicly identify and acknowledge a mistake suggests that Bloomberg is at least capable of self reflection. This is the same progressive self-destruction we have been listening too for years; "there isn't any difference between Democrats and Republicans". Look around you.
4
"Bloomberg’s actions as mayor reveal that he was someone who also saw black and brown people as threats to the security and prosperity of his territory, New York"
No they don't.
He saw a crime spree that was killing black and brown people; that violence was confined to certain neighborhoods. He did not take action because that violence was affecting white residents, something you and many other polemicists are implying or even fabricating.
He could have easily ignored the violence and "let it solve itself," a tactic employed by far too many actual racists since the victims were almost exclusively people of color.
Let's decouple his policy with respect to these neighborhoods:
1. Increased police presence ("hot-spotting") in high-crime, violent neighborhoods
2. Stop and frisk
#1 should take credit for the drastic drop in the number of murders of men of color. Over 3000 men who would have seen their lives ended prematurely are alive today.
#2 was a mistake that likely had little effect on crime, but traumatized innocents. For this Bloomberg has expressed strong regrets and apologized.
Executive office requires action, and actions will not always be perfect. But let's not distort the story to invent racist antagonism where it isn't.
7
The "stop and frisk" program predated Bloomberg, and was lauded for being effective at reducing crime.
Bloomberg embraced a policy that was wrong and relied on studies that reached false conclusions.
What did Bloomberg do? He admitted the policy was wrong and apologized.
It is quite a leap to take these facts and then conclude that Bloomberg is therefore, a Trumpian racist.
Is it possible for politicians to make mistakes, admit their mistakes, and apologize for their consequences, without being "cancelled?"
When is the last time any other presidential candidate admitted that they had made a mistake? Only Buttigieg comes to mind.
3
Trump is targeting blacks to a significant extent in his campaign ads (see his Super Bowl ad). If he gets 5-10% of the Black vote, any Democratic candidate will not win. Trump understands that the Black vote is not monolithic, plenty are unhappy with liberal rhetoric, the kind that critiques stop and frisk but is OK with segregated schools (I'm not saying Mr. Bouie is OK with segregated schools). Violent crime is a REAL problem in black communities, with systemic racism and poverty as the most likely causes. Faulting policies that, though highly flawed and even racist, were designed to address that crime, without debating the underlying causes, is typical liberal double-speak. Here's an example from this article:
"A disproportionate number of those convicted of violent crime may have been young men of color, but the vast majority of young men of color weren’t involved in violent crime or any crime at all."
In effect, this statement is in agreement with Bloomberg's remark that "we put all the cops in the minority neighborhoods..because that’s where all the crime is".
Since Bloomy is still against the legalization of marijuana, will he revive his policy of 'stop & frisk' and take it nationwide? Does he have any investments in the 'private prison industry', I wonder?
I will vote for any Democrat (including Democratic Socialists) who wins the party's nomination.
NEVER for a Republican who buys it.
I will vote third party.
Note: The headline should have read "After DNC changes rules, billionaire to debate." Far more honest and accurate.
3
Democrats have sidelined Blacks in this election. Of course their votes will be wanted in November, but their input is not wanted now. Democrats will assure Blacks that they love them, but they don't need them at present. The Democratic contest now is an intra-party civil war between extreme left Whites and moderate left Whites. Black people need to wake up and realize that they have more in common with Republicans than Democrats. Republicans are for a strong economy and individual self-responsibility and freedom of action. These things benefit Blacks more than oppressive, ultimately controlling government programs. A strong economy will ultimately do Blacks more good than all the Democratic talk about fairness, redress of historic wrongs, and racial equity. Plenty of Black people are starting to see this and may either sit out this election or, heaven forefend, actually vote for Republican candidates, yes, including Mr. Trump!
3
@Ronald B. Duke Your comments don't reflect reality. Apparently, you've never seen a picture of the democratic caucus in our House of Representatives. If you had, you would see many, many black, brown, and women representatives. 30% of the House of Representatives seats are held by minority congressmen and women. Oh, and do you think those 30% are Republican seats? No, it is likely that the House would be almost majority-minority if every seat were held by a Democrat. I'm a white woman with means, and I can guarantee that the circumstances of my life will not change demonstrably one if Trump is reelected. However, I know Trump will hurt those without means, and I'm voting because our country is stronger when we do what we can others. Black men who stayed home are one of the reasons Trump was elected. That hurt many, many people who need our government to act responsibly. Please start voting for the good of the many, instead of staying at home and allowing the Republicans to hurt many.
1
Bernie is espousing policy that has worked in all the Nordic states for over 50 years. These governments are all true democracy's (unlike ours) and they are all capitalist market economies. They are also the most educated,healthiest, and happiest people in the world. That could be us if you just don't buy in to the red baiting propaganda...most people don't anymore that's why Bernie's winning ....
1
Trump is destroying America. If Bloomberg proves to be the candidate with the best chance to dethrone our new King he must get the nomination. No one is without flaws. At least he acknowledges his past sins.
4
Dear Readers,
I fear a great hypocrisy is about to be revealed, just as with Clinton v Trump’s obvious sexual misbehavior. I somehow doubt Bloomberg would be getting a pass but for his donations to progressive causes resulting in public “forgiveness” or silence. Remember people are smart, hypocrisy makes people stay home on voting day, and they want to vote for something, not against something, especially when the economy is good.
1
"Stopping someone on the basis of race was a recipe for false positives; stopping on the basis of actual suspicious behavior, on the other hand, would yield results, which is what happened when police stopped white residents."
This exact same paradigm is what takes place when it comes to vehicles stops and searches by the way. A detailed study of vehicle searches in Ferguson in the wake of #BLM found that a much higher percentage of stops of white drivers yielded contraband and/or illegal firearms than those of black drivers.
Along with vastly different sentencing rates and lengths between blacks and whites for the same crimes, yet another example of our 2 tiered criminal justice system. Throw in the GOPs new tactics of disenfranchising black voters, and we have all the ingredients for the 21st century version of Jim Crow.
Those who cannot control themselves must be controlled.
“Bloomberg’s actions as mayor reveal that he was someone who also saw black and brown people as threats to the security and prosperity of his territory,”
Grossly unfair. Bloomberg views armed lawbreakers as a threat to all of us, regardless of skin color. If a disproportionate number of them are lighter or darker, that doesn’t diminish the legitimate concern.
6
If a Sanders Presidency will be anything like the incompetence of the DeBlasio administration and the fluff of AOC, then I am running, not walking, to vote for Bloomberg in the primaries.
4
If I didn't know better, and unfortunately I don't, I'd think these Bloomberg past behavior horror stories are meant to attract rural rubes who act out at Trump rallies.
1
If a generic NYC mayor, wearing a blindfold, made a decision to heavily police the most crime ridden areas of the city by asking where the crime was and then sending his police there, he would end up with what Bloomberg did. I have a very hard time accepting that this was racially motivated.
7
An authoritarian oligarch who personifies the 1% is best positioned to defeat Trump?
And you thought Hillary had a problem being cozy with Goldman-Sachs?
I'm a moderate, disgusted with "cancel culture," who thinks Klobuchar could win back Obama/Trump voters. Bloomberg, no way!
3
He's a Republican through and through. The way he comes and goes from party to party to independent does nothing for me. His major qualification seems to be that he has more money than Trump. His racism hiding as pragmatism is also a non-starter for me.
If he's against affordable healthcare for all, he's against me. Win or lose, I still think we need to blow up the Democratic party the way Trump blew up the Republican party. He's not that guy. A more benign Trump is still bad for the middle class.
3
Yes the policy of stop and frisk was shameful and Bloomberg should be held to account for supporting it. But it pales in comparison to the 2 chief crimes of Donald Trump. Those being #1 his crimes against humanity with regard to his separation of children from their parents and putting them in cages and #2 his crimes against the planet in his denial of climate change and the associated destructive policies in furtherance of that. We can argue policy differences right down to the moment our democracy is eliminated or we can unite to defeat the cancer that is Donal Trump.
2
I'm looking forward to the Walk-on-Water segment of tomorrow's debate... Although, I'm sure the chattering class of commenters, like Mr. Bouie, will still find faults with the candidates.
2
What this column demonstrates is that liberal columnists are just as guilty as their conservative counterparts of distorting and rewriting history to conform to their worldview. First, New York City police initiated stop-and-frisk under Giuliani, not Bloomberg. So it's disingenuous to suggest that this policy somehow is a window into Bloomberg's dark soul. Second, let's not forget that stop-and-frisk was the police department's reposes to DEMANDS from residents of high-crime areas, many of them in minority neighborhoods, for police to rid their streets of rampant drug-dealing and murders during the crack epidemic of the 1990s.
Let's stop pretending that Giuliani and Bloomberg whipped up stop-and-frisk out of some racist control fantasy. They did not. You can impugn the tactic, but let's please stop impugning their character.
11
Blomberg has never stated he was a genius and has admitted he has made mistakes, unlike his counterpart in the White House. He is accepting no money from anyone in this campaign which puts him in the unique position, even among his fellow democratic nominees of owing nothing to anyone.
4
There was SOOOO much more to the Bloomberg mayoralship than just stop & Frisk. He did an excellent job as an administrator of an extremely complicated bureaucracy (NYC), something Trump is failing at miserably.
Trump is doing to america what he did to many of his companies, driving them into the ground or bankruptcy. Bloomberg's past track record is the opposite of Trumps. Bloomberg ran an excellent company, and never had a business go bankrupt on him.
Is Bloomberg another rich white guy, YES, but he is MUCH different than the racist, misogynist, condescending, xenophobic liar we currently have as president. Bloomberg has some semblance of honor, morals and ethics. Three words Trump has never integrated into his daily life.
3
Bloomberg's stop-and-frisk policy was disturbing. I don't believe he's the same person today. Nor could I envision a Bloomberg presidency as racist, cold-blooded and bigoted as the one we currently have. The real key to this column is to be found in the 134-word third paragraph. These are reasons Democrats ought to be able to embrace Bloomberg, if he turns out to be the nominee.
213
@Steve His disturbing comments on stop and frisk that surfaced were from 2015. He only apologized for stop-and-frisk shortly before he announced his presidential run. I don't understand how we could view this concession anything other than politically expedient but insincere. We are supposed to believe that a 78 year old Bloomberg has changed now?
37
@Steve --No offense, but you live in Louisville and I as a New Yorker would like to know what proof you have the Bloomberg is different person?
11
@Steve I’m sure he’s learned a lot since his early 70s.
11
"[Bloomberg] may be running as the anti-Trump, but when it comes to the politics of racial control, there is a resemblance."
Perhaps. The big difference between the two is competence, intelligence, and ability. These are attributes sorely missing from the Trump administration, especially in the so-called President. But there is no shared racism.
Trump is an explicit racist. There is no doubt about that. Bloomberg is not. Yes, he has the stain of stop and frisk on his resume, but the people he governed at the time approved of it. Except for those minorities who were caught up in the program, of course.
Bloomberg is no bigoted zealot in Trumpian clothing. We need to stop painting him as that. He might be more conservative in his views than other Democrats, but overall, he is worlds better than Trump. Look at him in full, and the picture is clear that he is superior to Trump in ever positive way.
And he puts American Liberalism in no danger, especially from being burdened as yet another Trump brand.
2
It is all fine and good to sit in an ivory tower and decry stop and frisk as a means of racial control, but this misses the real world impact of stop and frisk. It made crime-filled neighborhoods safer and saved lives. The Manhattan Institute estimates that stop and frisk saved approximately 1600 lives in poor black and Hispanic neighborhoods.
I invite Mr. Bouie to go to these neighborhoods and ask mothers and fathers which would they rather have: the annoyance and likely embarrassment of stop and frisk, or the lives of their children.
2
@MarkN Ok, I’ll bite. Why did Bloomberg apologize for it then?
@Chris Mr. Bloomberg apologized because we are living in a time when feelings trump (works for him too) facts, and Mr. Bloomberg cannot afford to hurt anyone's feelings. The fact remains stop and frisk saved Hispanic and black lives.
1
Bloomberg famously said he was trying to make NYC into a "luxury product." An excellent manager, smart and headstrong, with a bit of an authoritarian streak he was successful in doing so. NYC is a great place to live if you are part of the professional, managerial, and investor classes: a city for older people with money or younger people with promising careers.
But what if you don't fit the luxury brand Bloomberg was trying to establish? What if you were poor, black, latino, or a person of limited prospects? There might be a niche for you serving the successful, but keep quiet and don't stir up any trouble. Make yourself invisible. Stay downstairs. Upstairs will call when you are needed. If you get out of line, we'll stop and frisk you. Throw you up against the wall, let you know where you stand, put you back in your place.
Bloomberg's "liberalism" is all about making the world more pleasant for the successful. A healthy climate and a lack of guns make life better for the well-off. A living wage? A low-interest home loan? Free health care? Those help the off-brand crowd. They aren't part of Bloomberg's luxury liberalism.
A lot of liberal Democrats are well-off, highly educated, successful. We do well in a Bloomberg world. We can afford Manhattan, San Francisco, Toronto, Paris, London. But what about the rest of America—the vast majority—struggling to get by? What does Bloomberg do for them?
Based on past history, he mostly keeps them in their place.
2
"And under his administration, the city became a quasi-authoritarian state for many of its black, brown and Muslim residents."
NYC was never a quasi-authoritarian state under Bloomberg and being unfairly frisked and humiliated is a long ways from that. People protested and sued- the tactic was thrown out by the courts.
Liberals often complain about the constant use of false equivalencies of the right but it's such a tempting technique- who can resist?
My half-Ethiopian son despised Bloomberg for perpetuating stop-and-frisk policing and it was humiliating for men of color where he lived at the time in Brooklyn.
I was annoyed by the mayors inability to accept that the policy was hurtful to the communities it sought to protect and never admitted the down-side of his effort to reduce gun violence that victimize blacks of his city more than whites.
However, my wife, who is African American and born in Ethiopia, saw Bloomberg face to face when he was helping women in NY start businesses by contributing his money and presence to a group in Manhattan that nourishes fledgling female entrepreneurs. The man supports good causes with more than his money.
If Democrats don't understand how to pool our resources and make use of all our allies we will lose to Trump.
The right-wing plutocrats have a propaganda machine that has been well oiled and running for decades- they have a fake news TV channel that is the most watched in our country.
Bloomberg is helping.
Fantastic first paragraph! Few Times writers accurately state the fundamental reasons for Trump's success- our nation's unapologetic and rampant racism. While I don't fully agree with your characterization of Bloomberg from a racial perspective, my question is simple. Even if your analysis is accurate, if Bloomberg is the only candidate capable of defeating Trump, should't we overlook some of his prior bad acts?
1
Bloomberg is a globalist republican who runs as a D and Sanders an independent who runs as a D. If they are the frontrunners in 2016 this means that the Democratic party is intellectually caput and they have to rethink their positions on immigration, law enforcement, healthcare and education - not to mention woke culture and identity politics.
1
Okay, let's say Bloomberg wins the Democratic nomination. And Blacks and Hispanics essentially don't show up to vote for him in any substantial way. That means four more years of Trump.
It's a choice. But, I can tell you this. Trump's racism is inherited and virulent and championed by his followers.
Bloomberg's "racism" was likely driven by his belief in data [that's what his company is all about], however flawed...and it was flawed! It is not deep-seated nor held by his followers.
He made a big mistake. He's apologized for it. We have a choice.
2
Love your Target. This guy has no principles, other than his long record of using white power when he was the mayor. All he is really showing us is how many Americans' vote is up for sale.
1
More concerning then stop and frisk is the fact that he did not change direction when the facts proved that his assumptions were wrong. That lack of judgment in a president, or in anyone, is inexcusable. Is this proof that he will hurt others for personal gain?
1
Bloomberg's supporters talk as if there were no viable candidates to win against trump until the Dark Knight Bloomberg inundated the airwaves with his slick. expensive ads.
For goodness sake, can't you assess the mainstream media with a more discerning eye?
They have manipulated us, giving us misleading headlines and polls, blacked out and erased candidates, and now you are playing right into their hands supporting yet another Oligarch Savior.
Wake up and think for yourself. Listen to Mr. Bouie. Can you imagine what it's like to be stopped and frisked? Can you imagine a continuation of unfettered crony capitalism?
Wake up.
270
@TM I have listened to the debates, read the policy statements of the candidates and attended a Bernie Sanders rally. I don't believe in the class warfare approach of Sanders and Warren. Buttigieg and Klobuchar make the case that they are mid-westerners and could win in the mid-west.Is that enough? I originally liked Biden, but question whether he can endure the campaign. So I am seriously considering Bloomberg. He has the executive experience of running a big city, and I like the work he has done on gun control. I don't feel like I am being bought. I think there are quite a lot of people like me.
37
@TM
I can no more imagine what it's like to be stopped, questioned and possibly frisked then I can imagine going to the funeral of an innocent child shot accidentally in a playground during a summer weekend. Holding a politician elected to do something about solving a problem more accountable than the people actually committing the crimes is the real problem.
The media has shifted the narrative in the wrong redirection here. It is not what MB did more than it's really what was the least worst option he had. There are no easy choices or solutions to the problem of inner city violence.
Why not try stop, question and frisk in Chicago this summer and measure the results?
8
@Joan You "don't believe in the class warfare approach of Sanders and Warren" - why? Please articulate why you don't think "class warfare", this historical concept (dating from the late 1880s), is effective. It is amply documented to have been effective, in various historical contexts too long to describe in a NYT comment. It has brought independence and democracy to almost all of Latin America, and parts of some Sub-Saharan African countries. It has afforded their women, men, and children sovereignty and land rights. It has ensured the end of minority rule in some cases.
Class warfare, more aptly termed "class struggle", simply means we can shift the terms of our engagement with capital: shift ownership of production; shift the way wages are set; shift what gains accrue to capital, which Piketty statistically documents are disproportionate. Why wouldn't you want a shift that has delivered real results to the people who need it most? Because we have been fed a philosophical contra-argument that seems whole and rational, but is, in reality, infused by a false neoliberal, trickle-down argument that only serves immediate ends for a small percentage of the population (again, historically-speaking). And the class that engages in warfare the most? White, land-owning rentier class like me, who don't want to change the terms of engagement. There are no easy fixes but operating inside the system is historically a contributor to future violence to right systemic wrongs.
13
Almost every Democratic candidate is carrying some sort of racial baggage. Bernie leaving Brooklyn for the all white world of Vermont is his issue on case you were wondering. Not one of them would be where they are now if their skin were brown or black and they know it. Every candidate will be at Stacy Abrams' door hoping to wash away their sins. It's going to be a tough race and I hope Bernie's supporters will not sit out the election if they don't get their way.
2