MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Discussion of current events
neverfail
Posts: 4208
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: The Alternate Joe Biden

Post by neverfail » Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:40 pm

Alexis wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 2:12 pm

So why is he doing it? Well, to make sure that one classical "System" candidate remains in the course no matter what.
What the heck is a "system candidate" supposed to be anyhow?

Would a hard headed businessman bother doing that for the vanity of holding some kind of banner aloft; knowing that he would probably lose? I think not?
Alexis wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 2:12 pm
For whatever their differences, Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have one thing in common: they are not System candidates.

In 2016, there was only one System candidate among the two, and she lost.
Hillary and Bill Clinton had/has the tacky reputation of a pair who amassed their fortune by nefarious means. Is that what is meant by being a "system candidate"?

If there are any such scandals associated with how Michael Bloomberg amassed his billions then it has not so far come to my attention. You can bet however that if he runs then his political opponents and enemies will concoct something to tarnish his reputation.

This guy appears to be the straight goods. If he runs as the Democrats candidate during the US 2020 presidential election and Americans do not vote him in in preference to Trump, then Americans would need to be collectively an even bigger pack of fools than I currently give them credit for being. :)
Last edited by neverfail on Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

neverfail
Posts: 4208
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by neverfail » Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:41 pm

armchair_pundit wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 6:21 pm
He doesn't want to pay a 6% progressive "wealth" tax of $3.2B a year, plus all the other taxes that the rich and not so rich pay already at the local, state and federal levels, but can't say that and be a good proggie...
How would you know?

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 3342
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by cassowary » Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:39 pm

Doc wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:08 pm

You can stick a fork in the Democrats they are done.
Trump on Michael Bloomberg
"But I think he’s going to hurt Biden, actually," Trump said.

Indeed, Barack Obama's former advisor David Axelrod said as much.
If Bloomberg enters the race, it will help hurt Joe Biden and help Elizabeth Warren. Warren will then get the nomination which is good for Trump because she is easier to beat.

The more Democrats running the better.
The Imp :D

neverfail
Posts: 4208
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by neverfail » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:46 am

cassowary wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:39 pm

The more Democrats running the better.
Primaries are just a sorting out process. Only one can run for president as his/hers party's endorsed candidate.

Jim the Moron
Posts: 1617
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by Jim the Moron » Sat Nov 09, 2019 4:17 am

neverfail wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:46 am
cassowary wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:39 pm

The more Democrats running the better.
Primaries are just a sorting out process. Only one can run for president as his/hers party's endorsed candidate.
Gosh! We didn't know that. Thanks for filling us in . . .

neverfail
Posts: 4208
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by neverfail » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:52 pm

Jim the Moron wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 4:17 am
neverfail wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:46 am
cassowary wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:39 pm

The more Democrats running the better.
Primaries are just a sorting out process. Only one can run for president as his/hers party's endorsed candidate.
Gosh! We didn't know that. Thanks for filling us in . . .
That was not for your benefit Jim. Rather for somebody who presumes that the more that run in the Democrats primaries the better for Trump. I see it rather as the wider the choice of talent available the more likely the party will pick a winner.

(Though come to think of it the process must be flawed. Last time they picked Hillary despite her tainted reputation.)

Jim the Moron
Posts: 1617
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by Jim the Moron » Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:37 pm

". . . talent . . ." (?)

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 3342
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by cassowary » Sun Nov 10, 2019 1:29 am

neverfail wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:52 pm
Jim the Moron wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 4:17 am
neverfail wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:46 am
cassowary wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:39 pm

The more Democrats running the better.
Primaries are just a sorting out process. Only one can run for president as his/hers party's endorsed candidate.
Gosh! We didn't know that. Thanks for filling us in . . .
That was not for your benefit Jim. Rather for somebody who presumes that the more that run in the Democrats primaries the better for Trump. I see it rather as the wider the choice of talent available the more likely the party will pick a winner.
Not necessarily, Neverfail.

I think you don't understand how democracy works in practice. The Democrats are divided between their Socialists and the moderates.

The Socialists are divided between Elizabeth Warren (she claims to be a capitalist :roll: )and Bernie Sanders (he admits to being a Socialist).

The moderates have lined up behind Joe Biden even though he is a flawed candidate - possibly senile, tainted with his son's suspicious dealings in Ukraine and China. This makes Biden barely a front runner.

So if Bloomberg runs, the moderate vote will be divided between Biden and Bloomberg. The Democrats will go into the convention a divided party. No doubt, there will be mud-slinging and anger at the eventual nominee. This makes it tough for the eventually winner to unite the party. Hurt feelings among the losers' supporters will cause some to sit at home or vote for a third party candidate.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are rock solid behind Trump. That's why I think having so many candidates without a solid front runner is bad for the Democrats.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 2922
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by Sertorio » Sun Nov 10, 2019 2:12 am

cassowary wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 1:29 am
neverfail wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:52 pm
Jim the Moron wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 4:17 am
neverfail wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:46 am
cassowary wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:39 pm

The more Democrats running the better.
Primaries are just a sorting out process. Only one can run for president as his/hers party's endorsed candidate.
Gosh! We didn't know that. Thanks for filling us in . . .
That was not for your benefit Jim. Rather for somebody who presumes that the more that run in the Democrats primaries the better for Trump. I see it rather as the wider the choice of talent available the more likely the party will pick a winner.
Not necessarily, Neverfail.

I think you don't understand how democracy works in practice. The Democrats are divided between their Socialists and the moderates.

The Socialists are divided between Elizabeth Warren (she claims to be a capitalist :roll: )and Bernie Sanders (he admits to being a Socialist).

The moderates have lined up behind Joe Biden even though he is a flawed candidate - possibly senile, tainted with his son's suspicious dealings in Ukraine and China. This makes Biden barely a front runner.

So if Bloomberg runs, the moderate vote will be divided between Biden and Bloomberg. The Democrats will go into the convention a divided party. No doubt, there will be mud-slinging and anger at the eventual nominee. This makes it tough for the eventually winner to unite the party. Hurt feelings among the losers' supporters will cause some to sit at home or vote for a third party candidate.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are rock solid behind Trump. That's why I think having so many candidates without a solid front runner is bad for the Democrats.
Sounds like the perfect system... ;) ... I wonder why only idiots and crooks have occupied the White House since Kennedy was murdered...

neverfail
Posts: 4208
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: MICHAEL BLOOMBERG MAY ACTUALLY RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Post by neverfail » Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:43 am

cassowary wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 1:29 am

Not necessarily, Neverfail.

I think you don't understand how democracy works in practice.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
cassowary wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 1:29 am
The Democrats are divided between their Socialists and the moderates.
What else is new? What you cannot seem to grasp is that it is not at all unusual for such unlikely coalitions of interests to form within political parties in virtually all Western countries. Thinking back for more than half a century I recall in the case of my own country how the Irish-Australian Catholics long dominated (right wing) New South Wales branch of our Australian Labor party somehow held together with the socialist (left) Victoria state branch of the same party in our Federal politics. The Irish Catholics never shared the same set of values and ideals as the socialists but neither would ever have had a share in government without maintaining a (barely working) solidarity of mutual interest.

In the case of the USA the Democrats (a Party I can identify with as it reminds me somewhat of our Labor Party out here) for almost a century represented the interests of both the northern industrial unions and the Deep South Good Old Boys' network of patronage and exclusion. Since as with the ALP in my country important regional branches of the Democratic Party were also Irish-Catholic fiefdoms (remember the Kennedys?) and bearing in mind that much of the (protestant) white population of the old Deep South was by tradition virilantly anti-Catholic (as well as anti-black) one might sometimes wonder how and why the two ever came together. As with the Irish Catholics and Socialists here in Australia it was a matter of political convenience. Irish Catholics in both cases were very much the "outsiders" within a society where both corporate business and inherited privilege were for long exclusively in Anglo-protestant hands while in the case of the South, having lost the Civil War, the white southerners and their aspirations were also placed very much on the outer as well.

I view the US Republican Party as being a lot like our Liberal Party here in Australia: by tradition the party of the nation's insiders.

In future, before you sit on your favorite ideologically charged hobby-horse and bullshit away airing off your ill-informed wishful thinking, I hope that you will take all of that into consideration Cass.

You might also see now why I am not impressed by your allegations re. contesting candidates within the Democratic Party currently vying with one another for the right to contest next years' election as endorsed candidate. I can recall contests of the past even more rancorous than this and yet the party has still endured.
cassowary wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 1:29 am
Meanwhile, the Republicans are rock solid behind Trump.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

I believe not so much rock solid behind him as stuck with the embarrassing bastard!

Post Reply