This is fun. I wonder if the Russians paid Bloomberg another billion to run just so they could all point and laugh at the ensuing Democratic circular firing squad.
1 Like
And yet, I provided you with a rundown of the policies Bloomberg is specifically proposing as his platform, none of which is really the traditional GOP trickle-down bumfuckery, so you ignore it and instead reach back for a quote from 8 years ago to try to distract and mischaracterize and say that what he said 8 years ago, and not the specifics he’s saying right now, is what we should focus on? Irrelevant. It’s a stupid fucking game and it’s making it impossible for any actual conversation and discussion to take place about what the candidates are actually saying and running on (BECAUSE IT’S DESIGNED TO HAVE THAT EFFECT).
Again, I don’t like the guy, nor do I agree with much of his proposals, but what the fuck happens when a united Dem/liberal coalition packs the House and Senate and they send a progressive tax increase like this to a POTUS who has promised it as part of his campaign? That’s right, he signs it or might as well go hang himself in the Rose Garden.
1 Like
I remember in the old days when we eorried about a Trump media empire.
Bloomberg is not serious about inequality. Unless he’s celebrating it in his own person.
1 Like
I am not interested in having a conversation about the merits of Mike Bloomberg’s stated policy positions in his campaign for the Democratic nomination when they are flatly contradicted by literally decades of his own public statements to the contrary. He’s a lying liar who lies because he thinks he needs to do so to win in 2020, and who will promptly abandon those positions should he actually manage to assume the office of the presidency.
Bloomberg is roughly equally as credible on income inequality as Trump is on pre-existing conditions.
1 Like
I think there are several aspects:
-
Are his actions (not his words, not his pledges … his actions) consistent with that goal?
-
Taking the goal seriously for a minute, where is the Senate that will enact it?
-
If Bloomberg is serious and the Senate coöperates, what price will we have paid elsewhere?
Obviously such questions pertain not to Bloomberg’s candidacy only.
I looked for that article and got a 404 error.
Please help.
2 Likes
To this outside observer it would appear that you both have valid arguments. It depends on whether you trust that Bloomberg’s recent words are genuine or whether you think the views he has previously shared are more representative of his actual views. How much do you trust Mike is the question and a fair part of the evaluation of his candidacy.
4 Likes
Except they’re not contradicted. You couldn’t even come at me with a quote that was contradictory to what was contained in the article I gave you that provided a rundown of his policy platform on retirement.
Your statement highlights everything wrong with the Dems/liberals at this point. Your hyperbole and ad absurdum are cartoonish.
Neither Bloomberg nor anyone else we elect is going on a giant betrayal spree of Republican-esque policy making while the House and purse strings are in Dem hands. Quite the opposite if liberal and progressive policies are what they ran on.
1 Like
Would voting for one of the other candidates in the primary constitute falling for this “purity test”?
1 Like
You make it sound like he paid people to say they would vote for him in the polls. It’s a good thing for the other candidates for him to be in the debate, at this stage. If he was polling at like 4 percent and they let him on the stage, you might have a argument, but at this state he has more to lose then to gain in the debate, compared to the others.
1 Like
Remember, Bloomberg ran as a REPUBLICAN and endorsed President G.W. Bush in 2004.
He also refused to endorse President Obama. Twice.
Bloomberg is not a Democrat, nor is he a Republican. He is a PLUTOCRAT.
1 Like
Would it be helpful to … find out?
(If possible.)
He completely whiffed on his comment about the mortgage crisis being caused by the end of Redlining. As if lenders were persuaded, by liberal do gooders to stop being racist, against their better judgement.
Lenders certainly advertised themselves as nice people, but in fact they knew full well a dude making $13 an hour at Jiffy Lube was never going to afford a $300,000 mortgage. Instead of making prudent loans likely to be repaid with interest, lenders went into the refinancing and foreclosure business ON PURPOSE! And got bailed out by the same taxpayers who lost all our home equity, when their gamble failed. So until he demonstrates that understanding, Bloomberg can stop and frisk his own junk in front of the terminal that still won’t do it for him.
2 Likes
Meh. Cherry-picking facts from someone’s background to generate a narrative that affirms your preconceptions is not accurate analysis.
When done fairly. That’s the entire point of my initial post. Hyperbolic ad absurdum mischaracterizations and cherry-picked history is not fair nor accurate, but it is precisely what the left has developed as a learned behavior for “canceling” anyone they don’t like. It’s self-destructive and self-defeating.
1 Like
Ivanka then?
Wont matter what the policy is unless the Dems take the senate back.
“If Bloomberg Is Serious About Inequality…” If?
“It’s a good thing that Bloomberg wants to make fixing inequality a top priority.”
This is all way too hopeful, to the point of not getting Bloomberg at all – in fact, clueless about who Bloomberg is.
Elizabeth Warren is right about Bloomberg: his embrace of redlining, a right-wing lie about the financial crisis, should disqualify him for the Democratic nomination.
It is too late to be cutting Bloomberg any slack if he now merely admits his error; any such admission now should be treated very skeptically: it would have to be a very impressive admission. It was, after all, an error that runs deep: it says a lot about who he is – and Warren gets this. As Krugman said regarding similar bullshit from Bloomberg, “The point is that this is cheap, politically motivated stuff, motivated by a deliberate desire to mislead. And if Bloomberg actually believes this stuff, he has very bad judgement, not just about the facts, but about who he should trust.”
But, really, Bloomberg should not be misunderstood at all. Here he is a year ago engaging in the same cheap, politically motivated stuff, motivated by a deliberate desire to mislead: “Asked about Elizabeth Warren’s (very smart) proposal for a wealth tax, he responded with the favorite right-wing calumny of the moment – suggesting that her plan would turn us into Venezuela.”
Somehow that Venezuela lie does not fit with the clueless claim that “It’s a good thing that Bloomberg wants to make fixing inequality a top priority.”
Bloomberg has shown who he is, repeatedly. Trust him on this.
6 Likes
Well, whatever game you’re playing, it’s not the same one:
Well, I don’t need encouragement. Trust me.
1 Like