Bloomberg for President?

applecorped said:
yours noted as well
Click to expand...

I don't make a habit of answering questions posed to me in an effort to evade my own.

Effective dialogue requires both give and take.

Beelzebuddy said:
He entered the race the second Sanders and Warren said the words "wealth tax." All the money he's spent in the race so far is still a fraction of what their plans would cost him every year. This is an investment to him.
Click to expand...

I was skeptical of this, but found a useful calculator. (Click "Yes" then click Bloomberg.)

Or just read this.

ETA: It strikes me as a rational move to burn through a few billion in order to save many more, but running oneself wasn't the smart play. Bloomberg could've blanketed Super Tuesday states in pro-Amy agitprop instead, or gotten behind any other moderate Dem.
 
Last edited:
Beelzebuddy said:
He entered the race the second Sanders and Warren said the words "wealth tax." All the money he's spent in the race so far is still a fraction of what their plans would cost him every year. This is an investment to him.

Since his very presence at this debate is due to his wealth, not likability or policies, I'd say his wealth is fair game for criticism.
Click to expand...


Bloomberg has proposed increasing taxes on the wealthy, including himself.
Billionaire Democratic candidate Mike Bloomberg unveiled a tax plan on Saturday that would unwind corporate tax breaks granted by President Donald Trump and impose an additional 5% “surtax” on incomes above $5 million a year.

According to the campaign, the plan in total would generate roughly $5 trillion and would be sufficient to help fund Bloomberg’s initiatives, including his healthcare plan, education, combating climate change and more than $1 trillion infrastructure plan.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/01/bil...-calls-for-tax-on-incomes-over-5-million.html

And:
https://www.fool.com/taxes/2020/02/03/the-bloomberg-tax-plan-what-you-need-to-know.aspx

Considering how much Bloomberg has donated to charities and public causes, I am willing to believe that he is not entirely motivated by self-interest.
 
Last edited:
Distracted1 said:
Like it or not, there are believable instances wherein false allegations are made against wealthy people in the hopes of gaining an advantage.
It is also understandable how it might be less costly to an individual targeted by such an allegation to make a quiet settlement with the accuser.

I am not automatically put-off by the existence of such an arrangement. Although, admittedly, it would be better if there were none, since doubt could be removed.

I think my viewpoint is widely held.
Click to expand...


And, I think, wrong.

I don't think wealth should put one above the law. False accusations are an issue for everyone. I don't think they should only be an issue for those that can buy their way out of it.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
He has a credibility problem. Nothing about his current platform can erase his history as a center-right Republican and aspiring authoritarian.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's true.
Unlike Trump, Bloomberg is actually admitting his mistakes. And it must be possible for a 80+ year old to change his opinion.
But it very much requires credibility and visible contrition - something that he might not be able to muster.
 
Watching the debate, something he said which I hadn’t heard mentioned but was an odd answer. When asked what to do about China’s pollution, the first thing he said was “we can’t go to war with them!” Who said anything about that? Then “we have to tell them that their kids will die too!” Seems strange as though he thinks China are polluting the world to...what? To kill American kids or something and that they lack awareness of what climate change means...?
 
Bob001 said:
Considering how much Bloomberg has donated to charities and public causes, I am willing to believe that he is not entirely motivated by self-interest.
Click to expand...

1) those donations are tax deductible

2) he seems to have been using those donations to buy position within those movements. He's leveraging them to his political advantage now.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
I don't think that's true.
Unlike Trump, Bloomberg is actually admitting his mistakes.
Click to expand...

No, he isn't. He completely dismissed the criticisms. He even eye rolled when Warren brought up the 40 suits by 64 women for sexual harassment.

And it must be possible for a 80+ year old to change his opinion.
But it very much requires credibility and visible contrition - something that he might not be able to muster.
Click to expand...

He backed Republicans in several swing districts in 2018, several of which those Republicans won by hair thin margins.
 
d4m10n said:
What would have been a good answer? If you unilaterally release people from NDAs you're just giving money away; that's a mug's game.
Click to expand...



The answer is to not run for president when you have been systematically distributing hush money to cover up your record of misogyny unless you are willing to get it all out in the open. You get to choose one of the two.

Past that, when you are stumbling over the question like you didn't expect to have to answer it even though it was obviously going to be an issue, don't minimize things that required you to pay hush money as "women didn't like my jokes."
 
Seriously, who prepped him for last night? Is he so surrounded by yes men that no one is willing to point out the obvious attack points?
 
The Great Zaganza said:
I don't think that's true.
Unlike Trump, Bloomberg is actually admitting his mistakes. And it must be possible for a 80+ year old to change his opinion.
But it very much requires credibility and visible contrition - something that he might not be able to muster.
Click to expand...

Credibility is a thing. His candidacy gives me flashbacks to the 2016 WV Governors race where a billionaire named Jim Justice, a former Republican, ran as a Democrat and made the same sorts of noises. He bought the nomination with crazy spending in an open primary state and squeaked through the general.

About a year later he, on stage with Trump, declared his return to the GOP.

It was professional wrestling type stuff and it makes me real cynical about people crossing aisles when doing so makes it far easier to grab the reins of the party.
 
I said early in the thread that until Bloomberg is on the debate stage, we can't tell what kind of candidate he is.
I guess we know now.
 
Oh, I don't hugely care. Yep, a billionaire buying the presidency in a thoroughly corrupt political system, but at least a billionaire who seems reasonably, if not hugely, competent with several pretty sensible policies. Maybe this is the future for the "shining city on a hill": variously competent billionaires presiding over crap educational system, stripped down oversight on big business and especially big finance and increasingly hereditary social classes.
 
Suddenly said:
The answer is to not run for president when you have been systematically distributing hush money to cover up your record of misogyny unless you are willing to get it all out in the open.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but what should he have said?

(Imagine you were hired to prep him, and you saw this one coming.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom