Bloomberg for President?

[Belz...]

If a Republican is going to win, and they have a good chance, I'd rather it not be Trump. I don't see any Dem candidates that I like either. I may abstain. Pfft what's the difference I live in Cali, my vote goes Dem no matter who I actually vote for. Trump won a lot of districts here but all 55 votes went to Hillary. I hate that.

I understand your frustration. I don't necessarily think the EC should be abolished but it sure should be proportional in all states. That won't happen, mind you.

 

[Loss Leader]

Apparently, Bloomberg is saturating the airwaves in early (non-caucus) states. But I'm in a Super Tuesday state and I haven't heard a word about him.

I did live in NY when he was mayor, and he was the most democratic Republican I'd ever seen. But he was still a Republican, he still continued stop-and-frisk, and he did very little to improve the lives of the poorest New Yorkers.

So, I'm not excited about him. Maybe if I heard his platform, I'd be more convinced. If he's the Democratic nominee, I'll vote for him. If he runs as a 3rd party, I'll get really angry and move to a country with a functioning democracy - preferably somewhere warm.

 

[Donal]

Keep in mind, as mayor of NY, Giuliani was pro-gun control, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage. If you look at the transition from 2001 through 2002, the big difference is Bloomberg's language wasn't as harsh and he was gung ho anti-smoking. Most of the policies of the previous administration continued through.

 

[lomiller]

You really expect to see Trump voters, whether still supporting him or not, switching to Bernie? I can't imagine anything more unlikely.

I can see it. People who vote for Trump have shown could not care less about actual policy. He offers them catch phrase answers in place of real policy items, makes them similar in quite a few ways to the type of idealist who votes for Sanders.

This is why I hope Trump resigns and another Republican takes his place before the election. I think the Democrats are too far left to attract any conservative voters, or steal disheartened Trump supporters. That's Fantasy Island stuff there.

When you get down to actual policies, people who truly support old school conservative policies towards trade, efficient markets, balanced budgets and maximizing peoples personal freedom almost always vote Democrat these days.


Trump/Republicans voters mostly vote for the party and allow the party to dictate where they stand on the issues. Republican Party line is a mishmash of religious fundamentalism, xenophobia and promises to their base they can give them something for nothing.

 

[Brainster]

I did live in NY when he was mayor, and he was the most democratic Republican I'd ever seen.

He changed his registration to Republican to run for mayor because he knew he'd never win in a primary facing Democrats. Aside for 2001-2007, he's been a lifelong Democrat.

 

[Brainster]

But do you expect many Trump supporters to switch to Bernie? I don't.

I'm not that conservative and I never really liked Trump, but I would never ever vote for Sanders or anyone like him, policy-wise. Not even to keep Trump out.

No, I don't expect many Trump supporters to switch to Bernie, mostly because I don't expect Sanders to be the Dem nominee.

If he were the Dem nominee? Then I could actually see him pulling some support from the blue collar voters who went Trump in 2016. However, I think that would be more than outweighed by centrist voters who would correctly see Bernie as a bit too out there. All the Never-Trumpers would certainly be dragged kicking and screaming back into the Big Tent.

I am ambivalent about Trump myself. I didn't vote for him in 2016, but my state was still pretty safe Republican and so I voted Libertarian. But the media have been so ridiculously anti-Trump for the last three years that I can't wait to stick my thumb in their eye in 2020.

 

[Juniversal]

I can see it. People who vote for Trump have shown could not care less about actual policy. He offers them catch phrase answers in place of real policy items, makes them similar in quite a few ways to the type of idealist who votes for Sanders.

How so? Trump is a demagogue that likes to stir up racial resentments. Bernie isnt exactly known for his sound bites or hate speech...

 

[Venom]

I am ambivalent about Trump myself. I didn't vote for him in 2016, but my state was still pretty safe Republican and so I voted Libertarian. But the media have been so ridiculously anti-Trump for the last three years that I can't wait to stick my thumb in their eye in 2020.

Ah...triggering the libs.

That's what these Trump related discussions seem to invariably devolve into.

 

[Bob001]

.....
I am ambivalent about Trump myself. I didn't vote for him in 2016, but my state was still pretty safe Republican and so I voted Libertarian. But the media have been so ridiculously anti-Trump for the last three years that I can't wait to stick my thumb in their eye in 2020.

The "media" is anti-trump? How so? By accurately reporting facts that conflict with Dear Leader's lies and delusions? There is a strong argument to be made that the media enabled Trump by treating his campaign as an entertaining sideshow, without exploring his lifelong history of fraud, corruption, racism and abuse of women.

If anything, the media's shame has been that it has been way too soft on this protege of Roy Cohn.

 

[Juniversal]

There's an odd blindness conservatives have to Trumps misdeeds. Trumps not racist!, he took a picture with Al Sharpton 30 years ago! *rolls eyes* Trump dug his own grave with his abrasive, xenophobic, edgy (and corrupt) ways but his supporters insist he's being treated unfairly.

 

[Random]

I agree but I'd rather have Bloomberg than Biden if those were the choices. Biden will be smeared, and like a lot of lies, if there is a thread of truth to it, the lie is easily accepted.

You should not base your choice on who the GOP will smear, because the GOP will smear anyone, and it will all be believed by GOP supporters. Remember where the term "Swift-boating" came from? The Democratic party could nominate a ticket consisting of the second coming of Jesus and the reanimated corpse of Ronald Reagan and the GOP would still attack them. I mean, can you think of any Democrat that the GOP would not smear?

The GOP will smear the Democratic Presidential candidate regardless of who it is. Once you realize that, you can ignore that concern and focus on other tissues.

 

[TragicMonkey]

You should not base your choice on who the GOP will smear, because the GOP will smear anyone, and it will all be believed by GOP supporters. Remember where the term "Swift-boating" came from? The Democratic party could nominate a ticket consisting of the second coming of Jesus and the reanimated corpse of Ronald Reagan and the GOP would still attack them. I mean, can you think of any Democrat that the GOP would not smear?

The GOP will smear the Democratic Presidential candidate regardless of who it is. Once you realize that, you can ignore that concern and focus on other tissues.

This ought to be engraved in gold and mounted on the monitors of at least five posters here who contribute the same handwringing "but they'll say he/she is [insert slander here]!" as their best argument for not picking the best person as the candidate.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

True, the GOP Hate Machine has long passed level 11.
If the Dems nominated a transgender atheist, the vitriol couldn't get more extreme than it already is.

 

[pgwenthold]

You should not base your choice on who the GOP will smear, because the GOP will smear anyone, and it will all be believed by GOP supporters. Remember where the term "Swift-boating" came from? The Democratic party could nominate a ticket consisting of the second coming of Jesus and the reanimated corpse of Ronald Reagan and the GOP would still attack them. I mean, can you think of any Democrat that the GOP would not smear?

The GOP will smear the Democratic Presidential candidate regardless of who it is. Once you realize that, you can ignore that concern and focus on other tissues.

For example, any candidate who was in Congress they will call "the most liberal member of congress"

 

[Donal]

Mitch McConnell was on one of the Sunday talk shows calling Biden a socialist. They will throw any smear they want. There's no point in trying to strategize for it or point out their hypocrisy. This isn't about honest, good faith disagreements.

You need a candidate who will excite people who generally don't come to the polls. You can't worry about appealing to someone who doesn't quite understand how Democrat X is better than Stupid. They are all better than Stupid.

Go for the people who feel like the democrats don't care either. The folks who feel that the best they can hope for is another old rich white guy who is going to take care of other old rich white guys. And getting into a tit-for-tat with Stupid and trying to address each little smear the Republicans throw out is going to turn them away. Its going to be "politics as usual".

 

[JoeMorgue]

There's a balance to be had between "Our political opponents are going to sling (largely the same) mud at anyone we put up" and "it doesn't matter who we nominate and we shouldn't bother taking things like popularity (even undeserved, unwarranted, and unfair popularity) and baggage into account at all."

 

[Juniversal]

For example, any candidate who was in Congress they will call "the most liberal member of congress"

And "liberal" by American standards meaning not so conservative that you're bordering on fascist. The scaremongering applied to liberalism is ridiculous. The overton window is so far right Mussolini's corpse is starting to blush.

 

[Donal]

There's a balance to be had between "Our political opponents are going to sling (largely the same) mud at anyone we put up" and "it doesn't matter who we nominate and we shouldn't bother taking things like popularity (even undeserved, unwarranted, and unfair popularity) and baggage into account at all."

I pointed out why it is important who you nominate. I just said "Republican mud slinging" shouldn't be a factor, at least, not the deciding factor.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I pointed out why it is important who you nominate. I just said "Republican mud slinging" shouldn't be a factor, at least, not the deciding factor.

True and... well the metaphor sort of falls apart here but determining which is mud is being slung by the Republicans and which mud is being slung by the American voting populace and the Republicans a useful and necessary skill to have in politics.

The Republicans are going to throw everything at whoever the Dems put up. This is a metaphysical certainty. But the extrapolate of that is that at least some of the things they throw are, by coincidence if nothing else, also going to be things which are of a legit concern to the American voters.

 

[Donal]

Ya, but that is part of what the primary process is for. Sort that sort of thing out. There's just no need to make a public spectacle of addressing everything they use.