Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #3601  
Old 02-12-2020, 09:41 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,701
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
withering on the vine,

BTW: That's a very strong thing to say about the dem party. They seem to be having a normal primary to me. Anything wrong with calling it that? I think a lot of us are getting caught up in social media and cable media anxieties. A withering on the vine scenario is out there I'm sure but it comes from the tronp swamp. The far right needs it. I don't want to give it to them.
  #3602  
Old 02-12-2020, 09:54 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
I was surprised. Who is your ideal?

Also: Both parties are not comparable.

If centrism isn't dead how is it alive after Garland, and the deluge? Who is your counterpart in it?
I think bipartisanship is, for the moment, dead. The Republican party is now 90-95% behind Trump; the anti-Trumpers have left the party and gone independent. But what I'm saying is that many of those independent voters aren't necessarily going to embrace Bernie Sanders or anyone who coopts his ideas. That's pretty evident by the vote in New Hampshire last night. There is a lot of skepticism about Sanders and his pet proposals.
  #3603  
Old 02-12-2020, 10:00 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,318
I think bipartisanship as a vision that appeals to voters is very much alive, sells better than hyperpartisanship, and has more chance of happening than does success of bringing change by hyperpartisanship does. Which is a low bar to be sure.

Last edited by DSeid; 02-12-2020 at 10:00 PM.
  #3604  
Old 02-12-2020, 10:02 PM
PhillyGuy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Posts: 1,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
There are three likely outcomes for the progressive-left D's should Bernie get the nomination, and two of them are bad.

1. Bernie loses to Trump - perhaps big, like McGovern in 1972 - huge setback for the progressives.
2. Bernie wins the presidency, but is a one-term failure due to intense opposition from Congressional R's and also some centrist D's - gets little done, or, whatever he does get done, leads to a backlash far fiercer than Obamacare faced. No Democrats then dare run on a "progressive" platform for some years to come.
3. Bernie wins, successfully transforms the nation into democratic socialism, wins reelection, is a transformational, popular president.
4. Like Obama, who was, by one respectable measure, the most liberal U.S. Senator, Sanders proves surprisingly centrist to the few objective observers that can be founed. His first term starts with a recession that proves much milder than the famous last one, a success that will be his legacy. Bernie's health then leads to him being a one term-president. In 2024, Abrams beats Trump Jr.

5. (I'm afraid this is the most likely) Bernie loses in a squeaker.

and can't be ruled out:

6. Bernie wins fairly, but doesn't make the White House because of what happens when Pence leads the House electoral vote count.

Last edited by PhillyGuy; 02-12-2020 at 10:05 PM.
  #3605  
Old 02-12-2020, 10:22 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,701
7) Bernie pivots

8) Bernie gets more statesmanlike

9) Bernie wins a war

10) Bernie loses a war

11) People like him and his policies seem fair




Cmon we got to nail this DOWN. Let's cap it at 500.
  #3606  
Old 02-12-2020, 10:36 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 27,528
12) Bernie gets the nomination and then has another heart attack, not fatal, but more serious than the last one

13) Bernie and Trump BOTH have heart attacks

487 more to go.
  #3607  
Old 02-12-2020, 10:45 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
There are three likely outcomes for the progressive-left D's should Bernie get the nomination, and two of them are bad.

1. Bernie loses to Trump - perhaps big, like McGovern in 1972 - huge setback for the progressives.
2. Bernie wins the presidency, but is a one-term failure due to intense opposition from Congressional R's and also some centrist D's - gets little done, or, whatever he does get done, leads to a backlash far fiercer than Obamacare faced. No Democrats then dare run on a "progressive" platform for some years to come.
3. Bernie wins, successfully transforms the nation into democratic socialism, wins reelection, is a transformational, popular president.

1# and 2# are likelier than 3#. 3# is something that would take quite a few things all falling into place at the same time to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhillyGuy View Post
4. Like Obama, who was, by one respectable measure, the most liberal U.S. Senator, Sanders proves surprisingly centrist to the few objective observers that can be founed. His first term starts with a recession that proves much milder than the famous last one, a success that will be his legacy. Bernie's health then leads to him being a one term-president. In 2024, Abrams beats Trump Jr.

5. (I'm afraid this is the most likely) Bernie loses in a squeaker.

and can't be ruled out:

6. Bernie wins fairly, but doesn't make the White House because of what happens when Pence leads the House electoral vote count.
I think #6, broadened to include a broad range of possible GOP cheating, is much likelier than people think. Republicans have repeatedly demonstrated that Cheating is their principle value. They needn't worry about any backlash: many of their supporters accept all lies; others delight in GOP criminality.

There's also
7. Events beyond Sanders' control create turmoil (whether economic, social, political, or geopolitical); this turmoil strengthens the GOP politically and the Ds lose the Presidency in 2024. The turmoil may be a result of deliberate GOP sabotage: Expect the GOP to continue working with Putin with a D in the White House.

8. Bernie gets a too-extreme agenda passed; private insurance is abolished; this is hugely disruptive and strengthens the GOP politically.

#7 (a variation on #2) is a real possibility.
#8 is very unlikely: The D's lack even the gumption to abolish filibuster, let alone to pass a radical agenda.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On another question — "Is centrism dead?" — politics has certainly become obscenely hyperpartisan. But a very large number of Americans would favor centrist policies.

But I have trouble even viewing today's American politics in terms of left vs right. Instead it's Truth, Science and Humane Values on one side and Lying, Cheating, Greed, Hatred and Stupidity on the other side. In that context what does "centrism' even mean?

Last edited by septimus; 02-12-2020 at 10:47 PM.
  #3608  
Old 02-12-2020, 10:47 PM
TheMysteryWriter's Avatar
TheMysteryWriter is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 275
14. Trump challenges Bernie to a duel during their third debate.
15. Bernie refuses. Trump mocks him.
16. One of Trump's fans jumps up on the stage and tried to shoot Bernie to try and please Trump, but he's a cop by day, so a lousy shot and he accidentally hits Trump instead.
17. Bernie becomes our new prez!

Last edited by TheMysteryWriter; 02-12-2020 at 10:49 PM.
  #3609  
Old 02-12-2020, 11:21 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 8,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
There are three likely outcomes for the progressive-left D's should Bernie get the nomination, and two of them are bad.

1. Bernie loses to Trump - perhaps big, like McGovern in 1972 - huge setback for the progressives.
2. Bernie wins the presidency, but is a one-term failure due to intense opposition from Congressional R's and also some centrist D's - gets little done, or, whatever he does get done, leads to a backlash far fiercer than Obamacare faced. No Democrats then dare run on a "progressive" platform for some years to come.
3. Bernie wins, successfully transforms the nation into democratic socialism, wins reelection, is a transformational, popular president.



1# and 2# are likelier than 3#. 3# is something that would take quite a few things all falling into place at the same time to happen.
But there are some things many people, even republicans like. I for one like universal healthcare. I would like the wealthy to pay their fair share of taxes. I want more funding for social security and persons with disabilities. I want our corporations to pay fair share of taxes.

I have family in Denmark and I like how Bernie wants to embrace many of their ways.
  #3610  
Old 02-13-2020, 02:18 AM
Wrenching Spanners is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
There are three likely outcomes for the progressive-left D's should Bernie get the nomination, and two of them are bad.

1. Bernie loses to Trump - perhaps big, like McGovern in 1972 - huge setback for the progressives.
2. Bernie wins the presidency, but is a one-term failure due to intense opposition from Congressional R's and also some centrist D's - gets little done, or, whatever he does get done, leads to a backlash far fiercer than Obamacare faced. No Democrats then dare run on a "progressive" platform for some years to come.
3. Bernie wins, successfully transforms the nation into democratic socialism, wins reelection, is a transformational, popular president.



1# and 2# are likelier than 3#. 3# is something that would take quite a few things all falling into place at the same time to happen.
You left out Bernie winning and dying in office from a heart attack.
  #3611  
Old 02-13-2020, 06:35 AM
Grim Render is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,354
I seem to remember Biden floating the notion of a Republican VP. I wonder how a Bernie/Romney ticket would do?
  #3612  
Old 02-13-2020, 07:14 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Render View Post
I seem to remember Biden floating the notion of a Republican VP. I wonder how a Bernie/Romney ticket would do?
Hopefully the nomination of Romney would fail a roll call vote at the convention. That would be unacceptable at any time, but it would be especially heinous to put a conservative Republican on the ticket with a man who would be the first octogenarian president, who has already had a heart attack.

Romneyism is already on the ballot, and it's represented by Donald Trump.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 02-13-2020 at 07:19 AM.
  #3613  
Old 02-13-2020, 08:26 AM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Feldon View Post
Romneyism is already on the ballot, and it's represented by Donald Trump.
I don't think that's quite fair as Utah got a smaller percentage of votes for Trump than New Hampshire or Nevada and you can hardly say that they represent Trumpism. If anyone has a claim to be the banner-bearer of never-trumpism, it's the senator from Utah.
  #3614  
Old 02-13-2020, 08:40 AM
Grim Render is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,354
Well, I realize the last combined ticket did not end well, but they did win the election.

My thought was that you normally choose a VP to compensate for geographic and demographic weaknesses of a candidate. I suspect Bernies weaknesses in terms of being to the left of Americas Overton Window are more serious than geography and demographics though.

Other nations have at times advanced bipartisan coalitions to deal with serious crises. And I believe Trumps erosion of American practice in terms of accountability, rule of law and political neutrality in the departments do qualify.

Mitt Romney is the author of Obama/Romneycare, rich, strongly anti-Trumph and a former Republican presidential candidate, so he would seem to be the perfect candidate for such a ticket.

I do see that Bernies age and health is a strong argument against it, where Buttigieg/Romney or Warren/Romney would have been a better matchup.

Last edited by Grim Render; 02-13-2020 at 08:41 AM.
  #3615  
Old 02-13-2020, 10:41 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludovic View Post
I don't think that's quite fair as Utah got a smaller percentage of votes for Trump than New Hampshire or Nevada and you can hardly say that they represent Trumpism. If anyone has a claim to be the banner-bearer of never-trumpism, it's the senator from Utah.
It's absolutely fair. Donald Trump is a standard-issue Republican president who does extremely little that the Republican party as a whole (including Mitt Romney) does not stand for. The overwhelming majority of Romney voters voted for Trump because Trump was the candidate that represented their wishes. The overwhelming majority of terrible stuff that Donald Trump has done would have taken place in a Romney administration and vice-versa; Trump is the symptom, not the disease. "Never-Trumpism" is a niche faction that exists primarily in cable news studios.

Using the vice presidency to make a symbolic grand gesture about an impeachment trial that has already receded from the public memory is just an incredibly bad idea.
  #3616  
Old 02-13-2020, 12:06 PM
Grim Render is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,354
I don't really see the connection to the impeachment trial?

The points would be to
a) Cover the democratic candidates weakness in being to the left of the US Overton Window
b) Split the Republican vote
c) Convince some of the centrist floating vote that yes, this really is serious
d) Pull in an few voters who like Mitt Romney, he did get a lot of PR as a presidential candidate.

Also, I really don't think the trade wars, the Syria pullout, the Putin appeasement, the internment of children, the lack of competent appointees, the contempt for laws, lack of a blind trust, etc, etc would necessarily have been parts of any other Republican administration but Trumps.
  #3617  
Old 02-13-2020, 12:54 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Feldon View Post
"Never-Trumpism" is a niche faction that exists primarily in cable news studios.
Except the 21% of Utahns that voted for McMullin.
Quote:
Using the vice presidency to make a symbolic grand gesture about an impeachment trial that has already receded from the public memory is just an incredibly bad idea.
I did not say that it would be wise to put him on the ticket, I just said that it is not fair to equate Romneyism with Trumpism.
  #3618  
Old 02-13-2020, 01:20 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,886
New Morning Consult poll shows Bernie's lead up to ten points. He has improved his numbers more than any other candidate relative to pre-NH numbers. Also, he is now the candidate that Democrats view as most electable; that is also true of the subset of black Democrats (goodbye Joe, you gotta go, me oh my-o)
  #3619  
Old 02-13-2020, 01:25 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,955
Holy crap, Bloomberg... 18% in that Morning Consult poll?!
  #3620  
Old 02-13-2020, 01:47 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,553
Interesting to see that, despite all the recent talk about Warren's fade and Klobuchar's rise, that Warren's lead in that poll is still double that of Klob's.
  #3621  
Old 02-13-2020, 02:14 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,529
Yeah, Bloomberg just took a huge step toward taking control of the moderate lane and being a real contender, imo. Just looking at the situation:

1. Bernie shellacked the presumed national front-runner (Biden) in the first two states, so the left lane is showing momentum.
2. Biden's numbers are tanking in the next two states (down below 25% in SC & at about 15% in NV)
3. Bernie's national numbers are dwarfing Biden's, and Biden's numbers continue to crater.
4. Bloomberg is raking up endorsements.
5. Bloomberg is either in second place or +17% in: CA, NC, TX & MI (four delegate-rich, early-March states)
6. Bloomberg's averaging almost 17% in: NJ, FL, OH, WI & PA (five later-voting delegate-rich states)
7. Bloomberg's just broken the 15% mark nationally.

(All numbers from 538's polling averages)

I don't know how this doesn't end up being Bloomberg vs. Sanders for the nom at this point. Pete and Klob, while looking decent in IA and NH, just won't have the money to compete against the Sanders fundraising machine or Bloomberg's money printing machine going forward.

Warren, to me, is the biggest disappointment of the primary. I was really hoping she'd be a contender.
  #3622  
Old 02-13-2020, 02:19 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,803
Bernie vs a billionaire (and then Bernie vs a fake billionaire in the GE, if he makes it) is about as perfect a setup for his campaign and supporters as could be imagined.
  #3623  
Old 02-13-2020, 02:19 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
I don't know how this doesn't end up being Bloomberg vs. Sanders for the nom at this point.
What a fight that'd be. "We are the 99%" Bernie supporters would be in incandescent-rage mode, seeing their guy go up against a $60 billion billionaire.


ETA: iiandyiiii beat me to it.

Last edited by Velocity; 02-13-2020 at 02:19 PM.
  #3624  
Old 02-13-2020, 02:39 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,886
Awesome. I have total confidence in Bernie's ability to shred a billionaire on the debate stage. And if I'm wrong, I'd sure rather find out in the spring than in the fall.
  #3625  
Old 02-13-2020, 02:45 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,783
PredicitIt- which is interesting as it measures who people think will win ( as opposed for who they are voting for) currently has Bloomberg ahead of Sanders in 14 states ( mostly Southern and Eastern ) and Washington DC.
  #3626  
Old 02-13-2020, 02:48 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,304
That's pretty bizarre confidence. Billionaires come in all sorts but Bernie can shred them all?
  #3627  
Old 02-13-2020, 02:48 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Render View Post
... Also, I really don't think the trade wars, the Syria pullout, the Putin appeasement, the internment of children, the lack of competent appointees, the contempt for laws, lack of a blind trust, etc, etc would necessarily have been parts of any other Republican administration but Trumps.
They wouldn't have been part of a Trump Administration if the GOP Senate had exercised its constitutional duty to provide adult supervision for the White House, and to put their foot down when his crimes and treasons became undeniable.

But No. The Senate went along every step of the way: Refusing to consider bills that would seek to prevent Russia from rigging the next election; confirming the nominations of utter scumbags like Betsy DeVos; suppressing all efforts to expose Trump's crimes; joining in the Festival of Lies so that today, almost every sentence uttered by every GOP Congressperson is an outright lie, a hateful remark intended to promote Trumpism, or both.

Yes, a Rubio or a Cruz wouldn't have dared to engage in the extreme crimes and malice of Trump. But now that they know they can get away with it, expect the next GOP President to be wildly enthusiastic about criminality, lies, and hate-filled ranting in his White House, whatever he thought of Trump.
  #3628  
Old 02-13-2020, 03:55 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 42,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
That's pretty bizarre confidence. Billionaires come in all sorts but Bernie can shred them all?
If Sanders ends up debating Bloomberg--a billionaire from New York who's got a history of spouting misogynistic bullshit and of supporting racist real estate and policing policies--it may just provide a view of how he'd debate Trump.

What differences there'd be between the two would mostly be in Bloomberg's favor. Bloomberg is far more intelligent than Trump, far better at planning and sticking to message. He doesn't have nearly the honesty issues that Trump has. All Trump has over Bloomberg, AFAICT, is a canny ability to bully opponents, and a cult-like following.

So, yeah: I definitely look forward to seeing how Sanders handles Bloomberg.
  #3629  
Old 02-13-2020, 09:15 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post

I don't know how this doesn't end up being Bloomberg vs. Sanders for the nom at this point.
Clearly Democrats just love old Jewish guys from New York.
__________________
Please...we prefer the term "Bernard Brother".
  #3630  
Old 02-13-2020, 09:24 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
If Sanders ends up debating Bloomberg--a billionaire from New York who's got a history of spouting misogynistic bullshit and of supporting racist real estate and policing policies--it may just provide a view of how he'd debate Trump.

What differences there'd be between the two would mostly be in Bloomberg's favor. Bloomberg is far more intelligent than Trump, far better at planning and sticking to message. He doesn't have nearly the honesty issues that Trump has. All Trump has over Bloomberg, AFAICT, is a canny ability to bully opponents, and a cult-like following.

So, yeah: I definitely look forward to seeing how Sanders handles Bloomberg.
I look forward to it too but your reasoning is half baked at best. They are really nothing alike. Sanders better not debate a secret lizard man like Bloomberg the same way he debates a blowhard buffoon like Trump.

Bloomberg was elected mayor in a minority majority city during stop and frisk. Sanders may score on him but I don't see "shredded" happening.
  #3631  
Old 02-13-2020, 09:26 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,886
And for AFAIK the first time, Total Chaos is the clear front runner in the 538 projection! The relevant new data is apparently a new national poll with Biden (remember him?) still in the lead, and a Georgia poll showing him up by 32!
__________________
Please...we prefer the term "Bernard Brother".
  #3632  
Old 02-13-2020, 09:36 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Clearly Democrats just love old Jewish guys from New York.
Going with the fait accompli that Biden is effectively out of it, it is really something that the four most likely to be contenders are two old Jewish men (the socialist and the billionaire controller of media and finance), a gay man, and a woman. Any of them as president would be a first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
... Bloomberg was elected mayor in a minority majority city during stop and frisk. ...
This really needs emphasis. Black New Yorkers voted for him even as Stop and Frisk was getting lots of heat.
  #3633  
Old 02-13-2020, 09:41 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
And for AFAIK the first time, Total Chaos is the clear front runner in the 538 projection! The relevant new data is apparently a new national poll with Biden (remember him?) still in the lead, and a Georgia poll showing him up by 32!
Sanders still over 50% to get a plurality. Biden first in one poll is a part of it but now Bloomberg seems the solid uppwardly mobile third spot. They doubled his odds on both win types.

Last edited by CarnalK; 02-13-2020 at 09:42 PM.
  #3634  
Old 02-13-2020, 10:02 PM
str8cashhomie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Bloomberg was elected mayor in a minority majority city during stop and frisk.
Does anyone actually know the demographic breakdown for any of Bloomberg's mayoral elections? What demos did his support actually come from?
  #3635  
Old 02-13-2020, 10:15 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by str8cashhomie View Post
Does anyone actually know the demographic breakdown for any of Bloomberg's mayoral elections? What demos did his support actually come from?
Not sure where to find that but he won a majority in 4/5 boroughs in his 2005 & 2009 reelections.

Last edited by CarnalK; 02-13-2020 at 10:19 PM.
  #3636  
Old 02-13-2020, 10:27 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Going with the fait accompli that Biden is effectively out of it, it is really something that the four most likely to be contenders are two old Jewish men (the socialist and the billionaire controller of media and finance), a gay man, and a woman. Any of them as president would be a first.



This really needs emphasis. Black New Yorkers voted for him even as Stop and Frisk was getting lots of heat.
I find it interesting that PredicitIt shows him (Bloomberg) taking the dem primaries in the Deep South.

He has a lot of support in the black community at the local level, particularly with mayors. His foundation has worked with lots of minority communities in past few years. They helped Flint during their water crisis and their mayor has endorsed him.

I saw several black leaders (most notably Al Sharpton) interviewed during the past few days about Bloomberg and “stop and frisk”. The general line was - Yes, it was a horrible policy and Bloomberg has a lot to atone for. This apology is only the first small step. He has to do a lot more. But we need to give him a chance and listen to him. And remember the other candidates aren’t so great either.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/al-sharp...n-forgiveness/

The black voters will end up deciding. Call me crazy, but I bet Bloomberg picks up the black vote from Biden.

Last edited by Ann Hedonia; 02-13-2020 at 10:28 PM.
  #3637  
Old 02-13-2020, 10:29 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,553
Wouldn't it be ironic if Bloomberg, mayor of NYC, goes up in the general election against Trump, one of his most famous NYC "tenants."
  #3638  
Old 02-13-2020, 10:41 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
And for AFAIK the first time, Total Chaos is the clear front runner in the 538 projection! The relevant new data is apparently a new national poll with Biden (remember him?) still in the lead, and a Georgia poll showing him up by 32!
Everyone knew Biden wouldnt do well in NH and Iowa. But he had better kick butt in SC and do really well super Tuesday, or that's it.
  #3639  
Old 02-13-2020, 10:48 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,783
I think another irony is that if Bloomberg and Sanders end up being the front runners for the nomination - all the big corporations and industry lobbying groups and Super PAC donors looking to buy influence are going to be out of luck. They are the only two that can’t be bought. Bloomberg’s buying it, but he isn’t selling it.
  #3640  
Old 02-13-2020, 10:53 PM
str8cashhomie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Not sure where to find that but he won a majority in 4/5 boroughs in his 2005 & 2009 reelections.
Google really let me down on this, but I was at least able to find single polls from Quinnipiac on mayoral races taken just before the election for each of the elections he won. Just according to Quinnipiac, Bloomberg always did better among white voters than blacks, and in 2 out of 3 elections had a minority of black voters to one where he had a majority. Unfortunately I can't find any aggregate over multiple different pollsters over a time window, so this is all I have to go on.

2001:
Quote:
White voters support Bloomberg 49 - 37 percent, while black voters support Green 58 - 20 percent and Hispanic voters support Bloomberg 46 - 42 percent, a tie.
2005:
Quote:
The independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University survey shows Bloomberg leading Ferrer 81 - 17 percent among white likely voters and 58 - 40 percent among black likely voters, while Hispanic likely voters back Ferrer 57 - 40 percent.
2009:
Quote:
White voters back Bloomberg 66 - 24 percent, while black voters support Thompson 62 - 23 percent. Hispanic voters back the Mayor 51 - 43 percent.

Last edited by str8cashhomie; 02-13-2020 at 10:54 PM.
  #3641  
Old 02-14-2020, 12:40 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,518
With all the bogus lies about Biden wanted to cut SocSec (hint, he doesn't), here is a interesting factoid:


Rep. Ted Lieu
February 11 at 10:47 AM
The Trump Budget cuts over $1.5 trillion from Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

��️ REPEAT ��️

The Trump Budget cuts over $1.5 trillion from Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X46weunv3HI
  #3642  
Old 02-14-2020, 01:02 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,318
FWIW before the 2009 election season his approval rating among Black New Yorkers was 69% approve to 18% disapproval.

Still, in the 2009 election though he lost the Black vote to Thompson (who was Black) by 73 to 26%. Demographic breakdown here.



I do see one interesting possible Sanders/Bloomberg interaction during the debate -

Sanders launches his usual tirade about the evils of billionaire money in elections and how important it is that a candidate remains pure of that.

Bloomberg notes that he has committed to spending his billion in this election and the infrastructure he is building to defeat Trump whether he wins the nomination or not, and that Team Trump already had $300 million stocked up last Fall and are expected to get many hundreds of millions more in super PAC help from the like of Adelson and others. (Against Sanders in particular some corporate donors would flood the super PACS.)

"Senator Sanders, if you are the nominee, do you want me to NOT use my money and resources to help you defeat President Trump?"

There really is no good response for Sanders. Either he stays on message that billionaire money is inherently evil and that he would rather go into battle significantly outgunned on the money front than have help from those who have big money to use in the battle, or he contradicts his position. The former would show exactly how big of an idiot he is. The latter would show his hypocrisy.

Last edited by DSeid; 02-14-2020 at 01:04 AM.
  #3643  
Old 02-14-2020, 02:09 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
"Senator Sanders, if you are the nominee, do you want me to NOT use my money and resources to help you defeat President Trump?"

There really is no good response for Sanders. Either he stays on message that billionaire money is inherently evil and that he would rather go into battle significantly outgunned on the money front than have help from those who have big money to use in the battle, or he contradicts his position. The former would show exactly how big of an idiot he is. The latter would show his hypocrisy.
If it came to this, I'd bet that Bernie would go with the former answer - declining Bloomberg's money. Either he would know that Bloomberg probably despises Trump enough that he'd spend much money on Bernie's behalf anyway even if Bernie didn't want it, or Bernie would probably believe that he can beat Trump handily enough without Bloomberg's money (which Bernie quite possibly can.)
  #3644  
Old 02-14-2020, 05:45 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
With all the bogus lies about Biden wanted to cut SocSec (hint, he doesn't), here is a interesting factoid:


Rep. Ted Lieu
February 11 at 10:47 AM
The Trump Budget cuts over $1.5 trillion from Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

��️ REPEAT ��️

The Trump Budget cuts over $1.5 trillion from Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
Facts? You're bringing FACTS into an American politics discussion??

Isn't that rather like bringing a ping-pong paddle to a gun fight?

Last edited by septimus; 02-14-2020 at 05:45 AM.
  #3645  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:59 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 42,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
"Senator Sanders, if you are the nominee, do you want me to NOT use my money and resources to help you defeat President Trump?"
"Mike, I'm really glad you want to help. What I want is a world where money is not concentrated in the hands of a few hundred people like you, no matter how well-intentioned those people are. What I want is [insert Sanderspeak].

I'm delighted you want to help me defeat Trump. You can do this by speaking out loudly and often about how our current system privileges you and other billionaires at the expense of working Americans. Go on talk shows, give interviews, be loud about how we need a wealth tax, about how we need Medicare for all, about how free college is a necessity in today's economy.

If you want to use your money and resources to make the world a better place, there are plenty of wonderful progressive candidates across this country that you can support. This revolution is not only at the top. We need to return power to the people at every level of government. I've put together a list of campaigns you can help at bloomberghelps.com, and I encourage you to visit it.

Finally, while you're there, you'll find a list of nonprofits that are doing amazing work around the world. You've got $60 billion in net worth. Do you need more than $10 million of that? At bloomberghelps.com, you'll find ways for you to spend up to $59 billion, 990 million in order to make life better for everyone around the world.

Thank you again for asking."

Last edited by Left Hand of Dorkness; 02-14-2020 at 07:00 AM.
  #3646  
Old 02-14-2020, 07:36 AM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,027
If it does come down to Bloomberg and Sanders that seems pretty ideal. While I think Sanders would be good for the country, I think Bloomberg would make for a decent president. He would probably be good for the national economy, and would probably be very good at foreign policy. In fact, I would guess he would be better at foreign policy than Sanders. Bloomberg is intelligent, and unlike Trump, I think he would strive to hire the best people, and also, unlike Trump he would also listen to the advice. While I think it exceptionally unlikely to happen a Sanders/Bloomberg or Bloomberg/Sanders ticket would be really strong.

Last edited by BeepKillBeep; 02-14-2020 at 07:37 AM.
  #3647  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:09 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 42,220
Bloomberg strikes me as really a dream Republican candidate, about the best that party could ever give us. He might even work to restore the Republican party to its former role as an opposition party that stands against everything I think is important, but at least occasionally conducts itself with integirty and principle.

I don't see him as a great Democrat, though.
  #3648  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:47 AM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Bloomberg strikes me as really a dream Republican candidate, about the best that party could ever give us. He might even work to restore the Republican party to its former role as an opposition party that stands against everything I think is important, but at least occasionally conducts itself with integirty and principle.

I don't see him as a great Democrat, though.
I think it is fair to see him as a far-left Republican or a far-right Democrat. Certainly, some of his policies are in the current Democrat wheelhouse, such as gun safety, climate change action, expanding Obamacare (but not universal healthcare).

In order to bring some sanity back to the Republican party they're probably going to need to get utterly demolished in an election. Bloomberg could be the person who could bring that about if a significant percentage (5-10% maybe) of Republican voters who were planning on voting for Trump switch to Bloomberg and Democrat downticket (this second part is less likely). Elections are so close that even a small percentage of defectors can be devastating.

Certainly Sanders, who I prefer, is not that kind of nominee. The only Republicans who would vote for Sanders are diehard never-Trumpers who are sick of the disgrace he brings to the office of the president and the Republican party. However, I think it more likely that such voters will vote Republican downticket, and just not vote for Trump (leave it blank), or not show up at all. Sanders cannot capture dissenting Republicans so much I don't think.

Last edited by BeepKillBeep; 02-14-2020 at 08:50 AM.
  #3649  
Old 02-14-2020, 10:08 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
"Mike, I'm ..."
Yes, that is probably the answer he'd give, especially the [insert Sandersspeak].

And it would strongly illustrate why he is an idiot. He would be telling Democratic voters whose top priority is beating Trump that he would turn down a billion dollars to that goal.

Look I get his position. His consistent positions and issues are not most of the positions and issues of the Democratic party per se, his forever war is not with Trump, but a class war against the wealthy. Everything else is in service of fighting that war (and the fight is the point, not the victory) and viewed through that filter. That has been his consistent message and position ...always. Having effective weapons that were made by those who make weapons to fight against those who make weapons would be unacceptable. Better to go into battle with slingshots. The fight is what matters, not the win.

It is just not where most Democrats are at.


Bloomberg is where most Democrats are at.

To them beating Trump is job one, and they realize it takes resources to do that, not purity that would have you turn down the resources because it came from someone who had it to give. Class warfare is not the top priority for most Democrats. He is consistently strong on climate change, on gun control, on public health issues, and where most Democrats are on wanting Obamacare built upon with a public option. He is where they are with what sort of judges should be appointed. He is where they are with the need to be able to work with our international partners. He is where they are with caring about getting things done that can be done, not tilting at windmills bravely.
  #3650  
Old 02-14-2020, 10:24 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Yes, that is probably the answer he'd give, especially the [insert Sandersspeak].

And it would strongly illustrate why he is an idiot. He would be telling Democratic voters whose top priority is beating Trump that he would turn down a billion dollars to that goal.
He would say it. It doesn't mean he has to mean it, especially because Bloomberg has promised to help the Democratic candidate no matter what. He wouldn't have any control over how Bloomberg spends his money anyway -- all that matters here is the messaging, and that would be effective messaging, IMO, in response to this.

Sanders is a savvy politician. He's been rhetorically on the fringe for decades, but he regularly votes for compromise and other typical savvy politician activities.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017