Bloomberg for President?

Donal said:
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.
Click to expand...

That's unrealistic in the information age. You can't expect the your enemies to not pick up the mud your rivals slung at you when it shifts from "friendly competition among equals" to "open warfare between declared enemies" in a world where information doesn't go away or off the public's radar.
 
But again, understand the difference between a legitimate criticism that differentiates between qualified candidates and a disingenuous smear attack that only has life as long as you try to address it.
 
Donal said:
But again, understand the difference between a legitimate criticism that differentiates between qualified candidates and a disingenuous smear attack that only has life as long as you try to address it.
Click to expand...

OOooh okay.

So it's not a problem as long as the Republicans agree to not dishonestly use any points or arguments that Democrats use against other Democrats in an honest fashion.

*Wipes brow* Glad we got that settled.
 
They are going to do that regardless. But you can't let them dictate what is important. Admittedly, a big part of that is the hair pieces in the media, but there's no reason anyone with integrity needs to play that game.
 
This entire 'I'm not a fan of Trump but the leftist Democrats are so much worse' is just about the most ******** stupid thing I've ever heard.

But wannabe responsible centrist Republicans and so-called nonpolitical folks will continue to push that nonsense.

The pearl clutching is amazing.
 
I'll vote for whatever nominee the Democrats put up. There's no set of possible circumstances that will lead to me voting for Trump or not voting on election day.

That's not the same as pretending my own thoughts and values represent all voters.
 
Random said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'm well aware of that. I'm not basing it on who Trump will smear, I'm basing it on what the voters will do with it. Biden's son took a cush job with a high salary for doing very little because his father was VP. It's all too easy to make Biden look as bad as Trump.
 
TragicMonkey said:
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.
Click to expand...

If I'm one of those you are referring to, you really shouldn't paint me with such an insulting brush.
 
Ziggurat said:
Re: Republicans who admit "Trump is bad, but Democrats worse"
The pearl clutching is amazing.
Click to expand...
... he said, as he clutched his pearls ever harder.
Click to expand...
I don't think you understand what the term "pearl clutching" means.

From: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/pearl-clutching
Pearl Clutching: ...a very shocked reaction, especially one in which you show more shock than you really feel in order to show that you think something is morally wrong

Many/most non-republicans who dislike Trump are well and truly horrified by what he's done, and with good reason... his propensity for lying, his labeling of Neo-nazis as "fine people", nominating Drunky McRapeface for the supreme court. Those are bad things (at least to a non-racist, non-partisan). No fake reaction required.

On the other hand, what do the republicans have to be concerned about? Obama wearing a tan suit and eating the wrong kind of mustard? Its possible for someone to be on the political right-wing and have legitimate disagreements over policy with the Democrats. Its a totally different thing to think those disagreements are more significant than a right-winger using his position espouse bigotry.
 
TragicMonkey said:
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.
Click to expand...

But who is "the best person?" The person whose stated policies most closely resemble my own wishes? The person with the most experience as an honest, responsible public official? The person who has the greatest likelihood of beating the worst excuse for a president in U.S. history? Can you really separate all those factors? The ability and resources to actually get elected are part of the equation. By any rational standard H. Clinton was the "best" candidate in the 2016 general election, except that she couldn't run a winning campaign. Do we want to do that again?
 
Ziggurat said:
I don't think you understand what your side looks like to people outside your bubble.
Click to expand...


Actually, I' well aware of what Democrats look like from inside the brainwashed conservative right wing bubble.

Did you have a point?

LOL!
 
Last edited:
Loss Leader said:
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.
Click to expand...
Portland Metro area here and, despite the fact that I watch a miniscule amount of TV, a Bloomberg ad popped up here on Hulu.
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.
Click to expand...
The only thing I find exciting about him is that he's wealthy beyond Trump's fondest dreams and there seems to be a [sad and pathetic] portion of the electorate that equates wealth with talent and doesn't look any deeper than that. It seems like Bloomberg should easily take those votes away from Trump. If only Mike was illiterate, he could probably win in a sweep.
 
Venom said:
This entire 'I'm not a fan of Trump but the leftist Democrats are so much worse' is just about the most ******** stupid thing I've ever heard.
Click to expand...

At least the old lie of "Democrats and Republicans are the same!" has completely run out of steam. That's progress, I guess.
 
Random said:
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.
Click to expand...

So the Democratic Party nominating Trump might implode the GOP?

I mean, it worked for Captain Kirk like six times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom