Bloomberg for President?

I think it is essential that we see Bloomberg on stage - I think it is a far greater risk to him than to the other candidates to join them on stage.
 
I really hate the idea of a septuagenarian billionaire buying access to the presidency, but I want a moderate Democrat, and he is one.

We'll see who is standing by the time Michigan rolls around. I could see myself voting for Bloomberg if the other moderates are out by then. It depends on who is still being taken seriously by the time our primary rolls around.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
I think it is essential that we see Bloomberg on stage - I think it is a far greater risk to him than to the other candidates to join them on stage.
Click to expand...

Why? Keep in mind that the guy was the mayor of NYC for 12 years so it's not like he might wilt in the spotlight. Yeah, there are aspects of his mayoralty that could be brought up--like stop and frisk--but how hard are the other candidates going to want to attack a candidate who has basically offered his staff and a portion of his fortune to them to help them beat Trump?
 
Brainster said:
Why? Keep in mind that the guy was the mayor of NYC for 12 years so it's not like he might wilt in the spotlight. Yeah, there are aspects of his mayoralty that could be brought up--like stop and frisk--but how hard are the other candidates going to want to attack a candidate who has basically offered his staff and a portion of his fortune to them to help them beat Trump?
Click to expand...

my view is that any debate leaves the candidates worse off - just some much more than others. The number of candidates and the format (and inept moderators) give no one the chance to really shine, just to suck not so much.

Bloomberg has the advantage of not being tainted with any of that so far, which I would argue is unfair to the others: if he is seen as "just one more candidate" instead "the other candidate", that would likely lessen his appeal for some.
Or he might surprise everyone.
 
I was listening to "My History Can Beat Up Your Politics" this weekend. I'm now convinced that bloomberg really screwed up by getting into the Dem primary. He should be running in the Rep Primary to weaken trump, as that is one of the few ways an incumbent president ever looses.
 
ahhell said:
I was listening to "My History Can Beat Up Your Politics" this weekend. I'm now convinced that bloomberg really screwed up by getting into the Dem primary. He should be running in the Rep Primary to weaken trump, as that is one of the few ways an incumbent president ever looses.
Click to expand...

In recent memory both Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were incumbents who weren't re-elected. When was the last time a first-term incumbent wasn't re-nominated by his party? There is no chance that a moderate -- Bloomberg or anybody else -- could take the nomination from Trump. Some states even canceled their Repub primaries so Trump wouldn't face any competition. And Bloomberg wants to win, not just weaken Trump.
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
In recent memory both Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were incumbents who weren't re-elected. When was the last time a first-term incumbent wasn't re-nominated by his party? There is no chance that a moderate -- Bloomberg or anybody else -- could take the nomination from Trump. Some states even canceled their Repub primaries so Trump wouldn't face any competition. And Bloomberg wants to win, not just weaken Trump.
Click to expand...

Both were challenged by folks in the primaries. Carter by Ted Kennedy and Bush by Buchanan. It would be very unlikely that any incumbent would actually loose the primary, but there is evidence that a challenge could weaken the incumbent for the general.

Granted, it could also be that weak candidates get challenged. A harder argument to make for Bush than Carter.
 
ahhell said:
Both were challenged by folks in the primaries. Carter by Ted Kennedy and Bush by Buchanan. It would be very unlikely that any incumbent would actually loose the primary, but there is evidence that a challenge could weaken the incumbent for the general.

Granted, it could also be that weak candidates get challenged. A harder argument to make for Bush than Carter.
Click to expand...

You understand that there is not one primary, right? Every state conducts its own primaries -- sometimes caucuses instead -- according to its own rules, awarding delegates who cast their votes at the party convention.
 
Bob001 said:
You understand that there is not one primary, right? Every state conducts its own primaries -- sometimes caucuses instead -- according to its own rules, awarding delegates who cast their votes at the party convention.
Click to expand...

Oooh, good point, let me amend my previous statement:

Both Carter and Bush were challenged in their party's primaries and the Iowa caucas and then went on to loose the generals*. this suggests a link between primary challenges and incumbents loosing the election.** Ford was also challenged in the primaries and Iowa caucus and also lost in the generals.*

*to be clear, there's not really just one general election either.

**Which I have already granted may be as much the result of weak candidates being challenged as it is challenges weakening the candidate.
 
carlitos said:
Loose = your pants are too big
Lose = you did not win
Click to expand...

Hopefully both, this time: Trump's pants are notoriously loose-fitting. How someone can have so much money and occupy such an office while not having access to decent tailoring...it boggles the mind.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Hopefully both, this time: Trump's pants are notoriously loose-fitting. How someone can have so much money and occupy such an office while not having access to decent tailoring...it boggles the mind.
Click to expand...

He has access but doesn't use it. More evidence of him being obstinate. Or just maybe he got stuck in the 90's with the big suits and thinks that they look great.
 
bloomberg has pledged to keep his campaign running even if he doesn't get the nom. to run an anti-trump advertising push right up to the end.

i wonder if people have thought through what the reactions of that will be for say a sanders campaign where his core supporters generally have...lets say 'a poor opinion' of billionaires. does a candidate running as super left/progressive, grass roots, small donations only, etc etc ...but then having a billionaire attack dog running interference create a wedge issue that can be exploited by their opponent? or even an irreconcilable issue within the campaign itself before the opponent even does anything?
 
So ,when does Bloomberg replace Soros as the MAGA-hat's version of Emmanuel Goldstein?
 
Meadmaker said:
I really hate the idea of a septuagenarian billionaire buying access to the presidency, but I want a moderate Democrat, and he is one.
Click to expand...

Agreed on both counts, but there are plenty of other moderates to choose from.

I'd be unhappy to see both parties come to a consensus that we ought to be ruled by people who never have to balance their own checkbooks, do their own laundry, or shop for their own groceries.
 
It's interesting that Bloomburg is building his political organization completely outside the usual Democratic party networks...
 
d4m10n said:
Agreed on both counts, but there are plenty of other moderates to choose from.

I'd be unhappy to see both parties come to a consensus that we ought to be ruled by people who never have to balance their own checkbooks, do their own laundry, or shop for their own groceries.
Click to expand...

Amen. Welcome to the plutocracy.


But if Bloomberg is still in the race when Michigan rolls around, and he's the only moderate left, I'm voting for him.

I suppose I should go to the news page and see if there are results from Iowa coming in.
 
Is Bloomberg actually a moderate, though? He's running as not-Trump, but if he takes office he'll be President Bloomberg. What kind of president would he be? Does his time as mayor of New York give any clues? Would his undoubtedly extensive business interests around the world color his executive decisions?
 
If Bloomberg is the Democratic nominee in November, I'm voting for him. Also Biden, Bernie, Warren, Klobuchar, or the ghost of Ronald Wilson Reagan.
My state's having a primary next month, I think. I've no idea who I'll vote for in that. Maybe let my wife decide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom