Bloomberg for President

Options
1…1011131516…22

Comments

  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,454

    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Gern Blansten
    Gern Blansten Mar-A-Lago Posts: 22,153
    edited February 2020


    Nate Silver 538
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
    The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,590
    Gern Blansten said:


    Nate Silver 538
    Big poll out tomorrow morning. If he's at 10%, he would qualify for the NV debate on Wednesday. 
    www.myspace.com
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,879
    oftenreading said:
    There's a big issue that is being missed here that is leading to people arguing in circles. There seems to be an assumption on the part of some posters that if someone is in some way "trying to help" that means by definition they are not racist, but simply put, that's hogwash. History is rife with racist do-gooders who were "trying to help". It's quite possible that Bloomberg was both genuinely trying to help Black and Latino individuals and still harboured significantly racist ideas. 
    That's true of course, and don't you evaluate someone differently based upon their intent?  What are we doing today that's embedded in our culture that will be considered racist or sexist in 20 years? Surely we're not at peak awareness. 
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,879
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    I’m starting to think the whole Bloomberg as a savior idea might not work. Couple reasons....

    1) Voters already know the good stuff about him. More and more negative things that either are or can be construed as racist/sexist/elitist will come out. Trump weathered that storm in 2016, but I’m blot sure Bloomberg will. 

    2) He seems very boring. The constant ads are one thing, but holding rallies and participating in debates is another. 

    3) His late entry might piss off the supporters of the currant candidates. Are the supporters of Biden, Amy, and Pete going to get behind him if he vanquishes them? From the perspective of those supporters, they’ve been in the fight with their candidates for months now. Now some rich asshole is basically buying the primary?

    4) Nobody is going to be passionate about Bloomberg in a way they’re passionate about Sanders (or on the other side, Trump). Most people that support Bloomberg will do it under the notion of “Trump is bad, I want Trump gone, Bloomberg can do it.” That’s fine, and it might beat Sanders in the primary (probably via shady superdelegates lol). But Trump? As we saw with Hillary, just being the better option than Trump might not be enough. The winning candidate needs excitement and passion surrounding him (as Obama did, or as Sanders and Trump do) and I don’t see that happening with Bloomberg. 
    All true to some extent.  I think he decided to join when he saw Bidens weakness.  I don't think he anticipated anything from Pete or Amy.  Maybe he thinks both are still weak.  It's interesting how weak Pete is in national polling but he did so well in the two states.  I'm guessing he just doesn't have the money to raise a national profile. 
  • Jearlpam0925
    Jearlpam0925 Deep South Philly Posts: 17,520
    Always been a big fan of this stupid photo of stupid idiots.


    Yeah, uh huh...sign me up for this.
  • mcgruff10
    mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 29,111
    Jearlpam0925 said:
    Always been a big fan of this stupid photo of stupid idiots.


    Yeah, uh huh...sign me up for this.
    Clinton and Joe Torre are idiots?!?!
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Jearlpam0925
    Jearlpam0925 Deep South Philly Posts: 17,520
    mcgruff10 said:
    Jearlpam0925 said:
    Always been a big fan of this stupid photo of stupid idiots.


    Yeah, uh huh...sign me up for this.
    Clinton and Joe Torre are idiots?!?!
    I think the appropriate word I should've used is schmucks. Or putz (putzes?).

    Khakis and pleats for dayyyyyyysssss
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,879
    edited February 2020
    Jearlpam0925 said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    Jearlpam0925 said:
    Always been a big fan of this stupid photo of stupid idiots.


    Yeah, uh huh...sign me up for this.
    Clinton and Joe Torre are idiots?!?!
    I think the appropriate word I should've used is schmucks. Or putz (putzes?).

    Khakis and pleats for dayyyyyyysssss
    This was probably from ten years ago plus I bet.  Pleats were still common particular older guys. 

    No one golfs in khakis anymore, even old guys. 
    Post edited by mrussel1 on
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,590


    Nobody in here voted for the chick in yellow, right?
    www.myspace.com
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,879
    The Juggler said:


    Nobody in here voted for the chick in yellow, right?
    Proudly.  Would again. 
  • Jearlpam0925
    Jearlpam0925 Deep South Philly Posts: 17,520
    https://prospect.org/politics/michael-bloomberg-candidacy-mirror-image-trump/

    So good.
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,289
    Bloomberg spending $130M to show he is not racist is the equivalent of someone with $20K life savings spending $40 to show they are not racist.


    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,590
    Jason P said:
    Bloomberg spending $130M to show he is not racist is the equivalent of someone with $20K life savings spending $40 to show they are not racist.


    Yeah that’s what happened. 
    www.myspace.com
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 7,834
    pjl44 said:
    Also, "hey it's not racist, I'm just quoting crime stats" is quite literally a Breitbart move

    Those of us who lived thru the homicide spike in NYC from 1970 to 1995 are not so flippant about crime stats.
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 7,834
    oftenreading said:
    There's a big issue that is being missed here that is leading to people arguing in circles. There seems to be an assumption on the part of some posters that if someone is in some way "trying to help" that means by definition they are not racist, but simply put, that's hogwash. History is rife with racist do-gooders who were "trying to help". It's quite possible that Bloomberg was both genuinely trying to help Black and Latino individuals and still harboured significantly racist ideas. 

    This topic has literally become people who don’t understand the recent history on NY trying to preach about the history of NY.
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 7,834
    mrussel1 said:
    I would also hope your hiring strategies target members of the community that walked in those shoes, not some white kids from Long Island who don't know how they lived. 

    Excuse me?
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 7,834
    .Jason P said:
    Bloomberg spending $130M to show he is not racist is the equivalent of someone with $20K life savings spending $40 to show they are not racist.




    closer to $666.
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    Lerxst1992 said:
    oftenreading said:
    There's a big issue that is being missed here that is leading to people arguing in circles. There seems to be an assumption on the part of some posters that if someone is in some way "trying to help" that means by definition they are not racist, but simply put, that's hogwash. History is rife with racist do-gooders who were "trying to help". It's quite possible that Bloomberg was both genuinely trying to help Black and Latino individuals and still harboured significantly racist ideas. 

    This topic has literally become people who don’t understand the recent history on NY trying to preach about the history of NY.
    Another recent instance of the incorrect usage of “literally”. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,521
    Lerxst1992 said:
    pjl44 said:
    Also, "hey it's not racist, I'm just quoting crime stats" is quite literally a Breitbart move

    Those of us who lived thru the homicide spike in NYC from 1970 to 1995 are not so flippant about crime stats.
    Stop-and-frisk was good from your view?
This discussion has been closed.

Categories