Bloomberg in town Thurs I might go see him.
What is fascinating about Bloomberg’s strategy is by jumping in so late and skipping the early states to pump his own money - hundreds of millions worth - into the Super Tuesday delegate rich states, is it is making everyone else (candidates and pundits) look foolish.
While everyone else was fighting over wine caves and the purity of super pacs, Bloomberg saw it as democrats stupidly tying their own hands behind their back and more importantly saw an opening. He is now polling closely behind Warren in the RCP tracker, and in some selective national polls above her.
While busing from the 1970s became a hot topic in this primary it ultimately did not hurt Biden with black voters. But Mr Stop and Frisk has now taken the number two spot according to a recent poll (even if it is exaggerated as it shows Biden down 20 points but it’s clear Biden has lost some support to Bloomberg as everyone else is pretty much flat). This strengthens the notion some of us have been arguing that when you listen to black voters, especially older ones, their number one goal is to beat Trump. They are pragmatic and the real politically sharp voters. Too much of this primary have been about bullshit talking points that appeal to a small but vocal constituency.
This might be premature but I don’t how there is enough time in the calendar to stop Bloomberg if Biden tanks.
Because Bloomberg has been skipping the early states, his ads and targeted media is focusing 100% on Trump. He has been running a shadow GE campaign while everyone else has been sparring fellow democrats.
Because Bloomberg has been self-funding his campaign he has not qualified for the three debates he has been eligible despite meeting the polling requirement. Now the donor requirement has been scrapped he will qualify for the next debate. In addition he has not participated in a town hall Q&A and has done very few network interviews. That’s not been a bad thing for his campaign — because it allows his ads and targeted media to portray himself as presidential and electable. Most people have not heard him on the stump or off the cuff. By the time we do the image of Bloomberg might have already grown big enough that he will not be pulled back.
He has the endorsement of the mayor of Flint, MI, who is talking about the help he gave the city during the water crisis. He also has the endorsements of the mayors of Philadelphia, Washington DC and Compton CA (along with many others ). This will, I think, help him make inroads with black voters.
It will be a stretch for even Trump to paint him as a Radical Socialist, and he’s not going to spook the financial markets.
Hard to figure out where his support is coming from. The only major candidate whose vote share has been falling since he started rising is Warren (Biden has obviously fallen since Iowa but was holding steady before). Seems weird that he would be the second choice of so many Warren supporters. Either that or they’re coming from the previously undecided voters.
I’m not taking him super seriously at this point. Progressives aren’t going for him and I can’t really see him winning much of the white working class vote. The sexual harassment stuff isn’t going to help. We’ll see what happens to his polling numbers once the other candidates start attacking him.
The problem IMO with a super-rich officeholder is that they see the world very differently from people who have to worry about the monthly bills, that they inhabit such a different universe that they have no sense of what it’s like down here, you have no sense of what ordinary people’s problems are that the government might should do something about.
One of the things I appreciate about Warren is that she’s been there.
The two or three posts before the quoted one are about Bloomberg’s bona fides on the environment and climate change. I need not expound on Trump’s record on the environment (EPA, Interior Dep’t, Paris Accords, etc.) and contempt for acknowledging much less addressing global warming. If the election comes down to Trump vs. Bloomberg, anyone on the far left who votes Green or stays home might as well start calling themselves climate change deniers because the effect would be the same.
Rick Kitchen:
Perhaps that was true of before he got into politics at all (I don’t know much of how he referred to himself as a businessman alone) but he certainly went by “Mike” before the presidential campaign. Here’s an image from 2009
I will see him Thursday , they have not picked a site yet. Rain is predicted so I figure it will be indoors. Guess he can afford to rent any place.
This could prove to be an effective strategy for picking up Democratic voters who are sick of the internecine pie fights and worried about the party snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
This. Anyone who considers themselves Green who doesn’t vote for the Democratic nominee in November, regardless of who that is, is clearly treating political and ideological purity as being of greater importance than climate change and the environment.
Possibly not minorities, though.
Cite.
Which highlights a problem I have with many Democratic/progressive policies, and I don’t think it is limited just to me. Putting more cops in high-crime neighborhoods is common sense. But it seems to be controversial among Democrats. They’d rather talk about “whiteness” or something.
Bloomberg has supposedly disavowed his position. Which, IMO, means he is backing off from common sense. I suppose this is the usual “run in primaries from the extreme, and when nominated, race back to the middle”. I wonder if Bloomberg is going to get a chance to race back anywhere.
Regards,
Shodan
You think backing off “stop and frisk” is an extreme position? Hoookay.
We’ve got two former mayors left in the race: the mayor of NYC, and the mayor of…South Bend, Indiana???
I’m thinking only one of these guys really has the chops to belong in this race. 
Nothing wrong with putting cops in high-crime neighborhoods in order to reduce violent crime. That’s absolutely great, AFAIAC.
The problem comes when the cops expand their mission well beyond that, and bust the people living there for a lot of trivial shit like marijuana possession. That makes the residents of those neighborhoods soooooooooooooo much safer, right? :rolleyes:
Basically that just punishes poor people for not being able to afford to live in a nicer neighborhood where the cops don’t stop and frisk you for dope.
Couple new polls up on 538 and Bloomberg is nuzzling up to Warren with only 0.6% separating them.
I admit, I didn’t see Bloomberg as a real possibility at first, since he declared his candidacy so late (I believe I read something about him not even being on the ballot in these early states, right?) so I figured he had no chance. I hear more and more about him actually having a chance, especially with Biden suddenly doing bad, and…honestly, I am confused. To me, it is looking like this billionaire suddenly decided to walk in and purchase the election (and the timing made it look like his reason for getting into it was because he was concerned about Warren or Sanders potentially winning), and…is maybe succeeding? I mean, to me, that looks just as bad as Trump winning with lies and false information. He is the one democratic candidate that I really, really do not want to vote for. It seems a lot of people here do not share that view, and it perplexes me that many of you don’t.
So, to those of you who have no problem supporting him, or even actually would want him to win…why? I’m not against billionaires on principle: I would have voted for Steyer with no problem had he been the nominee, but Steyer didn’t wait til after the race had started only to try to purchase victory.
joining late is not a good look for him. But he’s got many good policies. I think he would do very well in a debate vs. Trump.
That wasn’t even the worst part - something around 80-85% of the stops in NYC resulted in neither an arrest nor a summons. If that many people are being stopped and frisked with no further action at all, then the standard they are using to stop people is too low, and it starts to look like the standard is “non-white male” in some specific age range.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why is it some big deal if he started late? I really don’t get that attitude.
This is a man who spends millions of dollars of his own money every year on climate change, gun control and good (evidence based) governance. Why would you discount him because it isn’t fair he didn’t jump in January 2019?
I guess some people are not happy he didn’t spend a year or more in Iowa and NH. He didn’t “pay his dues” like everybody else. I can see that point.