I can’t wrap my head around Bloomberg. Wasn’t he going to fund a massive “Koch Brothers” type funding stream for Democrats? While I detest what the Koch Brothers did to this country, I have to say, none of the Kochs ran for President. Maybe Bloomberg could buy us some COVID-19 test kits and distribute N95 respirator masks. And, we’re gonna need about a couple of thousand ventilators throughout the country too. Get on it, Mikey.
Like I have stated many times recently; Bloomberg is NOT a Democrat, nor is he a Republican, he is, in fact, a PLUTOCRAT.
He only dabbles in politics to “protect himself and others of his class”, donning the guise of whatever party will accomplish his goal of protecting his, and his customer’s, Money.
Who needs Fox News to tear down all of the alternatives to Trump, when we have TPM and ProPublica and the rest of the left media to do it instead? JFC, I’m getting tired of this crap.
Whatever policies Bloomberg may publicly espouse, it seems fairly clear where his sympathies lie and considerably less clear he would not follow them when push comes to shove as it must in this country.
ETA: multiple problems with oligarchy aside, the main issue with Bloomberg in this election cycle is his intimate relationship with the financial sector and the problems that sector has caused this past half century. As Paul Krugman argues
…there is no evidence that Wall Street’s mega-expansion made the rest of the economy more efficient. On the contrary, growth in family incomes slowed down as finance rose — although a few people became immensely rich. And the runaway growth of finance set the stage for the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. …
And here’s the thing: Financial reform, unlike health care, is an area in which it might make a big difference which Democrat becomes president. It’s true that other candidates — including Bloomberg! — have endorsed Warren-type reforms. But it is, I think, fair to ask how committed they would be in practice, …
Billionaires…simply said…are not the solution to anything though they believe in their hearts that they can govern better than anyone. I’ve said it before but it bears repeating, just because you’ve made a lot of money doesn’t mean you are smart or deserving of our attentions.
You cannot become a billionaire by being a nice guy you need to have a pathological level of greed and selfishness to get there. I question if billionaires are good or even neutral to the public good, they seem noxious from every angle that I look at it, and the “philanthropy” and “charity” angles are complete hogwash. But I am robespierran in nature.
Bloomberg spokesman Kevin Sheekey said the Sacklers tried to use their relationship with Bloomberg for the family’s benefit, but were mostly unsuccessful. Mortimer Sackler “clearly had an agenda. Clearly, he’s a bit of a Keystone Cop,” Sheekey said. “Their philanthropy was set up because they had an interest in art institutions and putting their names on them. And they are now trying to leverage that around a business crisis. What has their leverage bought them other than party invites? In relationship to us, we haven’t been able to find it.”
The guys the article is talking about have killed more Americans with their addictive opiods than EL Chapo. They have also made far more money than Guzmán. All the while they have cultivated the image of fine upstanding American billionaires. If Bloomberg provided them PR help, he has no business in the Presidential race. People don’t come more vile than the owners and executives of Purdue Pharma. .