Well, I think most people do, which is always part of the problem.
3 Likes
It’s not a compelling argument if the question is “should I support Bloomberg for the Democratic nomination?”
It’s a rather more compelling argument if the question is “should I choose Bloomberg over Trump?”
I’m personally hoping we don’t reach a point at which the latter question needs to be asked.
10 Likes
10 Likes
Iowa was basically demographic best case scenario for him and while he squeaked out a narrow victory he wasn’t able to parley that into momentum for the other early states.
Her choice (and mine, as I’ve mentioned elsewhere). However, she’s done worse so far than Pete, and polls well behind Bernie and Biden. Voters evidently don’t care about this detail.
We saw the same thing with Dukakis; his attention to detail was a political liability.
Bernie has been historically allergic to detail and any approach but bold impressive bills that aren’t neccisarily meant to pass. Under pressure from Warren he’s fleshed a few things out. And in speeches, interviews and debates he’s acknowledged that it will take time and multiple bills. And even outlined what that might look like. He’s actually done a better job of selling that reality in many places than she had. Which is what lead to that spat where Warren tried to differentiate herself and her polling reversed. Her strong suit on this particular issue was that she was the candidate with the fleshed out plan, and the ability to explain it realistically.
The front line push is still throwing around a complete bill that is very much not a step one or something that’ll do the thing in isolation of other bills. And his campaign is still on the whole one guy who can do it all, one law with a pithy name approach.
And that’s one of Bernie’s biggest shortcomings. He’s got very little history of even attempting the former, and a whole career of the latter. If he doesn’t get the right people around him he’s gonna get brought up short real quick.
I do no get the feeling that Sanders is too amenable to that. He certainly has very little experience actually doing that. And I suspect at least some of his most fervent followers will not like that at all.
He could have stuck with any sort of consistent position rather than jumping through different sales pitches. IIRC he was all for Medicare for All 2 years ago, and he only switched to all Sanders all the time after Iowa. As a candidate he was mostly driven by messaging and triangulation.
Oh yeah. But that was primarily driven and pushed by the NYPD leadership. Basically if you had locked Bloomberg in a box he never would have come up with stop and frisk. But surrounded by advocates for it, backers that told him it worked, and since his existing voters didn’t balk. He was more than happy to ask for more and harder.
And that tells you something. Because even after decades of people proving it didn’t work, and a massive check in being forced to move away from it. He still maintains it was effective and the policy itself isn’t the problem.
But if it comes down to the other option being Trump?
I fucking hate Bloomberg. And I don’t think anyone is saying he’s worth supporting. But on the off chance it comes down to it can you honestly say you’d rather let Trump push us over the edge?
I don’t think it’s going that way. Bloomberg doesn’t seem to be sticking and most of the action around him has been predicated on potentially stepping in if Biden falters. Biden just had a significant win in the lead up to Bloomberg’s first outing. Buttigieg dropped, Klobuchar is about to endorse Biden.
Bloomberg got the rug pulled out from under him on the first debate. Propping Biden up, even if it’s just for tomorrow likely does him in.
Bloomberg is legitimately the worst candidate still in it. And he would be actively bad, if not Trump bad. It’s possible that this is what Klobuchar at least is up to.
2 Likes
she’s still in the race because she does have some good widespread support. ( and dollars from that support. )
her organization’s argument i believe really is she’s everyone’s second choice right now, so given that so few voters have voted, and not everyone ( as is now evidenced ) will go the whole way, her numbers will tick up.
we’ll see sooner now i guess than later with amy and pete out.
i’m pretty sure all people saw was the tank.
5 Likes
Still waiting for the corporate journalist neoliberal op-eds about how not voting for Bernie over Biden is anti-semitic… crickets on that one.
You forgot about the eyebrow.
2 Likes
Plus she might get votes this week from people who liked Pete or Amy for reasons other than their specific positions.
However, the ability to craft detail is rarely one of the primary reasons people support a candidate, and honestly it is not really all that important a qualification in a president. (The ability to understand detail is perhaps more so.)
1 Like
If the other option is Trump, then I still don’t find it a compelling argument. I think that vs. Trump there are a lot of much more compelling arguments, but the argument that we should look to the court appointments is likely to remind a lot of people who are uncomfortable with Bloomberg of the points where he is weakest. I think it is better to point to policies where there is a stark difference to highlight the gap rather than a place where he represents a mixed bag.
1 Like
In this scenario the court appointment would go to Trump if we don’t find Bloomberg compelling over Trump.
I don’t see how “Bloomberg’s impact on court appointments would be less than ideal” is as concerning as “Trump’s impact on court appointments will end democracy in this country”.
3 Likes
Because they were focusing on polls and statistics, while everyone else was focusing on narrative.
The President is effectively untouchable by Congress:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/opinions/mcgahn-subpoean-court-of-appeals-honig/index.html
Abortions can be denied:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-supreme-court-retreat-from-roe-vs-wade-could-begin-this-week-with-louisiana-abortion-case/ar-BB10DsXt
The ACA is abolished:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-obamacare-idUSKBN20P25N
This is all critically important stuff to many people. With a highly politicized and conservative majority SCOTUS, things are looking incredibly grim.
7 Likes
It’s amazing that we’re (slowly) looking past the the things that used to divide us unnecessarily, in some cases to the point of physical violence. From what I saw, Buttigieg’s sexual orientation wasn’t even all that interesting of a topic to most voters. There was a lot more interest from people on Buttigieg’s political career, his current policies, and his performance in debates.
(Much of America says they want a centrist. The DNC believes polling and big donors that a centrist has the broadest appeal. But it’s all relative, center to what? free market capitalism and theocracy? I’d like to see someone left of neoliberalism and third-way, but right of Sanders. But I’ll compromise on Sanders rather than Joke Biden)
1 Like
He was just a flashy young candidate who was all talk and little substance. I’m glad this was deemed more important than who he preferred to smash genitals with.
7 Likes
indeed. i mean, in watching his speech suspending his campaign, i was struck by two things: the first, he was introduced by Chasten (who took Pete’s last name, apparently!), and the bar on the screen said, “Husband of Pete Butiggieg,” like they would for the spouse of any other candidate; and secondly, that under Pete during his speech it simply said “Democratic Candidate for President,” instead of “Openly Gay Democratic Candidate for President” – which probably would’ve been the caption not so very long ago.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?469906-1/pete-buttigieg-suspends-campaign-south-bend-indiana
6 Likes
I was thinking of Bill Hader, but Mulaney would work as well.
So when he inherits immigrant internment camps, Muslim travel bans, a white supremacist paramilitary in the form of ICE+CBP, etc. etc. etc. we’re supposed to trust that this time he’ll do the right thing?
I’m not buying it.
4 Likes
As @Brainspore said, I really don’t want that to be the question. I have serious doubts that Bloomberg wouldn’t push us over the edge; it just might be a different cliff.
3 Likes
