Sign in to follow this  
Fakenews

Bloomberg to throw his hat in the ring?

Recommended Posts

Just what we need, another old white guy. How does he differ from Biden, Sanders (and even Warren)? 

I am an old white guy too (not as old as the folks mentioned above) who thinks we need someone younger who makes sense. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Rum Runner said:

Just what we need, another old white guy. How does he differ from Biden, Sanders (and even Warren)? 

I am an old white guy too (not as old as the folks mentioned above) who thinks we need someone younger who makes sense. 

I thought he said something about jumping in if Biden dropped out.  Didn't read it very close though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rum Runner said:

Just what we need, another old white guy. How does he differ from Biden, Sanders (and even Warren)? 

I am an old white guy too (not as old as the folks mentioned above) who thinks we need someone younger who makes sense. 

Proven track record as a mayor of our largest city.  Brilliant mind.  Successful capitalist, a real billionaire with a net worth > $50B. Moderate. Likeable(ish).  Not a hint of scandal or corruption.  Mentally stable.  Respected.

Sure I’d like a younger person and I’m not sure we need billionaire presidents but he would almost certainly be a one term POTUS and be a bridge to a new generation.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Mike 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That comment about "if Biden struggles with Warren" is about Warren maybe not being subservient to the corporations.  He tipped his hat there.  We don't need another billionaire making sure everything is peachy keen for the wealthy. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This should shake up the race a bit -

Michael Bloomberg Is Expected to File for the Alabama 2020 Presidential Primary

Mr. Bloomberg is actively preparing to enter the Democratic presidential primary and is expected to file paperwork this week designating himself as a candidate in at least one state.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/07/us/politics/michael-bloomberg-president-2020.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Match up Bloomberg with a young progressive Dem (Mayor Pete ?) and you would have a most interesting ticket.  Could just be the best chance the Dems have.

Yea I know, 2 white guys and one of them is gay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Bloomberg is qualified in my book. Like Mayor Pete, he's been elected unlike Tom Steyer or Jeff's barista, Howard Schultz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell  combine Bloomberg with any Dem candidate with a pulse and Donnie would be a gone berder.

A real self made New Yorker vs a New York shyster, someone with cred and the financial  nous to sort the pile of shit that Donnie’s created what’s not to like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He’s a step up from “Flaming Bag of Dog Poo” so if the democRATS nominate him he’ll get my vote, as long as the Pride of the GOP is on the ballot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He scores high on the nebulous electibily test. A bit too right wing for my taste, but if you are trying to win an election and beat Trump (rather than working on big social change programs like medical for all)... Probably a lot more easier for the Midwest swing states to tolerate than Warren. Similar age to Given but not prone to verbal gaffes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we need another billionaire in the office. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm supporting any functional adult for Prez in 2020. But, I was not impressed with Bloomberg in his interview with Margaret Hoover recently. He's not that smart, on his feet anyway. His wealth is a question re motivation, and his NY political history does not necessarily relate to critical domestic policy. I think he's actually helping the incombant by running. I'll bet Trump out polls him.

He and Bill Gates need to take a deep breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

I don't think we need another billionaire in the office. 

If he runs and wins he will be the first billionaire to be POTUS.  Donnie is a fraud.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/14/2019 at 1:58 PM, Fakenews said:

Proven track record as a mayor of our largest city.  Brilliant mind.  Successful capitalist, a real billionaire with a net worth > $50B. Moderate. Likeable(ish).  Not a hint of scandal or corruption.  Mentally stable.  Respected.

Sure I’d like a younger person and I’m not sure we need billionaire presidents but he would almost certainly be a one term POTUS and be a bridge to a new generation.

 

 

Honestly...no more phony Democrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they’re mad that a pretend billionaire managed to become POTUS and is screwing everything up.  He’s giving them a bad name.

But if Larry Ellison jumps into the race we’ve got a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fakenews said:

I think they’re mad that a pretend billionaire managed to become POTUS and is screwing everything up.  He’s giving them a bad name.

But if Larry Ellison jumps into the race we’ve got a problem.

I might have gone for Harlan Ellison

The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity.

but not Larry.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Little late for Harlan

Harlan Jay Ellison (May 27, 1934 – June 28, 2018)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Zonker said:

Little late for Harlan

Harlan Jay Ellison (May 27, 1934 – June 28, 2018)

I'd vote for an urn with his ashes over Trump.  With an ashtray as VP (has more personality than Pence).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2019 at 12:23 AM, Jules said:

That comment about "if Biden struggles with Warren" is about Warren maybe not being subservient to the corporations.  He tipped his hat there.  We don't need another billionaire making sure everything is peachy keen for the wealthy. 

I think that’s probably more an admission of reality that if warren looks like the front runner for the nom, then the D’s would lose in the general.  I have nothing against Liz, but I don’t think ‘Murica is ready to take that big of a leap into massive gov’t socialisticalishness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I think that’s probably more an admission of reality that if warren looks like the front runner for the nom, then the D’s would lose in the general.  I have nothing against Liz, but I don’t think ‘Murica is ready to take that big of a leap into massive gov’t socialisticalishness.

‘Murcia already has taken the leap, but it’s a leap into authoritarian corrupt right wing socialisticalishness.  Cheap at twice the price! If you consider the tariff bailout for farmers alone has so far cost more than twice what the auto bailout ran us, we’ll never see it back, and it’s just a tiny tip of the Trump Iceberg?  Destroying things Trump style is easy,  and I’d argue that Warren’s support is an expression of the panic that is dawning on the the country that our destruction as a nation is at hand, and most of us are going to need all the help we can get.  It’s like a beach where lifeguards have been withdrawn because of budget cuts, swim at your own risk, and ‘bye the way, it’ll cost you $100 for the afternoon, the beach will be sold off to private ownership at the end of the season, the proceeds will disappear somewhere, so enjoy it while you can!  And watch out for the motorboats cutting through the swimming area- those propellers can hurt, but motorized craft do have right of way over everything (and everyone) else!  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Zonker said:

Little late for Harlan

Harlan Jay Ellison (May 27, 1934 – June 28, 2018)

I met Harlan at a book signing a some years ago, he was very sick, but was nurturing some hope that he was somehow going to download his consciousness into the web, so maybe.....?  The Vancouver BC crowd might have some inkling of what he was talking about. ^_^ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, VhmSays said:

DSC_9095-900x679.jpg.54aac29c705fb3befdecd3be99130476.jpg

Vote for Porkchops.

(could someone file his nomination please?)

mmmm, bacon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, VhmSays said:

DSC_9095-900x679.jpg.54aac29c705fb3befdecd3be99130476.jpg

Vote for Porkchops.

(could someone file his nomination please?)

No opposing thumbs, smarter than the average bear, and stuck in a gravity well with Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

The billionaire set seems really wound up for this cycle. 

Wheeel, what else do you do for amusement ? Newspaper? nah done that, TV show..nah..Trianon peut-etre mon petit choux?

Faaark, what is wrong with you people? you've got 320 million people in a system that supposedly gives everyone the opportunity to become the POTUS and New Zealand has a better head of state on all possible counts.

It's sad when the presidency now seems to have the kudos of a christmas bauble, a retirement hobby, but a trinket to amuse rich bored old white guys with a whim to try their hand at being leader of the free world

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Wheeel, what else do you do for amusement ? Newspaper? nah done that, TV show..nah..Trianon peut-etre mon petit choux?

Faaark, what is wrong with you people? you've got 320 million people in a system that supposedly gives everyone the opportunity to become the POTUS and New Zealand has a better head of state on all possible counts.

It's sad when the presidency now seems to have the kudos of a christmas bauble, a retirement hobby, but a trinket to amuse rich bored old white guys with a whim to try their hand at being leader of the free world

You must remember that these folks are The Best Americans, and should be respected on the basis of the amount of money [they tell us] they have. Laws do not apply to them, be they laws based on the Constitution, morality, social norms, common decency or any other. The only thing that matters is if they are on the right team, or on the enemy team. There is no "Best American" without "American."  Anything less is just another democRAT. 

How in the hell is Ukraine going to have time to investigate Michael Bloomberg now?  This is not fair.  China, Russia, if you are listening, I hope you are able to dig up some dirt on Michael Bloomberg before the election!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jerseyguy said:

Match up Bloomberg with a young progressive Dem (Mayor Pete ?) and you would have a most interesting ticket.  Could just be the best chance the Dems have.

Yea I know, 2 white guys and one of them is gay.

Trump is slipping.  Kentucky and Virginia may be just the tip of the iceberg.  If the trend continues, Trump could even be challengable in the primaries.  I don't think we need to settle for another billionaire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Amati said:

I met Harlan at a book signing a some years ago, he was very sick, but was nurturing some hope that he was somehow going to download his consciousness into the web, so maybe.....?  The Vancouver BC crowd might have some inkling of what he was talking about. ^_^ 

He found hope after "I have no mouth and I must scream"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think Bloomberg really wants to be President, but another four years of Trump is not an acceptable outcome.

If he had confidence that the eventual nominee from the current Dem crop could beat Trump, I don’t think he would have thrown his hat in the ring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bloombergs and Schultzes and the Zuckerbergs (you may have already forgotten his forays into touring diners in Iowa etc a few years ago) don't get that just being a rich CEO won't win them anything.  It's Trump's showbiz background and reality show image as a business mogul that he was able to sell to voters.  And Trump did have the ability to be a shameless demagogue in his 2016 primary campaign that most of the billionaire wannabe candidates lack.

No one is interested in Bloomberg, Schultz or Zuck being president.  My impression is Schultz wasn't deluded enough to think he could actually win, but merely sought to be an independent spoiler against a Democratic candidate who was too left for his liking, especially Bernie.  He got out when he realized he couldn't get any traction no matter how much money he threw away and he likely wouldn't be successful even being a spoiler.

If Bloomberg sought to be a spoiler as an independent in the general election, with the unspoken goal of preferring another term of Trump over Bernie or Warren, then running in the Democratic Primary instead of waiting until the general election is the dumbest thing he could possibly do.  At best he would peel some support off of Biden and make a Warren or Bernie nomination that much more likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BrickTopHarry said:

The Bloombergs and Schultzes and the Zuckerbergs (you may have already forgotten his forays into touring diners in Iowa etc a few years ago) don't get that just being a rich CEO won't win them anything.  It's Trump's showbiz background and reality show image as a business mogul that he was able to sell to voters.  And Trump did have the ability to be a shameless demagogue in his 2016 primary campaign that most of the billionaire wannabe candidates lack.

No one is interested in Bloomberg, Schultz or Zuck being president.  My impression is Schultz wasn't deluded enough to think he could actually win, but merely sought to be an independent spoiler against a Democratic candidate who was too left for his liking, especially Bernie.  He got out when he realized he couldn't get any traction no matter how much money he threw away and he likely wouldn't be successful even being a spoiler.

If Bloomberg sought to be a spoiler as an independent in the general election, with the unspoken goal of preferring another term of Trump over Bernie or Warren, then running in the Democratic Primary instead of waiting until the general election is the dumbest thing he could possibly do.  At best he would peel some support off of Biden and make a Warren or Bernie nomination that much more likely.

A lot of folks want traditional norms back, and don’t know how to undo what Trump has wrecked.  I’d put Bloomberg in that crowd, unless he comes up with something specific.  Mayor Pete is looking better and better, simply because he seems to have brought traditional norms with him while breaking new ground.  He ismaybe the only one besides maybe Booker who can do this?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current focus is obviously on who will the Dems ultimately nominate and what are the odds that he/she will beat Trump.  Bloomberg maybe nothing more than the flavor du jour or he might have some staying power.

The harsh reality is that in order for a  Dem POTUS to get anything accomplished the Senate is going to need to be flipped.  This cycle there are more GOP seats to defend than there are Dem seats.  That said, the best that the Dems can hope for is a 2 or 3 seat edge clearly not enough to prevent the Republican from going on a 2 year filibuster.  Thus when the Senate adopts its rules for the next session the filibuster has to be modified if not eliminated.  This is not without considerable risk as the voters just might give the Senate back to the GOP in ‘22.

Some serious people need to give some serious thought as to how to play this.  It is well above my pay grade.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

The billionaire set seems really wound up for this cycle. 

MB is in  the top 10 of American Philanthropists each year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Amati said:

I met Harlan at a book signing a some years ago, he was very sick, but was nurturing some hope that he was somehow going to download his consciousness into the web, so maybe.....?  The Vancouver BC crowd might have some inkling of what he was talking about. ^_^ 

Not B.C. but close, thinking a "personality construct" along the lines of William Gibson's earlier works?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, animeproblem said:

Not B.C. but close, thinking a "personality construct" along the lines of William Gibson's earlier works?

Yup! CyberPunk!  Adoring Idoru?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I Found this on Twitter and I thought it would grow the conversation about Bloomberg.

Federica Pelzel @federicca
FollowFollow @federicca
More

I saw @MikeBloomberg speak to a group of rich executives end of 2018, when he was already considering running for president. I was so shocked at his views that I took notes. Here are the highlights: (thread)

4:02 PM - 7 Nov 2019
  • He opposes legalizing marijuana and criminal justice reform; used the "gateway drug" argument.

    28 replies392 retweets2,339 likes
    Reply
     28
     
    Retweet
     392
     
     
    Like
     2.3K
     
    Direct message
  •  

    He's against investing in tech education in public schools because -get this- "we invest in computers and then they're used for porn and to plagiarize homework" , verbatim. I could spend a whole thread just on this but there's more to cover.

    23 replies470 retweets3,053 likes
    Reply
     23
     
    Retweet
     470
     
     
    Like
     3.1K
     
    Direct message
  •  

    He's against minimum wage and regulation around income and aid for poor Americans who have to hold several jobs just to make ends meet

    10 replies378 retweets2,049 likes
    Reply
     10
     
    Retweet
     378
     
     
    Like
     2.0K
     
    Direct message
  •  

    Literally said "you can't train people to do tech jobs, they're just not wired that way" when asked about tech education to mitigate job loss because of AI advances

    21 replies331 retweets1,985 likes
    Reply
     21
     
    Retweet
     331
     
     
    Like
     2.0K
     
    Direct message
  •  

    He ranted for several minutes about younger generations wanting to retire (?) and how that makes things hard on the economy #okboomer

    18 replies345 retweets2,974 likes
    Reply
     18
     
    Retweet
     345
     
     
    Like
     3.0K
     
    Direct message
  •  

    at some point said "women all of a sudden have opportunities now" so there are 2 bread winners in every family... Sorry Mike, ALL OF A SUDDEN?

    14 replies319 retweets2,644 likes
    Reply
     14
     
    Retweet
     319
     
     
    Like
     2.6K
     
    Direct message
  •  

    And finally, he said "we need to go back to how things were done in Clinton days, when he'd get 3 democrats, 3 Republicans and take them golfing, then go lock themselves in a room, close the door, smoke cigars and make all the decisions" (all men implied)

    28 replies367 retweets2,700 likes
    Reply
     28
     
    Retweet
     367
     
     
    Like
     2.7K
     
    Direct message

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If America didn't run on rumors and innuendo it wouldn't run at all... good luck...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Amati said:

Yup! CyberPunk!  Adoring Idoru?

Indeed, & what a great concept in that one, a dreaming AI gains a physical existence thanks to little nano-tech help.

 

 

 

 

 

And only in one of Bill's books would a central character be named "Chia Pet Mckinsey". 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, badlatitude said:

I Found this on Twitter and I thought it would grow the conversation about Bloomberg.

Federica Pelzel @federicca
FollowFollow @federicca
More

I saw @MikeBloomberg speak to a group of rich executives end of 2018, when he was already considering running for president. I was so shocked at his views that I took notes. Here are the highlights: (thread)

4:02 PM - 7 Nov 2019

Related to his favorable view of prohibition programs, he's a big "stop and frisk" promoter. Disturbing to fourth amendment fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, animeproblem said:

Indeed, & what a great concept in that one, a dreaming AI gains a physical existence thanks to little nano-tech help.

 

 

 

 

 

And only in one of Bill's books would a central character be named "Chia Pet Mckinsey". 

I forgot who it was that postulated that AI would only want to dream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Amati said:

I forgot who it was that postulated that AI would only want to dream.

Sounds like Philip K. Dick, but that's a WAG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Sounds like Philip K. Dick, but that's a WAG.

Maybe Greg Egan....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I like about Bloomberg is his strong affirmative stance wrt reasonable gun control and banning of AW’s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Bloomberg's Centrism Combines the Worst Instincts of the Right and Left

Quote

in the unlikely event that Bloomberg wins the nomination, the presidential nomination will pit a billionaire busybody again a billionaire bully

Yep.

Quote

Bloomberg's reaction to the legal defeat of his ban on large sugary drinks was telling. "We have a responsibility as human beings to do something, to save each other, to save the lives of ourselves, our families, our friends, and all of the rest of the people that live on God's planet," he said. "And so while other people will wring their hands over the problem of sugary drinks, in New York City, we're doing something about it." Bloomberg honestly believed he was saving the world, one slightly smaller serving of soda at a time.

I mentioned in the thread about his $peech that I actually admire his desire to improve the world, even if I disagree with lots of the ways he wants to do it.
 

Quote

 

While Bloomberg's paternalism may not faze progressives, his approach to crime control should. Under his administration, notwithstanding his admission that he had smoked pot and "enjoyed it," arrests for marijuana possession in New York City soared to record levels. This year he said legalizing marijuana, a policy supported by almost every other Democratic presidential contender (with the notable exception of Biden), "is perhaps the stupidest thing we've ever done."

Bloomberg was (and is) an ardent defender of the NYPD's "stop, question, and frisk" (SQF) program, which involved detaining, questioning, and searching young (and overwhelmingly black or Hispanic) men, often without reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. Although the threat posed by hidden weapons was the official justification for stop-and-frisk pat-downs, they almost never discovered any, and a federal judge ultimately ruled that the program was unconstitutional.

Bloomberg actually conceded that point, probably without realizing it. He defended SQF not as a method of disarming criminals but as a way of deterring young men from carrying guns in the first place. To his mind, the tiny and declining percentage of stops that yielded guns showed the program was working. According to the Supreme Court, however, police must have reasonable suspicion that a particular person is armed before patting him down.

Bloomberg is either oblivious to that requirement or believes ignoring it is necessary to prevent gun violence.

 

I disagree with Bloomberg and Biden on the stupid drug war. As for stop and frisk, I think Bloomberg does know about the fourth amendment but shares the Gungrabbiness Uber Alles attitude of most grabbers.

Quote

On this issue, Bloomberg sees eye to eye with Trump, who thinks "stop and frisk" is a no-brainer.

I actually agree with Bloomberg, Trump, and Bull Gator that stop and frisk is brainless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new player joins the fray.  Deval Patrick, native Chicagoan and former Governor of Massachusetts, is getting ready to announce his candidacy.

I will not even speculate on which candidates are helped by his entering the race or are hurt by it.

It does seem that, so far, none of the announced candidates have really inspired African-Americans who normally support Democrats.  Might a Patrick candidacy do that? 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/politics/ct-deval-patrick-2020-democratic-presidential-bid-20191111-qq6mkisuhnh5vnknshaeppdnui-story.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jerseyguy said:

It does seem that, so far, none of the announced candidates have really inspired African-Americans who normally support Democrats.  Might a Patrick candidacy do that? 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/politics/ct-deval-patrick-2020-democratic-presidential-bid-20191111-qq6mkisuhnh5vnknshaeppdnui-story.html

No.  Biden seems to enjoy quite high support among the black folk.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloomberg maintains his strong affirmative stance wrt reasonable drug control
 

Quote

 

...Speaking yesterday at the United States Naval Academy's 2019 Leadership Conference in Annapolis, Maryland, Bloomberg explained why he opposes marijuana legalization and still believes "stop and frisk" was a good idea.

...

In 2012, more than 40,000 people were arrested for low-level marijuana arrests, according to the NYC Criminal Justice Agency.

Thousands of those arrests came courtesy of another controversial stance that Bloomberg defended yesterday: stop and frisk. Under that program, police would detain and search citizens based on a reasonable suspicion they were armed. Though as the New York Civil Liberties Union has noted, police recovered just 729 firearms in 2012 due to stop and frisk. By contrast, more than 26,000 people were stopped on suspicion of alleged marijuana possession, leading to roughly 5,000 arrests.

...

Stop and frisk was also unconstitutional—police shouldn't be able to stop people without probable cause. And as a federal judge ruled in 2013, the program affected mostly innocent people and minorities. "Nearly 90 percent of the people stopped are released without the officer finding any basis for a summons or arrest," wrote then-Judge Shira Scheindlin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, according to The New York Times. She also said the New York City Police Department engaged in a "policy of indirect racial profiling" by regularly stopping "blacks and Hispanics who would not have been stopped if they were white."...

 

How is that "indirect" racial profiling? Seems like run of the mill "direct" racial profiling to me. But no matter, they got 729 guns and Gungrabbiness Uber Alles excuses absolutely anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. I wonder if he's into that whole grab them by the pussy thing?

Not that it would matter. Such boorish behavior, like any other kind of behavior, is excusable if you're gungrabby enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now he has repented,  saying Stop und Frisk was wrong.

He's politically astute enough to recognize it was a bad part of his record. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2019 at 8:20 PM, Zonker said:

And now he has repented,  saying Stop und Frisk was wrong.

He's politically astute enough to recognize it was a bad part of his record. 

He was not astute enough to pay any attention to the critics of his program while it was ongoing, nor in the years since. He was just defending it the other day!

Michael Bloomberg's Convenient 'Stop and Frisk' Conversion Is Transparently Insincere
 

Quote

 

During Michael Bloomberg's three terms as mayor of New York City, the number of people detained under the NYPD's "stop, question, and frisk" (SQF) program skyrocketed from fewer than 100,000 in 2002 to more than 685,000 in 2011. The program was perennially controversial because it seemed to violate the Fourth Amendment and because it overwhelmingly targeted young black and Hispanic men. Bloomberg nevertheless was always a staunch defender of it—until yesterday, when he told the congregation of a large African-American church in Brooklyn he has seen the error of his ways.

"I was wrong," Bloomberg said in a speech at the Christian Cultural Center, "and I am sorry." The dramatic reversal may be the surest sign yet that Bloomberg is entering the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. But it is transparently insincere, since he cannot offer a plausible explanation for his convenient conversion, aside from crass political considerations.

"I got something important really wrong," Bloomberg said. "I didn't understand…back then the full impact that stops were having on the black and Latino communities. I was totally focused on saving lives. But as we know, good intentions aren't good enough. Now, hindsight is 20/20. But as crime continued to come down as we reduced stops—and as it continued to come down during the next administration, to its credit—I now see that we could and should have acted sooner, and acted faster, to cut the stops. I wish we had, and I'm sorry that we didn't."

SQF's racially disproportionate impact was always one of the main complaints against it. The issue figured prominently in a federal judge's 2013 decision deeming the tactic unconstitutional as practiced by the NYPD. It is impossible to believe that Bloomberg took this objection to heart only recently. Even after U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin concluded that the program violated the Fourth and 14th amendments, Bloomberg continued to defend it.

 

This puts him squarely in the "I'll say anything to get power" camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

This puts him squarely in the "I'll say anything to get power" camp.

Ouch. Lumping him in with Gary Johnson and Tulsi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know a lot about Mayor Mike, but he seems to be a pragmatic problem solver, with some progressive views, who is a proven decent leader, as a former Mayor of Gotham.  And he maybe the only one with enough jui$e to $ucce$$fully challenge the Trumpublican juggernaut....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/19/2019 at 9:34 AM, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
On 11/19/2019 at 6:33 AM, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

This puts him squarely in the "I'll say anything to get power" camp.

Ouch. Lumping him in with Gary Johnson and Tulsi.

Actually, "I'll say what I think knowing it won't lead to power" is a whole different camp but I don't expect someone like yourself who can't even figure out basic facts like how many votes Gary got to understand why.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would good for diversity to finally have a Jewish President. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, spankoka said:

It would good for diversity to finally have a Jewish President. 

 

Way better than the current "Fake" Batshit Crazy Bible Thumper!!  Grab them by the pussy, just like all the Catholic preachers grabbed those little boys by the penis!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

Actually, "I'll say what I think knowing it won't lead to power" is a whole different camp but I don't expect someone like yourself who can't even figure out basic facts like how many votes Gary got to understand why.

I long ago admitted I made an error on that subject Tomballs. Are you lieing on purpose, or do you just not remember what the fuck you are talking about anymore and randomly bump posts that appear on your grievance list in between drunken shooting sprees on the golf cart? Or are you just a troll, jerking people off because you are sad stupid fuck that thinks because you post under your real name you aren't a dumb trolling sack of shit? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

I long ago admitted I made an error on that subject Tomballs.

Actually, you never did, which is why it remained amusing to me for so long. Now that you have, you're boring again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloomberg threw his $peech into the ring, followed quickly by his hat.

Quote

 

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg officially entered the 2020 race Sunday, ending several weeks of will-he-or-won’t-he speculation about a late entry into the already-crowded Democratic primary.

"I’m running for president to defeat Donald Trump and rebuild America," Bloomberg said on his campaign website. "We cannot afford four more years of President Trump’s reckless and unethical actions. He represents an existential threat to our country and our values. If he wins another term in office, we may never recover from the damage."

Bloomberg’s entry was preceded by news of a massive television ad buy — $31 million, according to Advertising Analytics, which said it was the single largest single week expenditure the firm had ever tracked. A $30 million buy in the final weeks of the 2012 race for then-President Barack Obama held the previous record.

The ad promotes Bloomberg's record as mayor in the aftermath of 9/11 as well as his post-mayoral work campaigning for gun control and against the coal lobby.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/25/2019 at 7:52 PM, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

I long ago admitted I made an error on that subject Tomballs.

^^^ Code for any gracious gentleman to let such a mistake go, to just move on. Also code for any little person to bring the same error up, repeatedly =  it fills a void.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2019 at 2:22 AM, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

which is why it remained amusing to me for so long. Now that you have, you're boring again

^^^ the void.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2019 at 8:19 AM, jocal505 said:
On 11/25/2019 at 10:52 PM, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

I long ago admitted I made an error on that subject Tomballs.

^^^ Code for any gracious gentleman to let such a mistake go, to just move on.

Only if it were true, but it's not. akaGP is just lying about his lie.

But that's now why I'm here.

King Michael Thinks Rules Are For Little People
 

Quote

 

...

a reporter asked him whether he had ever smoked marijuana. "You bet I did," the media mogul enthused, at a time when politicians tended to be much more reticent about such things. "And I enjoyed it."

Talk about do as I say, not as I did. During Bloomberg's three terms as mayor, the Big Apple became the marijuana arrest capital of the world, thanks to the notorious stop-and-frisk searches in neighborhoods where billionaires rarely venture.

 

He knows best and doesn't approve if people enjoy themselves the way he did.
 

Quote

 

In an April 2018 conversation with Christine Lagarde, then the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, Bloomberg defended his fondness for taxing items, such as sugary sodas and trans fats, that are widely enjoyed by the non-rich.

"Some people say, well, taxes are regressive," he said. "But in this case, yes they are! That's the good thing about them, because the problem is in people that don't have a lot of money. And so, higher taxes should have a bigger impact on their behavior and how they deal with themselves….The question is, do you want to pander to those people, or do you want to get them to live longer?"

 

Especially poor people, who need someone who knows what's best telling them what to do more than those with money.

Quote

He is the leading financier of gun control advocacy in America—and one of the few people allowed to have an armed security detail in Bermuda.

He needs armed guards in Bermuda but doesn't think people who are stupid enough to be poor should have guns, which is why places like NY and NJ put fees of hundreds of dollars on the exercise of that right. Not that there's anything racist or regressive about that.

Quote

He has been positively Trumpian about releasing his tax returns, snapping at the mere suggestion that such political traditions should apply to him.

This is sometimes considered bad behavior, but gungrabbiness uber alles excuses any behavior.

Quote

Trump may troll people about seeking a legally proscribed third term, but Bloomberg actually went there, changing the law near the end of his second term and then switching it back soon thereafter. As The New York Times noted dryly upon the latter occasion, "Bloomberg thinks that being able to serve three terms in office is a good idea—just not for anyone else."

Once again, he knows best.

Quote

To the president, constitutional rights are speed bumps slowing down his policy goals, especially concerning immigration. To Bloomberg, apology tour notwithstanding, policy ends can justify means that judges have explicitly ruled unconstitutional. "I think people, the voters, want low crime," he told The New York Times in September 2018, defending the legal setbacks of stop-and-frisk. "They don't want kids to kill each other."

He has very recently, if not very credibly, flip flopped on the use of stop and frisk as a drug/gun war tactic. He now says he knows a new best. Whatever he knows, it's always best!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From 2015:

Michael Bloomberg calls Colorado’s decision on legal pot stupid

Colorado voters have had a few years to think about it.

He was honest about his stop and frisk policy back then...

Quote

 

Bloomberg claimed that 95 percent of murders fall into a specific category: male, minority and between the ages of 15 and 25. Cities need to get guns out of this group’s hands and keep them alive, he said.

“These kids think they’re going to get killed anyway because all their friends are getting killed,” Bloomberg said. “They just don’t have any long-term focus or anything. It’s a joke to have a gun. It’s a joke to pull a trigger.”

At one point, the former mayor brought up New York City’s stop-and-frisk practices, which gained national attention in 2011. Bloomberg said that during his last year in office, a minister at a Baptist church in Harlem invited him to speak.

“While I’m sitting there waiting for him to introduce me, he said to his congregation, ‘You know, if every one of you stopped and frisked your kid before they went out at night, the mayor wouldn’t have to do it,’” Bloomberg said. “And so I knew I was going to be okay with that audience.”

 

The idea that the mayor "has to" disregard the fourth amendment to be a better parent seems to have faded in popularity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloomberg Plays Dumb
 

Quote

 

...

In that clip from CBS This Morning, Gayle King notes that there's some suspicion about how sincere Bloomberg really was when he apologized for his city's stop-and-frisk searches, which heavily targeted minority citizens but rarely uncovered the contraband drugs or guns used to justify them. Bloomberg responds that "nobody asked me about it until I started running for president."

This, of course, is utter nonsense. Bloomberg hasn't just been criticized for New York's stop-and-frisk policy; the city was sued over it. Even as he was doing some initial groundwork for his presidential run, he was still defending the policy. Just a year ago—in response to, yes, people asking him about it—he was still insisting that it helped lower crime rates in New York City, even though there's little data to back up this claim, and even though crime continued to fall after the practice ended.

One federal judge ruled that these warrantless dragnet searches based on no probable cause were unconstitutional. Does Bloomberg want us to believe that no one at any point in that process "asked me about it"?

...

 

From the NY Times in 2018

Quote

 

Asked whether, in retrospect, he saw any civil rights problems with stop-and-frisk tactics, Mr. Bloomberg replied: “The courts found that there were not. That’s the definition.”

In 2013, a federal district judge, Shira A. Scheindlin, ruled that the stop-and-frisk policy had been carried out in an unconstitutional way. Mr. Bloomberg’s administration assailed the decision and vowed to appeal it, but his successor, Mayor Bill de Blasio, a Democrat, declined to do so.

 

He was asked about civil rights problems with stop and frisk and his response was to lie about what the court found. The basis of his lie: we woulda won on appeal! But since that didn't happen, it's just wishful thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this