Michael Bloomberg's attempt to buy the election, detailed

[Belsnickel]

(02-18-2020, 10:00 AM)GMDino Wrote: 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.

True story: George Washington bought votes to be elected to the House of Burgesses by handing out free libations.

[GMDino]

(02-18-2020, 10:05 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: True story: George Washington bought votes to be elected to the House of Burgesses by handing out free libations.

And, IIRC, Washington was much like Trump in that he didn't ask for a big salary but was a huge spender which more than made up for it.

[BmorePat87]

We need to unite to defeat Trump in November. This type of "energy" is not going to get us there. https://t.co/bPuUZMs2d6 pic.twitter.com/Tdp6mpWjcX

— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) February 17, 2020

Bloomberg is calling out the toxic online Bernie Bros, calling for Bernie to address the behavior of his supporters. Naturally, the response has been to repeat the behavior or say things like "it's effective" (it's not) or "If you can't handle this, how will you handle it from the Nazis we're running against" (I think they just compared their behavior to Nazis).

Bloomberg is a shit candidate, but someone had to say it.

[CJD]

(02-18-2020, 11:13 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote:

We need to unite to defeat Trump in November. This type of "energy" is not going to get us there. https://t.co/bPuUZMs2d6 pic.twitter.com/Tdp6mpWjcX

— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) February 17, 2020

Bloomberg is calling out the toxic online Bernie Bros, calling for Bernie to address the behavior of his supporters. Naturally, the response has been to repeat the behavior or say things like "it's effective" (it's not) or "If you can't handle this, how will you handle it from the Nazis we're running against" (I think they just compared their behavior to Nazis).

Bloomberg is a shit candidate, but someone had to say it.

Going after your opponents' supporters always goes well. Bloomberg obviously spoke to Hillary about this prior to making this ad.

[Belsnickel]

(02-18-2020, 11:13 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote:

We need to unite to defeat Trump in November. This type of "energy" is not going to get us there. https://t.co/bPuUZMs2d6 pic.twitter.com/Tdp6mpWjcX

— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) February 17, 2020

Bloomberg is calling out the toxic online Bernie Bros, calling for Bernie to address the behavior of his supporters. Naturally, the response has been to repeat the behavior or say things like "it's effective" (it's not) or "If you can't handle this, how will you handle it from the Nazis we're running against" (I think they just compared their behavior to Nazis).

Bloomberg is a shit candidate, but someone had to say it.

Monmouth poll puts him and Bernie tied in Virginia and Bloomberg ahead in a head-to-head with Bernie. Bloomberg is a very Trump-like figure for the Democratic party. He has been counted as both a Republican and a Democrat in different times, he is a rich asshole looking for power, and his policies aren't really where the party is. He's also seen as sexist and racist. The only big difference is that instead of Bloomberg being at the forefront of an energizing campaign, he's fighting against one. He's seen as a more palatable choice by many who just don't want the revolution that they see Bernie bringing. I'm not to keen on seeing what will happen if either one gets the nomination.

Honestly, I'd like the both of them to go kick rocks.

[CJD]

(02-18-2020, 03:00 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Monmouth poll puts him and Bernie tied in Virginia and Bloomberg ahead in a head-to-head with Bernie. Bloomberg is a very Trump-like figure for the Democratic party. He has been counted as both a Republican and a Democrat in different times, he is a rich asshole looking for power, and his policies aren't really where the party is. He's also seen as sexist and racist. The only big difference is that instead of Bloomberg being at the forefront of an energizing campaign, he's fighting against one. He's seen as a more palatable choice by many who just don't want the revolution that they see Bernie bringing. I'm not to keen on seeing what will happen if either one gets the nomination.

Honestly, I'd like the both of them to go kick rocks.

Who is your ideal nominee?

[Belsnickel]

(02-18-2020, 03:05 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Who is your ideal nominee?

I don't like anyone in the field right now.

[CJD]

(02-18-2020, 03:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't like anyone in the field right now.

That's gotta be frustrating. 

Is there anyone you think could potentially enter the field or are you just resigned to being disappointed in November regardless of the outcome?

[*michaelsean*]

(02-18-2020, 03:05 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Who is your ideal nominee?

His ideal nominee died 75 years ago, and he don't compromise.  

[Belsnickel]

(02-18-2020, 03:24 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: That's gotta be frustrating. 

Is there anyone you think could potentially enter the field or are you just resigned to being disappointed in November regardless of the outcome?

i'm pretty resigned to being disappointed. I mean, there are candidates I would rather see on the ticket than others, but I'm going to be holding my nose when I vote regardless in November.

(02-18-2020, 03:36 PM)michaelsean Wrote: His ideal nominee died 75 years ago, and he don't compromise.  

In all seriousness, though, my ideal candidate would be a mash-up of the Roosevelts.

[BmorePat87]

(02-18-2020, 11:30 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Going after your opponents' supporters always goes well. Bloomberg obviously spoke to Hillary about this prior to making this ad.

Someone called it his "deplorables" moment. 

That said, he's not wrong and neither was she. It only heightens the hate, though. 

[BmorePat87]

(02-18-2020, 03:00 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Monmouth poll puts him and Bernie tied in Virginia and Bloomberg ahead in a head-to-head with Bernie. Bloomberg is a very Trump-like figure for the Democratic party. He has been counted as both a Republican and a Democrat in different times, he is a rich asshole looking for power, and his policies aren't really where the party is. He's also seen as sexist and racist. The only big difference is that instead of Bloomberg being at the forefront of an energizing campaign, he's fighting against one. He's seen as a more palatable choice by many who just don't want the revolution that they see Bernie bringing. I'm not to keen on seeing what will happen if either one gets the nomination.

Honestly, I'd like the both of them to go kick rocks.

I'm not down with either "extreme". I'm gonna go to Buttigieg's town hall in Fairfax this Sunday. Just hope he picks up steam as Biden fades. 

[treee]

Who is in this guys ear? When 25-30% of the party is voting for Sanders at the moment, who thinks it is a good idea for Mr. 60 billion dollars to buy his way into the election? Not to mention he isn't winning any points socially either. Just seems like another opportunistic oligarch trying capitalize on America's monumentally skewed overton window.

[Arturo Bandini]

Even in Europe we are feeling that Sanders wave. If you get you guys together, you will be unstoppable.

Good luck.

Free education and free healthcare are just the basis of every western european country and you don't see many of us at your borders asking for asylum. It works very well.

You pay taxes but you know everyone of your citizen can have medical cares if he gets cancer and it can happen to everyone.

It's just mindboggling that for some people proud to workship someone called Jesus Christ, it is considered to be "radical".

It's just common f****g sense and the basis of every empathetic society.

What you call communism is called social democracy in every other country of the world.

#Bernie2020

[CJD]

(02-18-2020, 05:02 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Someone called it his "deplorables" moment. 

That said, he's not wrong and neither was she. It only heightens the hate, though. 

I hate the Bernie bros because they give legitimate Bernie supporters, one of the most diverse groups of voters out there, a bad name.

The problem, I think, is the most vocal portion of his supporters feel like the country is ***** them over (with student debt that their parents/grandparents didn't have, with increasing costs of living vs wages that their parents/grandparents didn't have, with healthcare costs that are skyrocketing to the point of bankruptcy which...to be fair their parents probably also had, but not to the extent that they do). And when they express these frustrations, they're called communists when they really just want what the generations before them had.

Van Jones said it isn't socialism or communism but called it "Grandparent envy" on Real Time with Bill Maher, which I think is pretty accurate.

It makes me more sympathetic to them than Trumps' deplorables, who are truly just fueled by hate and bigotry.

But I do wish they'd shut the hell up sometimes. Or at the very least express their frustration via constructive argument rather than trolling...

Ugh...Politics in the modern age suck...

[CJD]

(02-18-2020, 04:32 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: i'm pretty resigned to being disappointed. I mean, there are candidates I would rather see on the ticket than others, but I'm going to be holding my nose when I vote regardless in November.




In all seriousness, though, my ideal candidate would be a mash-up of the Roosevelts.

I get that.

My ultimate goal is Bernie as the nominee but even I have my doubts about whether the country is ready for his proposals. We've been taught since our childhoods that communism is bad, to the point that basically any redistribution of wealth is considered Stalinism by a lot of people. And that's very intimidating when you're determining who can capture the votes of the general public.

If I thought Pete or Amy or even Biden actually had a chance against Trump, I'd probably vote for them instead. I just see way too many warts on these other candidates. Amy doesn't have that many problems, but I am also concerned about the "Hillary Hangover," even with the acknowledgement that that may be considered a sexist stance on the matter (for the record, my concern isn't about a woman being a good president, it's about the people in this country thinking a woman would be a good president). Plus she's so boring. She's the "We can't afford that!" candidate this election cycle. I can't remember the last time that style of politicking actually drove people to the polls.

I think our best shot is increasing turnout from typical nonvoters (young, poor and minority voters, mostly) rather than "converting" Never Trumpers and moderates who, apparently, are still open to voting for Trump if the Democratic nominee is not exactly what they want.

I am prepared to be disappointed in November. The fact that the Democratic nominee isn't a slam dunk winner regardless of who it is, given the blatant authoritarian behavior from Trump over the last few years, is truly pathetic. I've caught myself often questioning the quality of the people in this country for even giving Trump a shot at re-election...

But thems the breaks, I guess.

[Dill]

(02-18-2020, 05:58 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Even in Europe we are feeling that Sanders wave. If you get you guys together, you will be unstoppable.

Good luck.

Free education and free healthcare are just the basis of every western european country and you don't see many of us at your borders asking for asylum. It works very well.

You pay taxes but you know everyone of your citizen can have medical cares if he gets cancer and it can happen to everyone.

It's just mindboggling that for some people proud to workship someone called Jesus Christ, it is considered to be "radical".

It's just common f****g sense and the basis of every empathetic society.

What you call communism is called social democracy in every other country of the world.

#Bernie2020

LOL rep for that.

[Dill]

(02-19-2020, 10:52 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: My ultimate goal is Bernie as the nominee but even I have my doubts about whether the country is ready for his proposals. We've been taught since our childhoods that communism is bad, to the point that basically any redistribution of wealth is considered Stalinism by a lot of people. And that's very intimidating when you're determining who can capture the votes of the general public.

If I thought Pete or Amy or even Biden actually had a chance against Trump, I'd probably vote for them instead. I just see way too many warts on these other candidates. Amy doesn't have that many problems, but I am also concerned about the "Hillary Hangover," even with the acknowledgement that that may be considered a sexist stance on the matter (for the record, my concern isn't about a woman being a good president, it's about the people in this country thinking a woman would be a good president). Plus she's so boring. She's the "We can't afford that!" candidate this election cycle. I can't remember the last time that style of politicking actually drove people to the polls.

I think our best shot is increasing turnout from typical nonvoters (young, poor and minority voters, mostly) rather than "converting" Never Trumpers and moderates who, apparently, are still open to voting for Trump if the Democratic nominee is not exactly what they want.

I am prepared to be disappointed in November. The fact that the Democratic nominee isn't a slam dunk winner regardless of who it is, given the blatant authoritarian behavior from Trump over the last few years, is truly pathetic. I've caught myself often questioning the quality of the people in this country for even giving Trump a shot at re-election...

But thems the breaks, I guess.

So far I like Warren best. She's the SMARTEST kid in class and won't play with the bad boys. Castrated Bloomberg with his own knife.

I'd be happy with Bernie too, or Pete after that. That guy is a learner. And young. Notice he is always prepared and better every debate. Strategic and focused.

Not sure the "socialist" will lose, as everyone predicts. Once he gets on stage and argues his points, I think he will change minds. "Why do we pay twice as much health care per capita as any other industrialized nation?" he keeps asking. When the answer to the question finally holds the public stage for a few months, I think it quite possible people will vote for "socialism." The argument against Bernie boils down to "Insurance companies, hospitals and Big Pharm deserve government protection!"

Amy was ok till she didn't know the president of Mexico.  But I'll vote for WHOMEVER is NOT TRUMP. 

Share your disappointment in US voters, and their embrace of criminality--that this election should be close at all condemns the national judgment.
And that's why I agree the goal has to be turnout. Little we can do to persuade Trumpers en masse.  But fractions continue to peel off as he lurches from one scandal to the next--Syria, acquittal without witnesses, green light pardons to the politically corrupt, the AG sicced on "enemies" . . . it's not over yet.

[CJD]

(02-20-2020, 08:05 PM)Dill Wrote: So far I like Warren best. She's the SMARTEST kid in class and won't play with the bad boys. Castrated Bloomberg with his own knife.

I'd be happy with Bernie too, or Pete after that. That guy is a learner. And young. Notice he is always prepared and better every debate. Strategic and focused.

Not sure the "socialist" will lose, as everyone predicts. Once he gets on stage and argues his points, I think he will change minds. "Why do we pay twice as much health care per capita as any other industrialized nation?" he keeps asking. When the answer to the question finally holds the public stage for a few months, I think it quite possible people will vote for "socialism." The argument against Bernie boils down to "Insurance companies, hospitals and Big Pharm deserve government protection!"

Amy was ok till she didn't know the president of Mexico.  But I'll vote for WHOMEVER is NOT TRUMP. 

Share your disappointment in US voters, and their embrace of criminality--that this election should be close at all condemns the national judgment.
And that's why I agree the goal has to be turnout. Little we can do to persuade Trumpers en masse.  But fractions continue to peel off as he lurches from one scandal to the next--Syria, acquittal without witnesses, green light pardons to the politically corrupt, the AG sicced on "enemies" . . . it's not over yet.

I tell you, Warren impressed the hell out of me last night. She had seemed so meek in the last few debates, it was really nice to see her really tear into Bloomberg. That was the Warren I remembered from early on when she was polling so high over the summer.

I personally don't think the forgetting the President of Mexico's name is that big of a deal. It's not a good look, but it is possible that she just blanked on it. I think her record as a prosecutor is a lot more concerning. All these former prosecutors throwing black men in jail over questionable cases just to claim victory is just nuts. Amy looked weak and out of sorts all night and I'm glad that she and Pete are fighting so much. 

As far as Pete, I like a few things about him. I appreciate his experience in the military and as a Rhodes scholar. I think he has the personality of a wet blanket though and I'm not sure what his deal with black people is, but he seems to repel them. It probably doesn't help that he's had at least 2 separate issues with him faking or misleading people about support for him from the black community. It just makes him come off as sleazy. And I think Medicare for all who want it is a disastrous plan that would set back the fight for universal healthcare at least 20 years.

I'll vote for any of them, but I'm only really excited to vote for Bernie and Warren :). The Socialist stuff won't take in the long run. Bernie is a center left candidate in most other developed countries. What he's proposing isn't as radical as moderates and republicans try to make him seem and I think the voters are seeing that now.

[Dill]

(02-20-2020, 10:51 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I tell you, Warren impressed the hell out of me last night. She had seemed so meek in the last few debates, it was really nice to see her really tear into Bloomberg. That was the Warren I remembered from early on when she was polling so high over the summer.

I personally don't think the forgetting the President of Mexico's name is that big of a deal. It's not a good look, but it is possible that she just blanked on it. I think her record as a prosecutor is a lot more concerning. All these former prosecutors throwing black men in jail over questionable cases just to claim victory is just nuts. Amy looked weak and out of sorts all night and I'm glad that she and Pete are fighting so much. 

As far as Pete, I like a few things about him. I appreciate his experience in the military and as a Rhodes scholar. I think he has the personality of a wet blanket though and I'm not sure what his deal with black people is, but he seems to repel them. It probably doesn't help that he's had at least 2 separate issues with him faking or misleading people about support for him from the black community. It just makes him come off as sleazy. And I think Medicare for all who want it is a disastrous plan that would set back the fight for universal healthcare at least 20 years.

I'll vote for any of them, but I'm only really excited to vote for Bernie and Warren :). The Socialist stuff won't take in the long run. Bernie is a center left candidate in most other developed countries. What he's proposing isn't as radical as moderates and republicans try to make him seem and I think the voters are seeing that now.

Yes, it's possible the forgetting was just a brain fart on Amy's part. Still, she does seem to have a "post it" size medical plan compared to Warren, who just looks to have mastered the data on health care, health policy, and corporate sleaze from every direction. She looks like she could advise her advisors.

I think that Pete's difficulty with African American voters stems from the fact he is gay. Black Baptist churches do have a problem with that.

The more Bernie and Warren speak, the more people will be comfortable with what Fox is calling "socialism" this election cycle. But once we have a nominee, I think another important recognition will kick in, namely that no one will get anything done so long as McConnell runs the Senate. Lawrence McDonnell made that point after the debate--all these Dem proposals, moderate or not, are pie-in-the-sky as long as the Republicans control the Senate. And they will so long as massive numbers of poor and middle class Americans put corporate profit and THE WALL above their own well being. Crazy to suppose that Bernie's election would turn us into Canada overnight.  In addition to Mitch, billions of corporate dollars would be flowing to Congress to keep our drug prices "American."