Michael Bloomberg's attempt to buy the election, detailed

[CJD]

https://twitter.com/blakezeff/status/1227976156936171520?s=21&fbclid=IwAR1m3COe5q_4KksA0UrBescx_hh32tlTSvLkvXPDjXQkIrtJCcCNxmM8UO0

Here's a pretty interesting 17 part tweet detailing all the ways that Michael Bloomberg is using his vast wealth to "buy" the democratic nomination.

Is this how democracy dies? Or is this just another form of capitalism and should be normalized in our country's politics?

[Au165]

I don't think this is really anything new in politics, the difference is we have a candidate wealthy enough to do it with part of his own wealth versus relying on corporate money to do it.

[Belsnickel]

(02-17-2020, 11:28 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: https://twitter.com/blakezeff/status/1227976156936171520?s=21&fbclid=IwAR1m3COe5q_4KksA0UrBescx_hh32tlTSvLkvXPDjXQkIrtJCcCNxmM8UO0

Here's a pretty interesting 17 part tweet detailing all the ways that Michael Bloomberg is using his vast wealth to "buy" the democratic nomination.

Is this how democracy dies? Or is this just another form of capitalism and should be normalized in our country's politics?

Yes, yes, and no.

This is how democracy dies, it is a form of capitalism, but it should not be normalized.

[Au165]

(02-17-2020, 11:59 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yes, yes, and no.

This is how democracy dies, it is a form of capitalism, but it should not be normalized.

...But again, how is this different then any other candidate who is well backed through Super PAC's? Money wins elections, it is a tale as old as time and has only gotten worse as protections for keeping corporate money out have eroded. 

I probably should point out, I am not a Bloomberg guy. I just look at that thread and see little in there that I don't think most people in presidential elections are doing, he's just starting at a primary level before a large amount of the "big money" starts flowing in.

[Belsnickel]

(02-17-2020, 12:16 PM)Au165 Wrote: ...But again, how is this different then any other candidate who is well backed through Super PAC's? Money wins elections, it is a tale as old as time and has only gotten worse as protections for keeping corporate money out have eroded. 

I probably should point out, I am not a Bloomberg guy. I just look at that thread and see little in there that I don't think most people in presidential elections are doing, he's just starting at a primary level before a large amount of the "big money" starts flowing in.

It's not really different, and I agree it's an old tale. Doesn't mean I have to like it and don't think publicly funded elections should be a thing.

[Au165]

(02-17-2020, 12:25 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: It's not really different, and I agree it's an old tale. Doesn't mean I have to like it and don't think publicly funded elections should be a thing.

Yea, I was just trying to see if I was missing something as it feels like the author of that twitter thread has more of an ax to grind specifically with Bloomberg. He attempts to paint it as "stealing the election" but that seems like propaganda as much as anything since a lot of the things there are nothing new. Paying people to come to rallies is a real thing, stealing people from others campaigns isn't new, etc. but the way this guy paints it he is acting like he alone if a threat to democracy when the reality is it has been under siege for a while. 

[Belsnickel]

(02-17-2020, 12:27 PM)Au165 Wrote: Yea, I was just trying to see if I was missing something as it feels like the author of that twitter thread has more of an ax to grind specifically with Bloomberg. He attempts to paint it as "stealing the election" but that seems like propaganda as much as anything since a lot of the things there are nothing new. Paying people to come to rallies is a real thing, stealing people from others campaigns isn't new, etc. but the way this guy paints it he is acting like he alone if a threat to democracy when the reality is it has been under siege for a while. 

While I can't find a ton on the guy, it appears he has had issues with Bloomberg for years as a result of the stop-and-frisk policies (my speculation there based on his writings).

[Au165]

(02-17-2020, 12:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: While I can't find a ton on the guy, it appears he has had issues with Bloomberg for years as a result of the stop-and-frisk policies (my speculation there based on his writings).

Quote:I've worked against him, covered him as a journalist & worked with his top aides.

That line had me a bit skeptical to start.

[CJD]

(02-17-2020, 12:16 PM)Au165 Wrote: ...But again, how is this different then any other candidate who is well backed through Super PAC's? Money wins elections, it is a tale as old as time and has only gotten worse as protections for keeping corporate money out have eroded. 

I probably should point out, I am not a Bloomberg guy. I just look at that thread and see little in there that I don't think most people in presidential elections are doing, he's just starting at a primary level before a large amount of the "big money" starts flowing in.

I'm a relative newcomer to politics so I don't have a whole lot of experience with observing and absorbing a primary season from beginning to end, so take this with a grain of salt.

But I'd be very surprised to learn that most politicians are paying off/influencing billionaire donors to not donate to other candidates.

Buying endorsements I think is a little more common, but I'd still be surprised if that was the norm in politics.

And then obviously the ads are completely normal for American politics, but the level of saturation is still pretty insane. Plus paying social media influencers to promote him may just be a different version of ads, but is still pretty sleazy, since social media influencers, more than commercials, are supposedly selling their brand and their ideology (whether that's true or not, that's the general perception) to their followers rather than crafting their ideology to match whoever pays them.

Do Super PACs really have an equivalent level of influence over races?

[BmorePat87]

This is why we need publicly funded elections.

Then there’s staff. Mike poaches talent away from other campaigns, by giving folks huge salaries & perks (catered meals, etc). His money also lets him hire more staff than all his opponents combined, while grassroots campaigns have to run on $18 checks from G’ma Millie. 8/17 pic.twitter.com/a1hBu84I3K

— Blake Zeff (@blakezeff) February 13, 2020

Also, my grandmother's name is Millie lol

[fredtoast]

(02-17-2020, 01:06 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Do Super PACs really have an equivalent level of influence over races?

Yes.  Money is money.

Why would you think that Super PACS would not do the exact same thing Bloomberg is?  You think they are more ethical?

[*michaelsean*]

So if he wins the nomination we are guaranteed four more years of a wannabe authoritarian.

[*Nately120*]

Between Trump and Bloomberg is nice to see the ultra-rich getting back into power after we let that guy who was born in a mud hut in Kenya run things.

[Dill]

(02-17-2020, 02:43 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: This is why we need publicly funded elections.

Then there’s staff. Mike poaches talent away from other campaigns, by giving folks huge salaries & perks (catered meals, etc). His money also lets him hire more staff than all his opponents combined, while grassroots campaigns have to run on $18 checks from G’ma Millie. 8/17 pic.twitter.com/a1hBu84I3K

— Blake Zeff (@blakezeff) February 13, 2020

Also, my grandmother's name is Millie lol

Would he pay me to support him on the Bengals Message Board? 

I'll do it for a new laptop.   Don't want a Mac though.

[Dill]

(02-17-2020, 04:06 PM)michaelsean Wrote: So if he wins the nomination we are guaranteed four more years of a wannabe authoritarian.

This guy is rich enough to pay us to like him.  I will if the price is right.

[Au165]

(02-17-2020, 07:44 PM)Dill Wrote: This guy is rich enough to pay us to like him.  I will if the price is right.

Isn't that what politicians have done in a round about way with "tax cuts" for years? 

[Belsnickel]

(02-18-2020, 09:06 AM)Au165 Wrote: Isn't that what politicians have done in a round about way with "tax cuts" for years? 

It's one of the pitfalls of democracy. Those seeking re-election will often put that over the policy that is actually best for the people.

[Au165]

(02-18-2020, 09:44 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: It's one of the pitfalls of democracy. Those seeking re-election will often put that over the policy that is actually best for the people.

Because many people, when it comes down to it, don't want the best policy they want what they think will benefit them directly the most. 

[*michaelsean*]

(02-18-2020, 09:06 AM)Au165 Wrote: Isn't that what politicians have done in a round about way with "tax cuts" for years? 

I guess I'd rather someone buy me off with my own money over promising me someone else's money.  

[GMDino]

Didn't JFK's dad essentially buy WV during the 1960 election?

The American people have been electing rich people as long as there have been Americans, elections and rich people...in general.