Bloomberg moves into 5th place (@ 7%) in Quinnipiac and Morning Consult

[brooklynite]

Easy response: Voters are stupid and are being taken in with his ad campaign.

Harder response: People like his policies, they're comfortable with a moderate candidate, and he's got a top-notch admaker.

[groundloop]

1. We don't need another billionaire in the White House

Just because he's republicon-light and not full blown bat-shit-crazy some feel he'd be a good fit for the White House..... no thanks.

[USALiberal]

16. What net worth is ok or too much? Nt

[Amishman]

31. Hard to put a specific number on it, but it's definitely a good bit less than a billion

Do
Not
Want

[madville]

32. We only support Multimillionaires for the White House here lmao

No Billionaires allowed

[Amimnoch]

2. He's doing the one thing a lot of people REALLY want:

His ad campaign is 100% laser focused on attacking Trump, and not fighting out party policy and mud slinging at the other candidates.

Currently Biden is still polling best in the critical swing states out of all the frontrunners, so as long as that holds out he’s my choice. I see Bloomberg, or Warren, or even BS, who I can’t stand take that lead, my support will shift.

Winning is not at ALL a guarantee, in fact, the odds are against us. I’m supporting whomever has the best chance in the critical swing states period.

[Sloumeau]

3. He's following the Tom Steyer playbook

1. Spend tons of money on television advertisements attacking Trump

2. Eventually get into the debates and hope that somehow you can make it into one of the top slots.

Bloomberg has a lot more money than Steyer, and he's spending it a lot faster than Steyer ever did, so he's made some good gains in polling. If nothing else, it is a study in just how much a huge wad of money can help a campiagn. However, I haven't seen anyone leaving Biden's campaign, and I don't expect to see that either. I think most Biden fants see Bloomberg for what he is: someone trying to buy his way into the campaign but without Biden's vast experiene or huge support among African Americans and older Americans. Bloomberg seems to have hurt Mayor Pete the most, and probably will continue to do so.

[brooklynite]

4. Unless the rules change, Bloomberg will never be eligible for the debates...

He's not raising money, so he won't meet the contributions threshold.

[Sloumeau]

8. Yep, I forgot about that.

Still, if he's really at 7% without the debates, the debates may not make that much difference. Steyer has been going to the debates, but I see no movement in the polls for him. It seems that massive ad spending may move the needle more than showing up at the debates.

Thank God that the debates have that requirement for number of donors. The fewer billionaires in the debates, the better.

[LongtimeAZDem]

5. I hate to admit it, but he just might pull it off

[Sloumeau]

12. Bloomberg won't win the nomination

Take a look at the graph here over at the economist:

https://projects.economist.com/democratic-primaries-2020/

You'll see that Bloomberg may be taking votes from Warren and Mayor Pete, but support for Biden and Sanders has been hugely stable throughout the entire primary. Biden and Sanders fans are rock solid loyal. It means that Bloomberg may cannabalize from Warren and Buttigieg, but he'll get close to nothing from Biden and Sanders. He may still take more from Mayor Pete, but most Warren people would go to Sanders long before they would go to Bloomberg. This means that if Warren drops further, it should help Sanders more than Bloomberg..leaving Bloomberg probably never really doing better than nipping at Sanders' heels. Biden will hold onto his fans, and Sanders will gain from Warren to Sanders converts. Bloomberg will never draw enough from Warren, Sanders and Biden to win, which is exactly what he would have to do.

[Joe941]

6. This is really impressive.

[ancianita]

7. Not buying this money-powered bullshit. He's been a political chameleon. For 17 years he's been

either republican or independent. He's money-driven to kick Warren and Sanders out. He'd better be nobody's running mate, either.

From 2001-2007 he was an f'g Republican, then from 2008-2018 he was an f'g independent. Since last year he's now a Democrat again.

I realize people change politically over time. Bloomberg might mean well, but given the seriousness of the times we're in, I have to doubt that.

Because his past actions, at best, indicate a person confused about Democratic Party values; at worst, an opportunist with money and the best media producers money can buy.

So it's a special, beautiful anti-Trump campaign, but we really only have sales pitch "ideas" from him and not concrete plans to match those of Warren, Sanders, or Biden.

Feckless, fickle people "Liking" is what got us into this mess. "Liking" Bloomberg had better not be the basis of getting us out of it.

[Skya Rhen]

9. Voters are too smart to buy what he's selling which is why he is at a meager 5-7%.

[ancianita]

11. Good. Given his expedient membership in the party, he can stay there. His values ain't solid enough

for me.

[AlexSFCA]

14. NYCers voted for him 3 times

his reelection was with 20% margin. Mind you, NYCers are some of the best educated voters in the country.

[ancianita]

15. During which years? I'm sure you're aware that we have well educated voters across the nation,

too, who've been hard working and lifelong Democrats for all the reasons we here know.

At this point, given our domestic and international situation, any discrepancies in a Democratic candidate's past political affiliations are rightfully suspect. Until Bloomberg gives his party commitment speech on the campaign trail, his staying in fifth place is fine by me.

Money can't buy trust.

[LongtimeAZDem]

19. "Voters are too smart to . . ." is something I will NEVER bet the farm on

[brooklynite]

27. Does the same theory apply to Klobuchar and Booker?

[Sloumeau]

13. Bloomberg has way too much of a racist background to ever...

win enough African American support. This means he has no hope of winning Southern States. If you don't win the South, you don't win the nomination. Just ask Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders.

[thesquanderer]

17. re: "I realize people change politically over time"

yes, but he's never changed, his party affiliation is one of convenience. It's why he could run as a left-leaning Republican or a not-so-left leaning Democrat. Neither of which is something I'm inclined to vote for.

I find him irritatingly arrogant, but that doesn't mean he couldn't be an effective president. I'm not sure why someone would pick him over Biden, though. Maybe because he's a better speaker?

[ancianita]

24. There's no reason, imo, for anyone to pick him over Biden; and his speeches are too polished,

too calculated, for me to call him a better speaker than Biden, mostly because we're Biden's true audience and only Bloomberg's expedient audience. Bloomberg's true audience are his worried billionaires who don't want to deal with Warren, Sanders or Biden.

[Awsi Dooger]

36. "Biden often sounds confused. Bloomberg is in his 70s but is still sharp"

That's one reason voters might prefer Bloomberg. They are not my words. I heard it in a bus full of old white people while attending an LPGA golf tournament in Naples a few weeks ago.

I mentioned it here a week or so ago. They were discussing politics on the bus. I was somewhat amazed that Democrats were receiving some mention, given a demographic like that. The guy doing most of the talking said, "That's what Biden has going for him, he's not too far out there." A woman piped up and instantly agreed. "The others are too far out there." That meant too liberal.

The original guy said, "Not Bloomberg. He's not too far out there." He provided the quote from my header and summarized that that the only two Democrats he'd consider are Biden and Bloomberg. Instantly at least 8-10 voices shouted out some form of, "I agree."

I was shocked. I had not considered Bloomberg viable at all, until listening to those people on the bus. I always take note of white America due to the huge numbers and influence. Golf crowds are the reason I knew full well that Trump had a big chance in 2016. At every tournament I attended in spring 2016 it was like a Trump rally alongside the gallery ropes.

[left-of-center2012]

10. He's spending time and dime attacking Trump

In my humble opinion,
people are tired of the circular firing squad.

[jcmaine72]

18. Oh, how wonderful!

This nation needs another business-friendly, corporation-owning, predatory capitalist, billionaire president like we need a simultaneous outbreak of bubonic plague and cholera. And we especially don't need one who owns his own news network.

No thanks.

[comradebillyboy]

20. I just filled out a political survey on Political Wire asking me to

rank the 10 contenders in order of preference. Bloomberg was 5 on my list as well.

[scheming daemons]

21. When $100 million can only get you to 7%, you have no chance to be the nominee.

[redqueen]

23. This. nt

[MineralMan]

22. That's the power of advertising for you.

Bloomberg's ads are devoid of any real substance. He just uses glittering generalities in his advertising. But, they're well produced, and are showing almost constantly during the network news hours here in Minnesota.

I think his position will be limited to about where it is, but he's going to give Buttigieg fits, I think. He might even pass him up before too long. I don't think he'll have much impact on the double-digit leaders, though.

The thing is that he might be consolidating centrist voters who haven't selected a candidate yet. I suspect his primary voters will shift to Biden, in the end.

He's a monkey wrench.

[LanternWaste]

25. Evidence to support premise?

"People like his policies..."

Evidence to support premise? (no post hoc ergo prompter hoc fallacies allowed).

[stopbush]

26. Bloomberg will continue to move up in the polls.

He has the money to buy name recognition and the money to stay in til the end. He can afford to get on all the primary ballots. He will begin to pull moderate Ds away from other candidates, and those candidates will fall in the polls and fall out of the race.

Bloomberg has decided to go around the establishment process, for good or for ill. The strategy is already working. Any shortcomings he has with minority voters can be remedied with a targeted VP pick should he win the nomination.

[redqueen]

29. "Any shortcomings...with minority voters can be remedied with a targeted VP pick"

You sound awfully confident about that.

I'd bet against it myself.

[Polybius]

28. Is he going to make the next debate?

He's certainly met the polling threshold.

[former9thward]

30. No. The debate rules say you need 200,000 different contributors.

Bloomberg is not accepting contributions so he will not make any debates with those rules.

[Polybius]

35. I'm no fan of Bloomberg

But if he’s polling 6% now and rising fast, he should be in the debates.

[LAS14]

33. It makes me mad that money can buy a place in the standings. nt

[brooklynite]

34. You mean other candidates haven't been spending any money?

[LAS14]

37. The money they've spent is from others who are demonstrating their support of the candidate. nt

[brooklynite]

38. I expect that people who like Bloomberg will demonstrate their support by.....voting for him.

[LAS14]

39. But he wouldn't be on their radar but for his private funds. At least Steyer....

... has been at this for years.