Yes, because it violates the laws of physics that you could actually be browbeating people.
My feelings are it was a good and an “about time” to hear a mayor admit that young black people are shooting other young black people and lives are being lost because of it.
Where it went wrong was how it was posed to the police officers. Bloomberg didn’t know how this would be seen and acted upon by the police officers. And no, it wasn’t a great idea. Good intentions don’t cut it all away. BUT… I’m not a young, black New Yorker. His apologies aren’t directed at me. It’s up to those it directly affected by this to make the decision on how to take his apology(ies) and how he plans to correct it.
I’m a white guy, 49, from East Coast now in CA. This problem is a world away from me, even when I lived in PA, because I was never a target. So shouldn’t the people who you say are or should be outraged by SaF decide on whether or not this is forgivable?
Bloomberg can do a lot of other things to lose my interest. And his reactions to those who this affected directly are an indication of whether or not he’s someone I should care about.
My point is… why does your opinion matter? Are you a former New Yorker? Were you ever a target from Stop and Frisk? I don’t think MY opinion matters that much in this and I’m American. Why are you so adamant about this? It seems like it has affected you personally.
Drudge is claiming that Bloomberg staffers have told him that he’s going to pick Hillary as his running mate. And so the right wingosphere, Fox News, Washington Examiner et al, are reporting it as a done thing.
We need to be smart about sources. We need to ask—immediately, and before assuming the “news” is true—why Bloomberg staffers, supposedly, would choose Drudge to break “news” about a running mate choice. Why not the Washington Post or the New York Times? Those would offer the quickest way of getting the “news” out, so why pick Drudge, which reaches far fewer people?
We need to be smart about the type of manipulation inherent in a piece of “news.” The right loves to hate Hillary–what better way to slam Bloomberg than to tie him to her? C
We need to be skeptical of the massive disinformation/propaganda efforts that are attempting, and will continue to attempt, to cause mass freakouts. Who benefits?
…as a person with brown skin who has to deal with systematic racism this question amuses me. Did stop and frisk affect me personally? No. But is the world facing a rise in authoritarianism and white supremacy? Yep. Does **that **affect me directly? Of course.
So I go back to what I originally said in this thread.
And you lot are answering that question. It really is as if black lives don’t matter. “He apologised.” “He deserves credit because he was trying to save lives.” It was all a mistake." You don’t even live there, why do you even care?" The lengths that people are going to to show me how little black lives matter to them is surprising even me.
Its all in the abstract for you. Those lives don’t really matter. You are a white guy, 49, from East Coast now in CA, it wasn’t you who was being thrown against the wall with a gun up against your head. It isn’t you who has had to deal with the life long effects of systematic racism. So why should you care? That’s your privilege. You can do that.
Some of us don’t have that privilege. I speak up when I can in every thread where marginalised people don’t have a voice. I do it in transgender threads, I do it threads about indigenous peoples, I’m doing it here. If I didn’t this would turn into an echo chamber. Bloomberg’s legacy would be swept under the rug. This is great debates and I’m debating. Its what we are supposed to be doing here.
I don’t see how a vote for Bloomberg is anything but a vote for a more polite form of white supremacy. He doesn’t get a pass on his history for a half-hearted apology and a twitter post. All of the other candidates, even the ones I don’t really like, are better candidates for the presidency. Bloomberg’s only advantage is that he has a big bank balance. If he wins the nomination then goes on to win the presidency then expect the next election to be fought on the same terms. The presidency will become the domain of the billionaire. Nobody else will be able to compete.
Not what I said. I feel that all the people who were affected by Stop and Frisk should be the ones deciding on his apology. If they strike back at him calling him a liar and not to be trusted, then I would lean that way too. But it is not up to me to say HOW it affected them. I trust their feedback. Since it never affected me personally, I don’t think I’m qualified to say how good or bad it is/was.
It’s Politics & Elections. Maybe this should be it’s own topic in Great Debates, because I agree there’s lots to discuss about this one issue of his.
Okay, so a half-hearted apology (your opinion) and a Twitter tweet doesn’t give him a pass. I AGREE. But what SHOULD he be doing to give back or earn forgiveness?
His only advantage isn’t just being a billionaire. For one thing, he’s a real one, not a fake one like Orageanus. And I really don’t think we’ll always have billionaires for leaders if these two go at it in the finals. We had Carter and Obama, we’ll have some like them again. But THIS time around, the best presidential candidate might not be the best solution to stop the GOP from their constant racism, led by a very unsuccessful businessman in the WH.
I am not supporting Bloomberg yet or at all, but I like to listen to his campaign and see all the options.
One way or another what I am saying is not being understood by you. I’ll try to make it very clear.
I think Mike Bloomberg would be an excellent president and would support him over Sanders (and Sanders over Trump).
Getting there and being effective there does require that he have reasonably strong support among Black voters. If he does not have that he cannot win the nomination and is unlikely to win the general if he is the nominee.
I personally do not feel that Stop and Frisk is disqualifying in the context of what he was trying to accomplish and what he has accomplished since. You do. We’ve established that. Still in this regard it really is true that what you and I think shouldn’t matter so much.
Yes, I do care what Black voters, especially those who were living with the gun violence that the policy was intended to address and who experienced to racist impact of the policy, thought and think. You want to speak for them and feel the similar pigment of your skin gives you the right? They not only can express themselves, they will en masse over the next several weeks in voting booths.
You really are coming off Loraxian - but the Lorax spoke for the trees because the tree have no tongues - and their bark wasn’t loud enough I guess - Black voices will be expressed as votes very soon and what those voices say will matter, even if you don’t care what they say or support because you know better than they do.
(This is apparently necessary - the next section, separated by extra lines, is not addressing BB specifically.)
Bloomberg is way to smart to choose HRC as a running mate. But it does raise his other big vulnerability in the primary - his apparent record of misogynistic comments. Honestly I think that will hurt him in the primary season more than Stop and Frisk will. Against Trump in the general though he is a rank amateur misogynist.
…I know exactly what you said. You characterized stop and frisk as a “mistake by the mayor.”
The are speaking out. I’m not sure what you are expecting. Stop and frisk affected the most marginalised communities in New York and they weren’t listened to for the 10 years they were being targeted and harassed by the NYPD. Why do you think you are suddenly going to be hearing their voices now? Hundreds and thousands of people were stopped and frisked. Do you want them to fill out a survey? What standard has to be reached before you are able to form an opinion for yourself? You don’t have the ability to watch documentaries or read articles about what it was that happened?
You aren’t going to be spoon-fed their stories. You are going to have to seek them out.
This isn’t about the apology.
He should immediately drop out of the race and start pumping millions of dollars into combating voter suppression.
I don’t share your optimism. America is only a few steps away from Idiocracy. If Bloomberg demonstrates he can literally buy the presidency then why wouldn’t the other billionaires follow suit? Trump has shown how easy it is to profit from the presidency. The norms have already been eroded and I see no reason to believe that Bloomberg is the person to bring it all back from the brink. If Bloomberg gets the nomination then it won’t just be the GO you are blaming for the “constant racism”.
…I think I’m understanding you perfectly. What is it do you think I don’t understand?
Why Bloomberg over Sanders? What about the other candidates? What special qualities does Bloomberg bring that someone like Mayor Giuliani wouldn’t also bring?
You see I think I understand what you are saying more than you understand yourself. You think what Bloomberg did to communities of colour is not as important as the reasons why he was trying to do it. Its just not something you are comfortable admitting.
I have never claimed to speak for them. I don’t want to speak for them. I’ve quoted them. I’ve pointed to their voices. I’ve expressly not criticised black people that have support Bloomberg. How they choose to vote is their choice, they have agency and none of them are participating in this thread.
You are coming across as the ostrich with his head in the sand. As long as you don’t have to think about what Bloomberg has done you can pretend it didn’t happen. Stop using black voices as a shield for your own opinions. If you support Bloomberg despite what he did to communities of colour then just own it already.
And NOW Hillary jumps back in. As many people knew she would.
Nice underhanded way to get back in with doing very little work.
Now to see how it comes down to the convention and somehow Hillary jumps out on top.
Damn she’s good!
Hey, polite racism is looking pretty good right now.
But seriously, no one is saying he gets a pass. He’s going to run the gauntlet on this, no doubt. You have to remember that the racism you faced and your society is significantly different from the POC’s experience who’re deciding whether to forgive/vote for him.
…except all the people who think he should get a pass.
Thanks for the lecture on racism. I had NO FUCKING IDEA that my experiences would be different to those of somebody else. Thanks for reminding me. I’ll take this all under advisement.
Good lord open a pit thread. Quit hijacking this one.
It wasn’t a lecture. It was a short comment on your strident lecturing.
You are not understanding pretty much anything I’ve said, as you illustrate with the next sentence.
Bloomberg has a much better shot at bringing a Senate majority and as stated a few posts up -
Is it better understood by requoting it?
He knows how to manage and delegate, how to be an executive, and how to analyze data. He represents the best chance we have to move away from “othering” as the key political tactic (which Sanders does with a different other than does Trump). And yes I think he has the least chance of losing and the most chance of winning relatively large.
Sanders in comparison IMHO will accomplish nothing and set up a backlash. His one talent would be using the bully pulpit well, but it wouldn’t be enough.
Biden is well meaning and has been my placeholder assuming he’d hire people smarter than he is. But he is lacking presence.
I love Klobuchar’s positions but I think you need more than that. She has neither demonstrated executive skills or the ability to inspire. She has yet to prove she can connect with diverse crowds. She’s be an okay president though(and would a fine VP for that reason).
Warren I had hopes for but she she’s proven to me her complete lack of good political instincts and I have concluded that she has an honesty problem (not in comparison with Trump but its weakened her in my mind.)
Buttigieg inexperience makes him a less preferred choice for me. Also a Democratic candidate who turns off Black voters as much as he has managed to do is disqualified to me.
And besides that I think he’d be the best president of our choices, and that I think he has the best shot of bringing the Senate D-ward, I believe his ability to beat Trump story more than I believe the others’ abilities.
Banquet Bear, I realize your feelings are strong. However, this is crossing into obsessive territory.
Please throttle it back or take it to the Pit.
…but these aren’t special skills. I can manage and delegate and analyze data. And I’ve never analyzed the data as Bloomberg did in regards to Stop and Frisk. And there are plenty of people with executive experience. Mayor Giuliani fits all of these criteria. Would Giuliani be a better president than Sanders?
Are you able to quantify that? Is there a scientific definition of “othering?” When I google “othering” why are there no results for Sanders, and when I add Sanders I only get a couple of articles?
You don’t think there will be a backlash from progressives if the Democrats nominate Bloomberg? Or are you just counting on them falling in line?
And yet none of these candidates defended a racist fascist unconstitutional policy that terrorised people of colour for over a decade.
I think that if Trump were to win again it would be the death of democracy for America. I think that if Bloomberg were to win then it will be a very different death, but a death nonetheless. Trump and his regime have been bankrolled by (real) billionaires. Bloomberg would simply be another escalation. I can’t see you coming back from that.
I was about to post this same link, but figured it’d be worth searching more carefully for it. Yeah, folks, if you’ve not read the linked Twitter thread, it’s worth reading. It details how Bloomberg:
-Buys nonprofit endorsements by donating millions to influential nonprofits
-Buys political endorsements by donating millions to the campaigns of representatives and senators
-Buys mayoral endorsements by having his philanthropies donate to cities.
-Buys religious leader endorsements by donating to churches.
-Buys a lack of rightwing pushback by donating to Republican candidates.
-Buys large rallies by having his rallies fully catered, including with alcohol.
-Buys staff by paying them out-of-pocket far more than other campaigns can afford to pay.
-Buys social media support by paying influencers to say nice things about him.
-Cuts off funding for other candidates by encouraging fellow billionaires to sit this one out.
None of this is normal. And sure, it’s swell that a billionaire is giving back to communities through massive philanthropy: if we’re gonna be fucked up enough to have a society with homeless people and billionaires both, the latter better be giving back massively.
But leveraging that philanthropy to buy an election? I am not here for that nonsense.
Well, I’m down to clown.
I was just thinking how this little tidbit might draw attention from the negative Bloomberg information that’s been flooding the airwaves, start a little new buzz,and set the right wing blogosphere on fire for the next news cycle. It might even inspire a tweet or two from Trump - and I’m sure the Bloomberg’s writers will have a cleverly crafted and focus-group tested response ready.
Maybe team Bloomberg started it, maybe the alt-right trolls started it and they’re just playing off it, who knows. It might win the news cycle.
We are in the era of politics as reality show, and this is the big extravaganza. It’s not politics as usual, it’s media driven machine warfare. I just don’t think the other Democratic candidates have the resources. I don’t think small donor financing will work once we get to the general.
I don’t like it but it’s the reality of politics post Citizen United. And you’ve got to play the game you’re playing.