This is often asserted here on TPM comment threads, virtually always as accepted-narrative-devoid-of-any-actual-evidence.
And of course the evidence is limited – as it is with all the candidates. But the evidence that we do have, the actual head-to-head polls, virtually all show Bernie beating Trump.
The level of presumed “certainty” accompanying these evidence-starved assertions-of-opinion-as-fact is frankly kind of laughable.
Fortunately, rank-and-file Democratic voters seem pretty unimpressed with these non-arguments.
Look, some states are just going to vote blue. We know that. Some states, we can pretty solidly assume will go red. What battlegrounds there are aren’t places like New York and California. They’re places with a significant blue-collar population. Exactly the people that Bloomberg wants us to think will be horribly offended by the concept of ‘socialism’. But those places respond—as we saw in 2016—to populism, and Michael Bloomberg does not speak populist. It’s a language he has never grasped. You put him up there, and watch what happens.
Watch the clip. Listen to Mike Bloomberg tell a room full of people that now, in the information economy, people need to learn to think, and analyze… unlike farmers and machinists. How do you think that plays in Ohio? Or Michigan. Or Wisconsin. Or Minnesota. Do you think the RNC and the right-wing superPACs aren’t already storyboarding the ads with that clip? Do you think that’s the only clip like that out there?
How about the ones where he talks about throwing minorities against the wall… to take away your guns? You think that doesn’t give him problems in literally every possible direction? What about the radio interview where he said that Stop & Frisk was unfair… to white people?
Trump’s a con-man, but he speak populist. No, Bloomberg can’t beat Trump. His performance tonight showed he really didn’t have any sense of how to collect himself and go for the throat. He doesn’t have any defense to shore up his weaknesses. He hasn’t faced this level of scrutiny from an electorate that has a very different sociological and economic experience than he’s used to talking to.
And that’s without the right-wing’s ‘NY Liberal Elitist Jew’ subtext that will color everything else.
No, he can’t win.
Edit to add: Look, I love being a New Yorker. I think Bloomberg was better than Rudy, and a more effective Mayor than DeBlasio. But I talk to people every damned day in Iowa, in Wisconsin, Tennessee, etc etc. No, he can’t win.
Nothing is likely to hurt downballot races as badly as the negative coat-tails of getting blown out by the Republicans in the Presidential race because you just thumbed your nose at the plurality of your own voters by rejecting their choice for the top of the ticket.
It depends on where the plurality votes are from I guess. If the winner doesn’t win the delegate’s district/state, then he/she might not vote for the winner. If the winner wins about 40 percent or below, it’s likely that the votes are disproportional among districts/states.
Need to think a little more complex. It’s not ‘did he/she win my district/state?’ it’s ‘did he/she get enough support in my district/state that going against them costs me the margin I won by last time?’
Sure, I could see that happening in some cases. But I think that for most, the (accurate) calculation will be that pulling the rug out from under the frontrunner will lead to poor Democratic turnout, and a lot more carnage downballot. And as a result there will be tremendous pressure to unite under the frontrunner, even if that person is not ideal for their district.
Agree. I meant to say that actually (just calling it “win” for simplicity). It’s about the percentage of votes the winner gets in that particular district/state.
I mean, it’s NY Post. But other than that, I agree that he mostly lost the narrative in MSM. He’s not their type (though most non-populists aren’t). Ttump on the other hand, is welcome by the media, even when they criticize him. Now I’m interested in how his groundgame will work.
Just so you know, I’m not happy about the Post’s take. I am not happy about the cock up this debate was for Bloomberg. He might improve. But I’m not about to happy talk on the basis of what I saw. I’d really like to know which part of his brilliant machine was responsible for prepping him.
I wonder if Bloomberg had his “base” in mind. For example, ttump behaved badly on stage but he was speaking to his deplorables. No one thought he won the debates but he won the votes. Have to wait and see.
Trump’s an entertainer. He dominated his primary debates. Bloomberg hung suspended most of the time, admittedly ghosted by the moderators, but standing there looking like he smelled something bad. Then he’d get attacked or asked a gotcha question and visibly bristle. He improved slightly as the night went on and even had a somewhat decent moment or two. But overall, very bad.
Yep. Trump’s whole game was demonstrating that he was the lead dog on the stage, bullying his rivals to establish himself as the strongest and the loudest. That’s not exactly going to work for Bloomberg, both because of who he is, and who he’s trying to appeal to.
I agree that he needs to be in the debates. I also think that enough money can buy the election. Republicans and the NRA have been doing it for years. Last time they used Putin’s money. Dems. need to find a way to compete.
He’s between a rock and a hard place because he is a bit of a bully too, and that’s not the brand he’s allowed to sell so he doesn’t really have someone to be. He’s up there straining against some of his most instinctual and habitual patterns of behavior.
So if Bernie doesn’t win, he’s going to pick up his ball and go home again? Well, that’s reason enough not to support him. He and his supporters are not in it for the country they are in it for their own selfish interests.The rule is that you win the majority of delegates on the first ballot, otherwise you must find a way to play with others in the sandbox and coax people to your position on a second ballot. If Bernie can not do that, he does not deserve to be president. And if his supporters want to sit another one out, so be it. They are mostly the young who will have to live with a Trump Supreme Court for the rest of their natural lives. It won’t be pretty, but they will deserve the government they get, and then some.
And Trump said he likes the dumb voters and the morans voted for him anyway. It does not matter in the age of Trump. Idiot farmers and machinists have been voting against their interests for years and they just doubled down with Trump. B’berg will be fine. He can do a Trump and call it fake news.
