Tao Economics Forum

Full Version: If Bloomberg runs....
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
I think if Bloomberg throws his name in the hat, the rest might as well quit.


He has two major attributes the others don’t have:

1. He has lots of money. No problem with campaign contributions!
2. He’s not a total arse-hole, like the rest of the Democrat field evidently are.

I think he could stand a real chance. All he has to do is steal the best bits of Trump’s policies such as tighter borders, the removal unnecessary regulation and cease pointless foreign wars. But can the Democrat Party stomach that?
I think you are wrong, Andrewo0. There are many, many voting Americans such as me who abhor a billionaire candidates who wishes to begin destroying the Bill of Rights starting with the very important 2nd Amendment. Fuck him.
(11-09-2019, 01:44 AM)Innocynic Wrote: [ -> ]I think you are wrong, Andrewo0.  There are many, many voting Americans such as me who abhor a billionaire candidates who wishes to begin destroying the Bill of Rights starting with the very important 2nd Amendment.  Fuck him.

Fair point. 

Clearly I'm not there and don't know feelings on the ground.

Meanwhile, this op ed says a lot:

Hillary Clinton, Establishment Democrats Signal Deepening Panic over Democrat Field


Quote:The elite class and Hillary Clinton, specifically, are unsatisfied with the current Democrat primary field and have signaled their dissatisfaction in a variety of ways in recent weeks, from refusing to endorse former Vice President Joe Biden (D) to dismissing the ultra-far-left candidates’ radical agendas.

There is no shortage of candidates in the current Democrat primary field. Democrats have, on paper, everything they have claimed to want in terms of diversity in their lineup.

They have multiple women — Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), and self-help guru Marianne Williamson (D). They have candidates who represent racial minorities — Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Julián Castro (D) — as well as a candidate who embodies their self-proclaimed devotion to the LGBT community.
Yet, despite that, Democrat elites like Clinton are unsatisfied, indicating a deepening divide within the Democrat Party.

The first presidential primary is less than three months away, yet select Democrats are still mulling a last-minute run. On Thursday, reports indicated that former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg filed presidential primary paperwork in Alabama, with sources adding that he is “close” to coming up with a final decision on a presidential bid.

Similarly, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is reportedly considering a long-shot bid, and Hillary Clinton has been teasing a run for weeks, failing to use her recent interviews to quash the rumors.

It has been widely believed among Democrats that Bloomberg and Clinton would not run unless Biden, who was long believed to be the unshakeable frontrunner, showed signs of wavering. Both Warren and Sanders have managed to put a dent in his support, keeping potential candidates like Clinton on the fence and prepared to pounce.

Bloomberg’s, Holder’s, and Clinton’s purported considerations speak volumes about the state of the current Democrat field. Democrat elites are unsatisfied with the choices, fearing Biden’s lack of stamina in a general election matchup against Trump and questioning the electability of Warren and Sanders, who have unabashedly embraced far-left proposals and positions that strategic Democrats, like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), have long attempted to keep at bay.

Clinton has openly criticized the positions of Warren and Sanders, causing some to wonder if she is subtly attempting to undermine the field or in the very least, influence the candidates’ positions.

She appeared at the New York Times’ DealBook conference this week and took aim at ultra-wealthy tax proposals and Medicare for All — two progressive plans both Warren and Sanders not only support, but champion.

“I just don’t understand how that could work, and I don’t see other examples anywhere else in the world where it has actually worked over a long period of time,” Clinton said of the wealth tax proposals, calling them “complicated.”

“If you were going to do a wealth tax and it was on assets … how you would value it is, I think, complicated to start with,” she said.

“But assume you can get some system of evaluation, people would literally have to sell assets to pay the tax on the assets that they owned before the wealth tax was levied,” she continued.

“That would be incredibly disruptive, so I think there are other ways to raise the revenues,” she added.

Clinton also expressed doubt that Warren’s $52 trillion Medicare for All plan would ever pass.

“No, I don’t,” Clinton replied when asked if she thought Warren’s plan would pass. “I don’t, but the goal is the right goal. ”

“I believe the smarter approach is to build on what we have, a public option is something I’ve been in favor of for a very long time. I don’t believe we should be in the midst of a big disruption while we are trying to get to 100 percent coverage and deal with costs,” she added.

Clinton has also taken direct aim at candidates like Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), calling her a “favorite of the Russians” and suggesting that she is a “Russian asset.”


“They [Republicans] know they can’t win without a third-party candidate, and so I do not know who it’s going to be, but I can guarantee you they will have a vigorous third-party challenge in the key states that they most need it,” Clinton said on the Campaign HQ podcast with Barack Obama’s former campaign manager David Plouffe last month.

Time and time again, rather than encouraging Democrats to rally behind a candidate in the existing presidential primary field, Clinton has subtly hinted that she could jump in the race instead.

In October, President Trump tweeted that “Crooked Hillary” should join the race “to try and steal it away from Uber Left Elizabeth Warren” as long as she explains “all of her high crimes and misdemeanors including how & why she deleted 33,000 Emails AFTER getting ‘C’ Subpoena!”

Clinton replied, “Don’t tempt me. Do your job,” and fueled further speculation during an appearance on PBS NewsHour.

“Maybe there does need to be a rematch. I mean, obviously, I can beat him again,” she said. “But, just seriously, I don’t understand. I don’t think anybody understands what motivates him, other than personal grievance, other than seeking adulation.”

Clinton kicked off an additional 2020 buzz on social media after posting a quote from Beyoncé about the need to “take” power:
Why this disarray?
It's because none of the candidates on offer present a realistic plan for the USA. The Democrat Party is just a long list of divisive factions, special interest groups, all hating what America used to stand for.
(11-08-2019, 11:19 PM)andrew_o Wrote: [ -> ]I think if Bloomberg throws his name in the hat, the rest might as well quit.


He has two major attributes the others don’t have:

1. He has lots of money. No problem with campaign contributions!
2. He’s not a total arse-hole, like the rest of the Democrat field evidently are.

I think he could stand a real chance. All he has to do is steal the best bits of Trump’s policies such as tighter borders, the removal unnecessary regulation and cease pointless foreign wars. But can the Democrat Party stomach that?

The only way Bloomberg could get the nomination is if the Party Elites hand it to him.

Businessmen make terrible presidents.
(11-09-2019, 04:26 PM)aqua Wrote: [ -> ]The only way Bloomberg could get the nomination is if the Party Elites hand it to him.
.....................


as is how they normally do it
(11-09-2019, 04:55 PM)DaveGillie Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-09-2019, 04:26 PM)aqua Wrote: [ -> ]The only way Bloomberg could get the nomination is if the Party Elites hand it to him.
.....................


as is how they normally do it

The real question then, is will Bloomberg run as a Republican or a Democrat ? ?
Too funny!

Too cynical!

:-) :-) :-)
(11-09-2019, 05:29 PM)andrew_o Wrote: [ -> ]Too funny!

Too cynical!

:-) :-) :-)

I believe Bloomberg has been both a Republican and a Democrat.

Maybe this time he will run as a Libertarian ? ? ?

[Image: dilbert-cynicism-215758_strip.gif]

x

[Image: Br7NrQLCYAEguZm.png]
Bloomberg would be a great choice for the Dems.
76 years old though.

The US is starting to look like the final days of the USSR when they kept electing crusty old farts who were barely alive.
Pages: 1 2 3 4