Only if he wins. Which would be nauseating. I already said I'd support Gabbard if she wins, too. I doubt he wins.
It isn't, people just whitewash her conservatism.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
These same people have spent 4 years saying that Biden is obviously most electable and we have to get ready to support him, and he has completely flopped. Absolute know-nothings.
Seems strange to call Bloomberg's campaign "effective" when he has a grand total of a handful of write-in votes in NH at this point.
The praise was effusive for Warren's campaign a short while ago, too, and she tanked spectacularly in her own backyard even among the groups supposedly predisposed to favor her. There is a dearth of polling and no actual results in the states he's been working on yet.
The praise was effusive for Warren's campaign a short while ago, too, and she tanked spectacularly in her own backyard even among the groups supposedly predisposed to favor her. There is a dearth of polling and no actual results in the states he's been working on yet.
Time for your daily reminder that "We need to stop Trump at all costs" is a foolish goal because there are many issues and cracks in American society that led to a Trump presidency and if our next president does not address those issues like our last Dem, there will be many more Trumps taking office.
Yeah I understand. Bloomberg also tries to keep his shit buried, so it's completely understandable you wouldn't know about it.
Friend group is varied. Some doing "well", others making below minimum wage. Some like Bernie, for sure, but a whole lot of them think hes the antithesis of America and will not vote for him. Straight shut it down.
Indiana is a good bit more conservative in general than the rest of the midwest (Ohio is certainly catching it).
I do not think Bloomberg can win the rust belt because he will turn out voters. I believe he can win because there are enough Trump voters there who will vote for him instead. Bloomberg wins by denying trump some of his voter base, not by turning out progressives or the young.
Note that I am not FOR a bloomberg candidacy. He is most certainly not my candidate of choice. I would actively campaign against him. But I do believe in choosing the lesser evil, and Bloomberg vs Trump clearly has a lesser evil. If it came to it, I would vote Bloomberg, and do so relatively willingly, as I believe Trump is a time bomb in the White House.
"Progressive" Lol. This forum has never been "progressive". If anything, it's liberal. And supporting a shitstain like Bloomberg is anything but liberal.
Most people aren't defending Bloomberg, just pushing back against the concept that he's the same as Trump and that not voting him if he somehow wins is the right thing to do. It's complete shit if he wins and I seriously doubt it happens.
Who's supporting Bloomberg.
This forum isn't nearly as progressive as you might think it is. That's not aimed at anyone specific in here but I've debated and discussed progressive politics and candidates enough to know that we've got a fair amount of centrist Democrats who have a strong affection for the Clintons.
He's not the same as Trump, but he is waaaaay too similar to Trump for anyone to be comfortable with. He has the same fascist tendencies.
There's definitely a contingent of posters on ERA defending Bloomberg. In fact, several of them have been banned for trying to dismiss concerns of racism around him.
it's really wild how many moderates have psy op'd themselves into thinking if they run a republican as a democrat, then republicans will vote for them when it's never worked because they have D next to their name instead of R. there's this bizarre (maybe even revealing) obsession with tailoring candidates to serve republican interests instead of anyone else's first and foremost
democrats frequently argue they should just be republicans with alarming tendency
democrats frequently argue they should just be republicans with alarming tendency
Congrats to Bernie last night but he is losing in delegates even if he's winning the narrative. I will be fighting him tooth and nail until he gets a majority - moderates easily won over 50% last night so his only hope is that the center lane stays fractured enough for him to gain an insurmountable lead. If they can coalesce around Pete or Amy or someone else, I still don't see any path to 50% of delegates. Unless of course Bloomberg becomes the moderate candidate in which case I will vote for Bernie over him (fuck Bloomberg).
Bloomberg is the kind of candidate that the left falsely claims Biden is (ie, yes Biden is centrist, but no he is not a Republican.). I definitely hope Bloomberg is not our nominee!
They CALL every Democrat a socialist, but only one actually IS one, self-described. It's an important distinction.
The only revisionist history going on here is you quoting a post, ignoring the contents, and trying to re-frame it as something else
There shouldn't be any justifying holding your nose and voting for someone like Bloomberg. You said he was good on climate but is the lowest rated Dem candidate on green peace. Its not so much as nauseating if he wins as much as it is, we have a failed democracy and its time to do something about it.
Just because Bloomberg is not the same as Trump, that doesn't mean he would be a good president. He would in fact set us back significantly. He is downright terrible. Bloomberg and Trump in the general election ensures that it is a billionaire's game, and in a way, this is the ultra wealthy protecting their interests of the presidency. Get all billionaires out of politics. We don't want this.
It's always turnout.
There is a fair argument to be had that Bernie charges the base, increasing turnout.
Conversely, I think there's an equally strong argument that his base is mostly young voters, who are notoriously bad at actually voting.
But if the Dems chose someone with the hopes of flipping Republicans they are going to lose. That's not going to happen.
We do have a failed democracy. If he wins the people who would be willing to do something about a failed democracy are supporting Bloomberg by and large and thus wouldn't view democracy as failed.
Fighting him tooth and nail?
Imagine thinking Bernie is the real enemy here guys, imagine.
The funnier part is that every moderate dem candidate who would appeal to the right has lost every bid for the WH since 2000. Its a losing strategy over and over again and yet people still seriously champion it. Trump would fucking murder Bloomberg.
Who's outright defending Bloomberg though? I can't control the other State's primary voters all I can do is vote in mine. I also don't think most clueless primary voters are reading this thread.
All anyone is saying is if it comes down to Bloomberg versus Trump they'll vote against Trump. Yeah it's a shit decision. But what more people need to realize is that's not a defense of Bloomberg. It's not a rationalization of Bloomberg, we don't have the power to rationalize anything into reality here unfortunately, these discussions are merely if/than functions.
It's like having a talk with your family about what to do if you get hospitalized with some serious shit, nobody would call you a cancer defender or that you're somehow making that situation reality just by discussing it.
Unless someone has data suggesting these dumb primary voters who are pro-Bloomberg are reading this thread and the mere act of admitting you'd vote for him over Trump is somehow strengthening his appeal to these people I don't see what the harm is in admitting such a thing.
And if the argument is that he is in fact worse than Trump and that if it did come down to it we still shouldn't vote for Bloomberg then feel free to make that case.
That last question is an important one, if he were to win the nomination and the Presidency it would reinforce the idea that that's the kind of politics the Democratic Party should run with even if other candidates also could have won. Then we're in a nasty situation where, assuming he would be marginally better than Trump, do we mitigate damage short term by voting for him or send the DNC a message and stay home?
Truly shitty times we're in.
All anyone is saying is if it comes down to Bloomberg versus Trump they'll vote against Trump. Yeah it's a shit decision. But what more people need to realize is that's not a defense of Bloomberg. It's not a rationalization of Bloomberg, we don't have the power to rationalize anything into reality here unfortunately, these discussions are merely if/than functions.
It's like having a talk with your family about what to do if you get hospitalized with some serious shit, nobody would call you a cancer defender or that you're somehow making that situation reality just by discussing it.
Unless someone has data suggesting these dumb primary voters who are pro-Bloomberg are reading this thread and the mere act of admitting you'd vote for him over Trump is somehow strengthening his appeal to these people I don't see what the harm is in admitting such a thing.
And if the argument is that he is in fact worse than Trump and that if it did come down to it we still shouldn't vote for Bloomberg then feel free to make that case.
That last question is an important one, if he were to win the nomination and the Presidency it would reinforce the idea that that's the kind of politics the Democratic Party should run with even if other candidates also could have won. Then we're in a nasty situation where, assuming he would be marginally better than Trump, do we mitigate damage short term by voting for him or send the DNC a message and stay home?
Truly shitty times we're in.
Bloomberg isn't close to even being near to winning. Why are we tying ourselves in knots thinking about him?
Think they meant fighting FOR him.
He's been gaining support in polls due to the ad blitz plus the media is propping him up so people are worried.
No one knows. Without seeing how he performs it is hard to say who supports him. My guess is that he will pick a woman if it goes that far. Someone well established in the Democratic Party. Probably a senator from the Midwest or Rust Belt.
I agree. Which is why I encourage you and everyone else to campaign hard for who you want and see the change we need. In no way am I or anyone advocating for anything different. Bernie wins the nomination boom, he wins, and its Trump vs Bernie. Great.
Inaccurate and completely irrelevant to the original post I was responding to.
Pot, meet kettle.
Must have been a typo then. My bad.
You'd be getting either Trump or Bloomberg for President at that point. So not voting is implicitly supporting Trump. Legislation will be passed through the same body that it would under any other President.
To me a non-vote or a 3rd party vote in the election is disproportionately helping out Trump and I don't want to give him any percentages. Plus there are still down votes to consider. This is most certainly a hold your nose, close your eyes and vote blue case... it's purely a case of choosing the lesser evils.
why the fuck are you all losing your mjnd about bloomberg? what makes you think he has a realistic chance?
Truuu.
Remember 2016 and how much people hated Bernie here?
I do!
Trump could repeat his debate tactic from the last election by giving front row seats to some of the women who have sued Bloomberg for sexual harassment.
www.theatlantic.com
abcnews.go.com
Do you think Trump running against someone who "told a pregnant employee to 'kill it' in a serious monotone voice" would increase turnout among Republican voters?
‘I’d Do Her’: Mike Bloomberg and the Underbelly of #MeToo
Disparaging comments. Demeaning jokes. As the mogul reportedly considers a 2020 presidential run, it remains an open question whether his long-alleged history of undermining women will affect his chances.
www.theatlantic.com
Bloomberg's sexist remarks fostered company culture that degraded women, lawsuits allege
Mike Bloomberg has on repeated occasions faced and fought allegations that he directed crude and sexist comments to women in his office.
abcnews.go.com
Do you think Trump running against someone who "told a pregnant employee to 'kill it' in a serious monotone voice" would increase turnout among Republican voters?
Imagine if Bloomberg chose Tulsi as his VP. That's possibly the only ticket I would outright refuse to vote for.
He has an opening now, which simply wouldn't exist if Biden didn't completely meltdown.
There's a good chance that he's the last moderate standing if/when Pete and Klob start to falter.
He's an X-factor. I get that people are worried about it -- they should be; Bernie doesn't talk about money in politics *constantly* because it's NOT a thing -- but here's the deal: if Bernie wins the states he is projected to win, whether by a hair or 10 percentage pts, he will pull ahead so massively there won't be a single thing Bloomberg will be able to do about it. We all know that Buttigieg is dead in the water come SC, and it's not a foregone conclusion that non-white votes go to Biden now, so Bernie is forecasted to win even there, even if slightly.
People need to be vigilant and realize that this thing is still close and come out in support of Bernie. But I would recommend holding off on the doom and gloom of Bloomberg: the man will shit himself in a debate, and he can't defend himself against non-whites with what he has done and said. As others have said, a clear winner will present themselves as states begin to be won, and Bloomberg won't look so scary then.
I didn't say not to vote, did I? And there is a very serious argument to be made that he would be worse than Trump given that he hasn't lost his mind, is an actual billionaire, and knows how to operate within the political system. Topics like being marginally better on climate change but still being the worst Dem in the race don't matter much when both positions are rapidly racing us towards the end of the world. Thats one topic we don't get to point to Trump for and say but its not as bad, because at the end of the day if youre not on track to save the world your plan isn't good enough.
Is the general consensus here that even Biden would be a better choice than Bloomberg? I think I'd take Pete over either of those clowns, but that isn't saying much.
Due diligence might be a good move before going on vigorous multipost defenses of your boy's record, huh?
- Status