Perfect name for Schultz, Bloomberg, Trump, Steyer...

[JaneQPublic]

...and other would-be candidates who believe their vast wealth is a superior alternative to mere experience in government:

"Billionaire Boys Club." It needs to be a hashtag.

Credit goes to "The Guardian" and their recent article, "Billionaire boys club': the challengers lining up to face Trump in 2020":
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/16/trump-2020-challengers-billionaires-tom-steyer-bloomberg-howard-schultz

Donald Trump is a billionaire, or claims to be. The last thing he is expecting from the 2020 presidential election is an opponent who is even richer.

But one of the more unusual clusters in the putative Democratic field is the billionaire boys club: former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, hedge fund investor and activist Tom Steyer and former Starbucks chief executive Howard Schultz. Estimated combined wealth: $50bn.

...

But these are early days and corporate titans can buy name recognition. Schultz, 65, reportedly plans to travel the country early next year to promote a book entitled From the Ground Up: A Journey to Reimagine the Promise of America. Bloomberg, a businessman who recently re-registered as a Democrat, and Steyer spent heavily in the midterms to help Democrats regain the House of Representatives. Earlier this month they were on the ground in the key states of Iowa and South Carolina. Both have political causes that could make them stand apart from a highly crowded field.

[CurtEastPoint]

1. working link here....

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/16/trump-2020-challengers-billionaires-tom-steyer-bloomberg-howard-schultz

[JaneQPublic]

2. Thanks!

I'll see if I can replace the faulty one in my OP.

[CurtEastPoint]

9. I think it was the final "

[JaneQPublic]

22. I see. Much appreciated!

[PunkinPi]

3. At least Steyer said he won't be running in 2020...so that's one down. nt

[JaneQPublic]

5. Hope he sticks with it. (nt)

[octoberlib]

4. At least Bloomberg is doing the honorable thing by running as a Democrat.

And he does have government experience unlike Schultz.

[JaneQPublic]

7. I agree.

And at least he's done a lot of good for liberal causes such as gun reform and climate change.

However, his asinine statements recently about how Medicare for All will turn us into Venezuela were unforgivable.
(Really, Mike? Why is it always Venezuela and not Denmark or Norway?)

[pangaia]

20. HA HA HA THAT is a good one.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

27. +1

or Canada or UK?

[still_one]

8. Exactly. Putting Bloomberg in that group is not fair because of those very important

facts you mentioned

[JaneQPublic]

13. I'm not a fan, especially after his recent comments.

NBC: "Bloomberg blasts 'pie in the sky' Green New Deal, rips Warren wealth tax as Venezuelan"

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/bloomberg-blasts-pie-sky-green-new-deal-rips-warren-wealth-n964056

[still_one]

14. It isn't a question about being for or against him, it is the fact that he recognizes that to run as

an independent would only benefit trump. Schultz on the other hand realizes that, but still wants to be a spoiler.

Bloomberg isn't going to get the Democratic nomination, and he isn't going to act as as spoiler either.

[Lonestarblue]

24. Schultz is little more than Donald Trump in disguise.

I saw him on Morning Joe this morning, and it’s clear that he thinks big business has the solution to everything. On healthcare, business needs to provide access, not government. On taxes, it’s ridiculous to punish people like him with his rags-to-riches story by raising taxes on the rich (never mind that taxes on the rich have been cut over and over while the middle class picks up the bill—remember how hard the AMT hit a lot of people who weren’t rich?).

He’s a perfect member of the Billionaire Boys Club who just wants to protect his privileges. When he said this morning that he could break the logjam that is preventing government from working, all I could think about was Trump’s proclamation at the Republican convention that he alone could fix everything wrong with the US (namely, people of color even being in the country, brown immigrants daring to set foot on our shores, Muslims who need to be sent back to anywhere but here, taxex on billionaires, etc., etc., etc.).

No more billionaire presidents who think government is a profit center!

[Proud Liberal Dem]

29. +1

No more billionaires in government, esp. those without any government experience. You can't run the country "like a business" and nobody should vote for somebody who thinks it can/should be.

[Eyeball_Kid]

32. I've got a strong case of "Billionairephobia".

No more billionaires in national office. They live on a different planet than the rest of us. They are secluded, insulated, elitist, and completely out of touch with average citizens, just by the nature of the assets they hold. They don't shop, they don't wash their own clothes, they can hire people to wipe their asses, and they don't ever see a paycheck with another's signature on it. They have an aversion from the unwashed masses who will always want a piece of their wealth. Show me someone who's still paying off their student loans, who has to use a third of their monthly income for rent, and who shops for a lower price for milk, and I'll know that they appreciate the plight of the common person. THAT experience, and a presumption that these things are what binds us together as US citizens, is a big part of what qualifies them for office.

[Loki Liesmith]

6. Bloomberg and Steyer are OK

I may question Steyer’s political advertising priorities but his heart is in the right place.

[bigbrother05]

16. Similar feeling about Steyer, but he owns his opinions/policies

He is willing to put his name, face, and reputation on his policy priorities unlike the shadowy figures on the right. People like the Kochs create astroturf organizations and superpacs to insulate them from their dirty deeds and money.

[EffieBlack]

10. Except Trump's not a billionaire

And Bloomberg's in a different category because he actually stepped up and ran for a lower office and did something while there. He didn't and doesn't assume that he should get to leap from his day job straight into the White House because he's rich.

[Lucky Luciano]

25. Exactly - 12 years as mayor of NYC is very significant.

He has a lot of good policies, but two things make him an absolute nonstarter:

1) his strong opposition to single payer.
2) his strong anti-fourth amendment policies for POC with stop and frisk which he has doubled down on even though crime has not increased when it has been eliminated.

I welcome his funding and initiatives for gun control and climate change.

[EffieBlack]

30. I'm not a big fan of Bloomberg, but he IS a serious politician and government exec

He's not a gadfly billionaire who decided he should be leader of the free world and made a lot of money. He's done the work.

[Eyeball_Kid]

33. Two reasons for a loud "NO". n/t

[JaneQPublic]

11. Wow. Look at all these Dems here jumping to defend the One Percent! (nt)

[still_one]

17. There are plenty of reasons to be against Schultz or Bloomberg. Because they are the 1%

isn't one of them.

FDR would have been excluded by those standards, as most of the Joesph P. Kennedy family. To drive the point home, the sons of Kennedy were not like their father at all.

I think decisions ideally should be made where someone stands on the issues, and their record.

[JaneQPublic]

18. So you think it would be fine for Dems to nominate a billionaire in 2020?

By the way, I don't recall FDR, JFK, RFK, etc. going straight from corporate CEO to POTUS, senator, etc. That's the point.

[still_one]

21. First of all if Bloomberg runs, he isn't going to win the Democratic nomination. Do I think it is

fine for the "Dems" to nominate a billionaire in 2020?

Since I don't use that criteria when voting for a Democratic nominee, and since I will NOT be voting for Bloomberg anyway if he runs as a Democrat in the primary, it will be the consensus in the Democratic party determines that.

One thing I will guarantee, I will vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is over trump. I will NOT sit out the general election, nor will I EVER vote for a third party

[JaneQPublic]

23. On that we agree! (nt)

[still_one]

26. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[mitch96]

12. I believe the term is Plutocrats

plural noun: plutocrats
a person whose power derives from their wealth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

m

[KPN]

15. +1. I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I think Ted Lieu has it right ... we already tried that

experiment once.

[pangaia]

19. Billionaire white boyz club

[MontanaMama]

28. I don't necessarily disagree

with the article but there are definite differences between these people. I would say that Steyer doesn’t seem to be driven by evil and MF45 isn’t a billionaire! Regardless, it would seem that after you’ve achieved billionaire status, where do you go from there? What would drive you? Some of us would give a lot of money away...I certainly would. For some of these folks, political power and influence is just another notch on their proverbial bedpost. Oprah is a billionaire and it sounds like even she toyed with it.

[JaneQPublic]

31. I greatly admire Oprah, but I don't want her for POTUS.

With billionaires like Schmidt and others, there's the assumption that whatever invention, idea, or talent made them rich is all it takes to qualify as POTUS, when it's an entirely different skill set.

At least with rich Dems in history like FDR and JFK, they built up a resume in public service before running for Leader of the Free World. Sure, Bloomberg has experience running NYC, but there's very few mayors who jumped directly into the race for the White House. Most rose to governor or senator first (https://www.politico.com/interactives/2018/mayors-for-presidents/).

I actually agree that Trump is probably lying about being a billionaire just as he does everything else. (Waiting for Maxine Waters to subpoena his taxes!)

[MontanaMama]

35. Agree 100%

[ancianita]

34. No more non-lawyers or business men in the White House, whether they're billionaires or not.

I want all the existing business owning Congressmen to be kicked out, too. Every last one.

This country is facing the slow roll coupt of government by we-the-people human beings by the fictional personhood goliath.

End Citizens United and the Electoral College and we won't have any rich who want to run.

We'll have we-the-people Americans who want to do the greatest good for the greatest number under a Constitution that was designed for flesh and blood human beings.