If most DU members would support Bloomberg over Sanders they haven't looked at his record

[Quixote1818]

Stop and Frisk, opposing financial regulations, raising money for Tom DeLay. If Sanders had done any of these things people here would be FREAKING OUT!!!!

Stop and frisk alone is extremely disturbing! Holy crap!

Sure, Bloomberg is a billion times better than Trump but I would not trust him at all to really work for liberal causes once he got in.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/29/bloomberg-has-too-many-negatives-to-win-democratic-nomination-barney-frank-says.html

[blm]

1. I won't participate in that type of poll.

Unnecessarily divisive.

No respect towards the feelings of other DU members, IMO.

[Tiggeroshii]

2. Its baffling really

A billionaire who cheered the war in Iraq, endorsed Bush and gave us stop and frisk -

[JudyM]

16. Supported Bush the second time, even. Against Kerry. That did a lot of damage.

[Tiggeroshii]

17. It absolutely helped him win

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

108. Forgot about that!! That drops Bloomberg even below Biden on my list.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

103. Not just baffing, its sad in light of the baseless Bernie bashin that goz on here on a daily basis!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[I_M_Blue_2]

104. I do not care, he has the best chance against Trump

This is the only thing I care about. Trump is a threat to democracy.

[Tiggeroshii]

105. Bloomberg helped give us Trump

By giving us Bush, the Iraq War, perpetuating stop and frisk (one of trump's favorite things). If he is the nominee, he will lose nearly every state after Trump replays his support and love of Bush and the Iraq war in every television commercial. He is a liability.

[aeromanKC]

127. +1000

[UniteFightBack]

135. Looks like there are plenty of folks who do not have this top of mind....and that is

quite concerning.

[jcmaine72]

123. Now hold on!!!

You mean, you weren't convinced by that heartfelt, ultra-sincere, bursting-at-seams-with-compassionate-contrition, apology Bloomy's hired speech writer penned for him for his once enthusiastic support for Stop And Frisk?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. I would support him over Sanders because I think he has a better chance of winning

and because Sanders would be a terribly ineffective president if he did win because he's proved over and over that he can't work with other people, and he has spent the last four years trashing the Democratic party. At least Bloomberg goes after Trump and doesn't slam Democrats. I wouldn't count on Sanders to get anything done at all.

[Bradshaw3]

19. Isn't funding repub candidates multiple times worse than "slamming Democrats"?

I think it obviously is. And we're not talking about decades ago. As recently as 2016.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

27. He's funding Democrats right now and that's all I care about.

Getting rid of Trump. Period.

[Bradshaw3]

99. Short memory for some and not for others

Since Bloomberg funded a repub who sits in the senate now and who voted not to hear witnesses and will vote to acquit your rationale has already proven faulty.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

100. I still don't care. Can he beat Trump? That's what I care about.

Only that. Whatever he may have done in the past or may do in the future isn't as important as getting rid of Trump. I don't like Bloomberg and I hope he isn't the nominee but I'll vote for him if he is. If my primary came down to him vs. Sanders (it won't), I'd vote for Bloomberg because he's more likely to beat Trump.

[Demsrule86]

41. I want to win so that is my priority...not something that happened a decade ago.

[spooky3]

57. Failing to accomplish anythng significant in a very long career is a much greater concern to me

than is the funding of some Republican candidates while ALSO funding many Democratic candidates.

[I_M_Blue_2]

106. Look I love Bernie, but he can not beat Trump

Beating Trump is all I care about.

[cwydro]

29. This.

[handmade34]

32. my reasoning as well

it isn't Sanders v Bloomberg in a vacuum... it is who has better odds of beating trump...

yes, let Bernie keep his day job, that's good for Vermont

[PatSeg]

98. I have to agree with you

I don't care for Bloomberg and think he would be a terrible choice for nominee, but he stands a better chance against Trump and though he might not be the liberal president I want, he would be a more effective president than Sanders. I don't see Sanders accomplishing much of anything in the White House and could end up fueling a resurgence of republicans in congress.

[Dem2]

126. Good point

Also, I'll take "a billions times better" (per O/P) than baboon anus any day.

[jrthin]

128. AMEN!!!!!

[W_HAMILTON]

4. I wouldn't trust Sanders to get in, in the first place.

And secondly, if he were to get in, I would expect him to do what he has done for progressive causes for his entire career, which is NOTHING because he alienates even would-be allies and can't achieve any sort of governable consensus.

[Tiggeroshii]

18. What does "get in" mean?

The nomination? Or get elected?

[W_HAMILTON]

31. I used it the same way the original poster did...

...which I took to mean "getting elected president."

[Tiggeroshii]

66. Got it

[Demsrule86]

5. I don't like Sander, but that is not why I would vote for Bloomberg...Bloomberg maybe can win

a general...and he is right on gun issues. Trump has to go. Bloomberg can help down ballot.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

6. Yeah, vote for the stop & frisk billionaire turned Rethug, turned Independent, turned Democrat

over the true progressive in the race... riiiiigghht!! Bernie is the obvious choice over Bloomberg after Biden drops out, as Bernie is the only candidate who can clobber tRumpy the Clown!!


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[Demsrule86]

7. Sanders is an Independent turned Democrat ...so ?

We have to get Trump out.

[Demsrule86]

15. True that.

[EndlessWire]

132. Yep.

I'm an outsider, but I remember that Bernie joined the Dems for the express purpose of running only. Afterwords, he returned to his own party. Now he is back for a second shot. People notice that stuff. Bernie doesn't seem to be a real Democratic candidate. Also, he is another rich guy. Maybe they are all rich...

We have to beat Trump. I don't even know if Bloomberg isn't a plant. I like the women candidates, or Pete. (Not a cheap shot there. I just like him.) Don't know if Pete can win. I cringe when I think about what Trump will say about him, but I think he is strong enough. If all gay people just voted for Pete, we could win, because there are a lot of closeted people out there. But, it doesn't matter what I think. It matters what all other voters think. So, you have to consider that, unfortunately.

I like Warren. But I also like Klobuchar, from the first time she opened her mouth. She is well spoken, comes prepared, and I believe she would make a good President.

But, I think Bloomberg can beat Trump.

For the record, I also liked Kamala Harris.

[OneMoreCupOfCoffee]

10. Sanders would get creamed. Too much baggage and too divisive.

[Zolorp]

8. Sanders was a member of the Socialist Workers Party of America.

That's a straight up Communist Party. It broke off from the Communist Workers PArty of America in support of Trotsky over Stalin.

He CANNOT win a nationwide election with that on his record.

[Tiggeroshii]

76. We already elected a pro fascist, openly authoritarian sociopath

I think we can probably elect somebody who associated with communists 45 years ago..

[Zolorp]

79. History has proved something time after time.

In a election when any electorate is given a choice between a fascist and a communist, they ALWAYS elect the fascist. Communists can only seize power through bloody revolution.

[NYMinute]

9. Sanders' record is far worse to those not wearing blinders.

[Amimnoch]

13. Yep.. one thing right off the top is much worse than the sum of everything Bloombergs accused of:

[Doremus]

55. Guess Sanders' supporters see better than you think.

(that's a fly mask, not blinders lol)

[NYMinute]

68. I know ... but it fits the scenario better

[Amimnoch]

12. Quite aware of his record. It's been posted here enough.

STILL would 100% take Bloomberg over Bernie.

I blame Bernie for much MUCH worse than anything Bloomberg has done.

[highplainsdem]

14. Here's a recent article that provides a lot of info on how Bloomberg has spent his money for

Last edited Sun Feb 2, 2020, 11:22 PM - Edit history (1)

political causes and races:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/12/michael-bloomberg-2020-campaign-political-donations-history-winning.html

Since leaving City Hall in 2014, Bloomberg has spent billions of dollars on the issues and candidates he supports. As David Callahan wrote this year for Inside Philanthropy, Bloomberg is an “exceptionally sophisticated” donor who targets strategically crucial races and significant but tractable issues. Bloomberg Philanthropies has spent a total of $8 billion on issues he cares about, including curbing deaths from tobacco (nearly $1 billion), traffic ($259 million), guns ($50 million), and opioids ($50 million), as well as combating climate change ($500 million).


-snip-

In June 2018, Bloomberg announced he would spend at least $80 million to help House Democrats flip the chamber. A month before the election, he pledged another $20 million for the same goal in the Senate. “Republicans in Congress have had almost two years to prove they could govern responsibly,” Bloomberg said. “They failed.”

-snip-

A newly aggressive Bloomberg infused the race with big money. He handed over staggering sums to other Democratic groups (in particular, $20 million for the main Senate Democratic super PAC). This time, many of the races he targeted directly involved new figures taking on entrenched incumbents. These were pricier contests, and Bloomberg spent more than $1 million on 13 different candidates, a threshold he crossed only once in 2014 and twice in 2016:

Katie Hill, D-Cal.: $5.1 million
• Kim Schrier, D-Wash.: $3 million
• Steven Horsford, D-Nev.: $2.8 million
• Haley Stevens, D-Mich.: $2.6 million
• Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich.: $2.4 million
• Mikie Sherrill, D-N.J.: $2.2 million
• Lauren Underwood, D-Ill.: $2.2 million
• Nancy Soderberg, D-Fla.: $1.6 million*
• Elizabeth Fletcher, D-Texas: $1.3 million
• Jennifer Wexton, D-Va.: $1.7 million
• Dean Phillips, D-Minn.: $1.1 million
• Carolyn Long, D-Wash.: $1.3 million*
• Carolyn Bourdeaux, D-Ga.: $1 million*
*losses

-snip-

The article also explains that Bloomberg's donation to Pat Toomey apparently had to do with Toomey's attempt to expand background checks for guns, something that's very important to Bloomberg.

[George II]

22. He spent about $200 million supporting Democratic candidates, not to mention all the philanthropic..

...work he's done over the years.

For example, he's given more than $3.5 BILLION to his alma mater, Johns Hopkins University.

Sad that some zero in on a few negatives in a very positive career of 40+ years of spending money on good causes.

[highplainsdem]

30. Philanthropy including $1B curbing deaths from tobacco and half a billion combating climate change.

[riversedge]

35. Thanks. very informative

[Demsrule86]

20. Well...I would rather have Biden and Warren is my second choice with a strong VP choice...

But if it is between Sanders and Bloomberg...than I chose the latter as you have no chance of getting anything done if the would be King Trump is re-elected. Sanders won't win a general.

[UniteFightBack]

136. People are refusing to back Biden then they'll get themselves a Bloomberg and I'm ok with that.nt

[DanTex]

21. Or maybe people have, and prefer Bloomberg's record.

From what I've seen, DU runs more towards the moderate side of the party rather than the liberal side. Like, more (Bill) Clinton Democrats than FDR Democrats, particularly on economic issues. Bloomberg is more conservative than Bill Clinton, sure, but a lot of Clinton's policies, like welfare reform, deregulation, his efforts at entitlement reform, are closer to Bloomberg than someone like Bernie. This is why there's more resistance to Sanders running as a Dem than there is to Bloomberg running as a Dem.

[Demsrule86]

24. Winning isn't everything, it is the only thing. Trump must go.

[George II]

25. DU runs more toward candidates who have been Democrats for a long time, INCLUDING Bloomberg.

[DanTex]

36. Bloomberg was a Republican who supported and voted for George W Bush.

Maybe some people aren't aware of that, but I hardly think the whole "Democrats only" thing has anything to do with people supporting Bloomberg over Bernie.

[George II]

43. Bloomberg was a republican for six years. Prior to 2001 (going back to his 20s) he was a Democrat..

...and has been a Democrat for the last two years. Even this short 2-year stint is longer than another candidate has been a Democrat.

[DanTex]

51. He's opposed Dems his entire political career. He was nominally a D before he entered politics.

But as a politician, he was either a Republican, or an Independent who ran against Democratic opponents for mayor. If he wins the nomination, this will be the first time in his life that he tries to defeat a Republican in a general election.

Bernie, meanwhile, caucused with Dems his entire career. And in his runs for Senate, he ran against Republicans, not against Democrats. And, obviously, he never supported George W Bush.

To try to make the "party purity" argument against Bernie while accepting Bloomberg is absurd. No, that's not why anyone prefers Bloomberg. Moderate Dems prefer Bloomberg because they prefer Bloomberg's policies.

[George II]

53. His "entire"political career prior to this year was 12 years, 7 as a republican and....

....5 as an independent.

That's a LOT less than another independent I know.

[I_M_Blue_2]

110. The policies I support are 100% Bernie's, but ...

There is only one thing I care about and that is beating Trump.
A candidate who calls himself a democratic Socialist cannot do that, no matter what his policies.
If he called himself a Social Security Democrat, there is no question I would be supporting Bernie 100%, but I cannot support somebody who will lose to Trump. So I must support Bloomberg. Our democracy is at risk.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

116. Yes, which is why the working class in this country will no longer accept crumbs, plain and simple!!

It's gotta be Bernie... or else we'll ever see economic equality, racial justice, or environmental responsibility!! We The People demand fundamental fairness... we demand Bernie!!


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[I_M_Blue_2]

118. I get what you are saying

but we get none of that if we lose. Sadly, as much as I hope it was different, Bernie would lose.

[BumRushDaShow]

119. Do you think that because both Bernie and Mike are native New Yorkers

like the current WH occupant, that they would have an advantage of knowing how he thinks?

[I_M_Blue_2]

122. Trump is a master showman and he knows how to use labels

New York is the center of the communication industry. Bloomberg and Sanders communicate fact Trump communicates fiction.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

120. I respect your opinion... and I just respectfully disagree.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[underthematrix]

130. There it is TRUTH.

[Demsrule86]

44. Gov. Northam also voted for Bush...and yet he is a great governor and turned the state blue...Warren

whom I like was a Republican and likely voted for Bush I and Reagan...it is all about the now...

[DanTex]

54. Right now, Bernie and Bloomberg are both running as Dems.

I agree, it's all about the now. That's why it's obvious that people who prefer Bloomberg to Bernie actually prefer Bloomberg's policies to Bernie's policies. It's not about who used to be a Republican or Independent or whatever.

[Demsrule86]

63. No, as people have told your repeatedly...I prefer that Bloomberg is likely to win a general.

And he has done much for the Party...and not attacked Democrats or the party either,not celebrated an endorsement from Rogan, he has...gone after Trump. And also Bloomberg will remain a Democrat...Sander goes back to Independent in 2024 for his Senate run.

[DanTex]

69. Except in our discussions you seem opposed to all of Bernie's policies, and supportive of

Bloomberg's. On the one hand, single payer, free college, debt forgiveness, you oppose. On the other hand, Bloomberg stuff like entitlement reform and spending cuts you seem warm too.

Unless I missed something in our previous discussions.

[Demsrule86]

84. I do not support free college with no income ...or MFA but since there is no chance

of getting any of that... not an issue. Sanders will lose the general and the house probably. You don't get it. I want to win period.

[Demsrule86]

85. Bernie will become an Independent should he lose.

Bloomberg will remain a Democrat.

[DanTex]

87. Of course, because Bloomberg has been so consistent with his political registrations in the past...

I wouldn't put it past him to switch to Independent this very cycle if Bernie or Warren win the nomination. He talked about doing that last time.

[Demsrule86]

93. More consistent than Sanders...who runs as a Democrat in Vermont and then

switches back to Independent. I want to win...it is my judgement that Sanders won't win...thus if it is between Sanders and Bloomberg, I vote Bloomberg. The gun issue is important to me so I can deal with that. Also, I haven't heard Bloomberg complaining about the party...

[Voltaire2]

42. Moderate? You give them too much credit.

Bloomberg is a center right politician.

[lapucelle]

61. Mike Bloomberg is a Libertarian-Leaning Progressive

Mike Bloomberg is a Libertarian-Leaning Progressive

https://www.ontheissues.org/mike_bloomberg.htm

https://bit.ly/2Uijfsj

[I_M_Blue_2]

111. Can he beat Trump? Yes, he has my vote N/T

[Voltaire2]

114. I thought it was JB.

Wasn’t Biden the only one who could beat Trump?

[True Blue American]

124. I am an FDR Democrat!

By today’s standards FDR would be a millionaire. Teddy was a Republican but he had Democratic Standards.

Bloomberg, like Biden believes In working with anyone for the good of the Country. Labels need to be put aside for the good of the Country.

[JudyM]

23. Not a reformed republican like Warren, he seems to go whichever way the wind blows.

He’s not going to inspire anyone who wouldn’t have voted Dem anyway. We need to reach beyond our conservative peeps.

[George II]

46. Not really. He was a Democrat, switched to republican because of the unique political climate....

...in NYC in 2001, became an independent in 2007 and then registered as a Democrat in 2018.

That's three changes in his entire adult life of over 50 years, hardly "whichever way the wind blows."

[JudyM]

59. Lol if you say so. Anyone who supported Bush is not on my team.

He’s the 8th richest person in the US and now because he doesn’t like trump he’s buying his way into the race for our party POTUS.

It’s so disingenuous to support him when you make such a stink about Sanders, who has voted with Dems more than some Dems, and fought tooth and nail against Bush. By any so called “purity” standard Sanders is far more Dem.

[I_M_Blue_2]

112. Don't care about purity only care about beating Trump

Bernie cannot do it

[JudyM]

113. All polls show him beating trump

as they did last time. There’s no actual evidence that suggests he can’t beat him.

In fact, he’s got the best chance of beating him because, Bernie appeals to those who voted for trump because he portrayed himself as a populist: Bernie is an actual authentic populist and polls consistently show people trust his word.

[TheCowsCameHome]

26. He's absolutely trashing Trump at every turn.

He knows who the enemy is.
The other candidates would do well to follow his lead.

[rzemanfl]

28. Put Bernie in a poll with Tulsi.

He will do better. I promise.

[Dan]

34. I would support Satan over Trump

[TheCowsCameHome]

39. Buy one, get one free.

.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

45. Is there a difference?

[Dan]

71. Hahahhahaha

gotta laugh over that...

[Demsrule86]

47. Me too.

[greymattermom]

37. We know.

But only money can beat Trump.

[rzemanfl]

38. Was it something I said? n/t

[lapfog_1]

40. here is the logical reasoning

If the (false) choice is between Bloomberg and Bernie...

The main goal should be to pick the candidate that will defeat Trump.

Bloomberg is a rational pragmatist... and would attract some Never Trumpers and even some Trumpanzees who are just tired of the show.

Of course, all Democrats and even the Sanders supporters are going to go for Bloomberg, despite his record (right???).

Last thing, Bloomberg has real money... like $50B.... unlike Trump.

Pretty sure if Bloomberg is the candidate, not only would he spend a couple of Bs on his campaign, he might well spend the promised 1B on Senate and House races.

Money isn't everything... but we need to beat Trump and if money is what it takes... I'm good with that.

We can be purists some other day.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

49. Makes sense to me.

I'm not crazy about Bloomberg's record, but beating Trump is what matters now. Bloomberg is no spring chicken and he isn't likely to run for a second term, so he'd be a place-holder whose job would be cleaning up Trump's mess - which will take any president's entire first term.

[Demsrule86]

50. Great logic...I agree...Oh,oh..San Fran is only up by three.... I am rooting for them myself.

[lapfog_1]

52. Not looking good... up by 10 but couldn't stop

Mahone on a 3rd and 15.

Sigh.

[Demsrule86]

86. Sad for SF...

[Recursion]

75. His spending also may scare Republicans into supporting campaign finance reform

I think at least that was kind of his goal when he started.

[Sloumeau]

48. I really would not want to have Bloomberg as a nominee...

But I figure that he's about 1000 times more electable than Senator Bernie Sanders. America is not going to put a Socialist revolutionary in the White House.

[lapucelle]

56. Bloomberg is and has been an strong anti-gun activist. I trust him to work for that cause.

He also said he would repeal the Trump taxes and raise taxes on the 1%.

[AlexSFCA]

58. he is not better than BS, he is just more likely to win than him

against trump. It is the only issue that matters in this election.

[Demsrule86]

60. Bloomberg needed money for New York because of 911...it is not that simple.

Bloomberg Secret: Kerry Win May Be His Happy Ending
By Ben Smith • 09/20/04 12:00am

'After this November’s election, win or lose, Democratic ad man Bill Knapp will wrap up his “John Kerry for President” account. He’ll file away the combative television advertisements he helped create, with lines like “George Bush’s wrong choices have weakened us here at home” and “George Bush: Denounce the smear. Get back to the issues. America deserves better.”

Then Mr. Knapp, one of the Democratic Party’s most sought-after operatives, will start work on next year’s most lucrative client: New York’s Republican Mayor, Michael Bloomberg...

Mr. Bloomberg did greet the President heartily in his opening speech: “The President deserves our support. We are here to support him, and I am here to support him,” he said. But the Mayor never appeared in public with Mr. Bush. Photographers caught him in the shadows, seated in a limousine with Mr. Bush standing outside. During some of the convention’s more rabid speeches, Mr. Bloomberg sat stone-faced, hardly clapping as the Republican faithful around him exploded in applause. He also made a point to attend only a handful of Republican Party events: one for gay Republicans, one for Republicans who support abortion rights, and one for the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC...'

https://observer.com/2004/09/bloomberg-secret-kerry-win-may-be-his-happy-ending/

[RandySF]

62. I'll bet you Trump is more afraid of Bloomberg than he is of Sanders.

[TheCowsCameHome]

64. I think you are right.

Bloomberg is going for the jugular.

[jcgoldie]

67. Trumps an idiot

Why does anybody give a fuck who he's afraid of?

[Jake Stern]

65. There is no such thing as a squeaky clean candidate

The key is how much they've improved and how close they will put us into the WH.

John Kennedy - Shagged damn near every female he came in contact with, authorized assassination attempts on Castro, expanded the number of "advisors" in Vietnam.

Lyndon Johnson - A world class asshole and bully, knowingly went along with a lie to escalate our involvement in Vietnam. Look up the 1948 Box 13 scandal to see how he and his buddies conveniently "found" a box with hundreds of votes to put him over the top in a tight senate election.

Jimmy Carter - Fucked up royally by allowing the Shah into the country for cancer treatment knowing damn well it would piss off the new Iranian regime to no end, in 1979 he started funding the Mujahideen in Afghanistan which included a young Saudi construction heir named Osama Bin Laden.

Bill Clinton - Couldn't keep his dick in his pants, kneecapped welfare, happily signed a law that drastically expanded the federal death penalty.

Each of them had pretty bad skeletons in their closet yet they're revered by the party as elder statesmen.

Does Mike Bloomberg intend to keep going with stop and frisk? From statements he made it doesn't seem like it and the honesty is that he is really getting under Trump's skin in a way that even Biden isn't.

Trump his terrified of Bloomberg because Bloomberg is everything Trump claimed to be on the campaign trail and more. He's an actual billionaire, a real self made man who doesn't have string of failed businesses and bankruptcies behind him, nor scandals involving hookers and porn stars.

[NYMinute]

70. If it is a Democrat, I'd vote for a piece of discarded chewing gum over Sanders in the primary

Bloomberg is a lot better choice.

[AJT]

72. I like Warren and agree with a lot of what Bernie proposes,

but I think Bloomberg has the best chance of beating 45 and that's all I care about at this point. I will support any candidate that wins the nomination.

[scheming daemons]

73. It isn't about record.. it is about who will beat Trump by more

[showblue22]

74. Bernie would not get any of what he says done

Who would he and his followers blame for that? Democrats. So.. I choose Bloomberg

[Gothmog]

77. We want to beat trump

I would prefer Bloomberg over sanders because trump would easily defeat a very weak socialist candidate like sanders. I prefer Joe Biden and then Amy over Bloomberg and sanders

[Clash City Rocker]

78. Wait...our only choices are Bloomberg or Sanders? Since when?

Trump would get re-elected against either of them. That’s like asking if you’d rather be shot or stabbed.

[getagrip_already]

80. sanders can't beat biden, so he is making it him or bloomberg.....

If you hate bloomberg, you have to vote for bernie the saying is going.

BS. Biden is the BEST candidate. Warren is good too, BBernie is the worst, and would lose in a landslide. Joe won't. Bloomberg is a made up distraction to take votes from Joe.

[robbedvoter]

81. I know his record. He was my mayor. Not a fan. But

I also know what revolutions are. This Bloomberg answer made me vote for him over Sanders (should the choice present itself) in a NY minute:

Link to tweet

Burnie can afford to laugh when he is asked if he is a communist. For many of us it's about as funny as rape, genocide, starvation and dictatorship.

[Fresh_Start]

82. Anyone supporting Sanders over Amy hasn't looked at their records

Sanders is all hat no cattle
Amy gets things done

[AncientGeezer]

95. Love this reply...

[Scurrilous]

83. Stop and Frisk is unique to New York.

It's like saying Bernie never arrested turnstile jumpers yay.

[lark]

88. Both of these are last and next to last on my primary voting list.

Neither of these is who I want to see atop the list, and don't feel that either represents the party and it's people.

Of course, if I am wrong and one of these end up being the nominee, I will work hard for them because anyone in the world is better than the traitorous Impotus3. However, I can not see Sanders beating drumpf, the country is not ready to accept socialism and that's what Bernie is calling for.

[tritsofme]

89. I don't like Bloomberg very much at all, but would support him over Sanders in a heartbeat.

I am well aware of both candidates records, one is just that terrible.

[LongtimeAZDem]

90. I support Bloomberg over Sanders because of Sanders' record

[LanternWaste]

91. Much like saying "If DU members disagree with me, it's because they're flawed..."

It's an unsupported premise that does little else other than illustrating our own self-righteousness.

[themaguffin]

92. It's about who to support over trump.

[booley]

94. That is why I want him in the debates

A lot of his support seems to be coming from name recognition.
But few outside New York know his actual record.

I don't think Bloomberg can survive scrutiny.

don't think that is why the DNC changed the rules. But it is a silver lining.

[Hortensis]

96. Bloomberg's record is better than Sanders' in many ways.

I hope it doesn't come down to that, of course, but Bloomberg in a heartbeat.

Bloomberg is at least competent. It's a huge job that the wellbeing of over 300 million people depend on, not to mention that of the rest of the planet, and people who know him believe he's up to the job. Colleagues and insiders familiar with Sanders believe he's anything but.

[booley]

107. How exactly?

Because I can point to Sander's accomplishments in Burlington, as a US Representative and Senator.

Policies Bloomberg is known for include profiling minorities for unconstitutional searches and holding off following court orders for as long as possible.

Link to tweet

[Hortensis]

109. No, you can't. That's the point. Skip the misinformation

Last edited Mon Feb 3, 2020, 05:07 PM - Edit history (1)

put out by Sanders partisans (including Russia) and examine Sanders' complete record. That you would post that list suggests to me that you've never examined his actual accomplishments and compared them with those of even his somewhat more effective peers, much less the towering senate figures. The man was in congress and a U.S. senator for nearly 30 years and to this day, by his own words, has very little idea of how to use government to achieve his campaign promises!

He's not only never been anything close to a leader, his famously obnoxious behaviors and hostile ideology caused him to exile himself from almost all the chats and meetings where agreements are reached and decisions made. It didn't have to be that way, but self exile to the sidelines saved him the hard work the movers and shakers have to do.

As for his principles and claims, his legislative record includes 95-99% voting each year for Democratic bills he claims to despise. Why would he vote for 30 years for them if they were so corrupt, Republicanish, and all-around bad? WHAT kind of person would claim to despise 30 years of legislation he voted for and then literally run on a claim that Democrats are practically as corrupt as Republicans, but not him?! If his colleagues are corrupt, so is he every bit as much, if not more.

Probably half of the remainder of his votes were for Republican bills to serve his donors and for sundry other purposes. Including moving VT's nuclear waste to a low-income, primarily Hispanic county in TEXAS. (!) Liberal Democrats don't do that! But HE did.

His other legislative legacy for the history books is 2 bills naming post offices and 1 for something I don't remember. AND, far more interesting and worthy of attention, a pattern and series of votes, skipped votes, and official statements that benefit RUSSIA at great potential damage to the U.S. and our allies. What's THAT about? Answer needed BEFORE voting!

This is just a tiny, very limited summary of his history. But how about for just one other (among many questions that you should find answers to) his deceptions about the vast difference between "Democratic socialism" and the socialized programs some European nations have? He outrageously claims they're the same!!! Only the trust and ignorance of voters could enable anyone to get away with peddling that disinformation.

We owe it to ourselves, those who depend on us, our nation, and our planet to refuse to be too trusting and too ignorant. At very least we should all know who and what we're voting for before we vote.

[comradebillyboy]

97. Bloomberg get results, Bernie scolds Democrats for not bowing down to him.

Bloomberg was very helpful in Dems taking back the House in 2018. Bernie not so helpful.

[Blues Heron]

101. They haven't - they just hate Sanders

[MontanaMama]

102. This election won't be won on policy.

It also won't be won by Bernie Sanders.

[bluestarone]

117. I'm for Biden BUT

Seems like Bloomberg, and his organization are pretty smart! I do like their approach. The ad's are great. I would have no problem supporting Mike IF Biden would not be first choice! I want RUMP DEFEATED!!!!!

[pecosbob]

121. I'll say it here and now...I won't vote for Bloomberg or Gabbard

I can't and won't vote for a plutocrat or a bat shit crazy person.

[Gothmog]

125. The only thing that matters is beating trump

If sanders is the nominee, trump wins 45+ states and we have Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House

[thesquanderer]

139. re: "If sanders is the nominee, trump wins 45+ states"

No way so many states Clinton won last time flip to Trump this time, no matter WHO we put up. After all, Clinton won them despite being a very unpopular candidate herself (to the general electorate).

I think any of our candidates wins at least the states that Hillary won. So then the question is whether someone can have more appeal in the rust belt.

[Gothmog]

140. I have seen some of the oppo on sanders-trump can use this oppo to win 45+ states easily

I am very worried about down ballot races. sanders is a very weak candidate and would be easy for trump to destroy. In addition to the well written 101 page memorandum with oppo on sanders with a 1000 pages of backup from the Clinton campaign trump has his own oppo file on sanders that would destroy such a weak and divisive candidate like sanders.

Link to tweet

trump had a two foot thick book of oppo research on Sanders http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

They ignored the fact that Sanders had not yet faced a real campaign against him. Clinton was in the delicate position of dealing with a large portion of voters who treated Sanders more like the Messiah than just another candidate. She was playing the long game—attacking Sanders strongly enough to win, but gently enough to avoid alienating his supporters. Given her overwhelming support from communities of color—for example, about 70 percent of African-American voters cast their ballot for her—Clinton had a firewall that would be difficult for Sanders to breach....

So what would have happened when Sanders hit a real opponent, someone who did not care about alienating the young college voters in his base? I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers....

The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.) In other words, the belief that Sanders would have walked into the White House based on polls taken before anyone really attacked him is a delusion built on a scaffolding of political ignorance.

sanders was such a weak primary candidate that the Clinton campaign did not use its oppo but trump would have fun destroying such a weak candidate like sanders

I will vote for the nominee of the party but I fear that the nomination of sanders will lead to a Speaker Kevin McCarthy

[thesquanderer]

142. Maybe. But I've looked at that Clinton campaign document...

...and I don't think anything there would persuade someone to actually vote for Trump instead of Sanders... even if they aren't thrilled with Sanders, just like many weren't thrilled with Clinton. That's why I think he'd at least win the states that Clinton won. I'll grant you (or the writer of that article) that Florida is a tough sell... but Clinton didn't win Florida either. What Sanders would have to do is maintain the states that didn't go for Trump last time, and add three rust belt states (out of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Ohio).

[Gothmog]

143. The Clinton memo was for primary use only and has stuff that real Democrats would care about

There is a great deal more including videos of sanders at anti-American protests in Central America and sanders praising Fidel Castro. These speechs are easy to use as negative ads. AMJOY made this point today

Link to tweet

I have seen a great deal of oppo on sanders that disturb me

Finally, if sanders is the nominee, Russia would suppress the African American vote like crazy. Russia did this to Clinton but here Russia would have some real material to use. I was a delegate to the national convention. sanders did virtually nothing to control or even vet his delegates who were his official representatives under party rules. There was well organized stunts by the sanders delegates to boo John Lewis, Elijah Cummings, Stacy Abrams and other leaders. The Clinton campaign had a whipping infrastructure in place and I was warned by my whip 20 to 30 minutes before each stunt occurred. According to my whip and others, sanders was asked to stop the booing of these African American leaders and declined.

Russia can and will use these planned stunts to depress the vote. There was a great deal of anger by many at the National Convention over these planned stunts. The Texas delegation and the Georgia delegation shared a bus from our hotels and there were some really mad Georgia delegates. Russia would have fun using real incidents to suppress the vote of African Americans.

Link to tweet

Without African American turnout, no Democrat can win even with sanders magical voter revolution.

I would not be surprised to see trump win 45+ states if we nominate such a weak candidate like sanders

[FarPoint]

129. This election...

I believe we can possibly win with a Billionaire....a real Billionaire against a fake Billionaire who is now a dictator...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

131. If he can beat Trump I don't care about any of that.

I'm already freaking out about some of the things Sanders has done much more recently. And he can't beat Trump.

[Gothmog]

133. Bloomberg is electable and that is all that matters

We have to defeat trump and I doubt that Warren, sanders or Mayor Pete are electable Bloomberg is my second choice after Biden.

Fighting over policy issues will only help re-elect trump

[UniteFightBack]

134. It's about beating dump. What part of that are you not understanding. nt

[Awsi Dooger]

137. Don't feed details to those of us who aren't stupid enough to care about details

Nothing in the OP matters in the slightest toward November. One of the great flaws of any type of evaluation is to obsess over every detail, to pay attention every day, to make subjective evaluations every day. Once you take that type of fatal course it's almost impossible to admit to yourself that it is wrong, that you need to stop, to totally ignore.

Think of all the cars whisking along a highway. That is the real world. They will be here again tomorrow. Nothing changed. They are within their little bubble. That is the real world. The reason I don't like Rachel Maddow is that she never presents that real world. She is fixated on two years past. She can provide a wonderful evaluation of two years past. She can also pretend that all of those whisking cars are incorporating new details every day, that they are changing their thinking and direction as a result of the newly acquired details.

Sorry Rachel. They are whisking along with all the familiar priorities and biases as yesterday and a decade prior.

It is the reason we can't force an easily defined liberal or a self-admitted socialist into a national decision, particularly in balanced terrain against a despicable liar owning all the advantages of an incumbent who party has been in power only one term. It doesn't matter what it looks like 9 months out. That nominee will be steadily chewed up.

We can't be dense enough not to apply situational big picture clarity. We can't watch a debate and fall in love with all of our candidates and what they say, our rosy here and now, under some nutcase impression that any of them can win. Ralph Nader ruined 2000 and part of that was his ignorant assessment, "If Al Gore can't defeat the incompetent governor of Texas..." Blah blah blah. It all sourced from details. Ralph Nader knew all the details of George Bush. The voters did not. They don't care.

People with all the day to day details are the ones who persistently insisted that Trump's approval rating would plummet below 30%, that Trump would resign, that Trump would be removed, that Trump would never be renominated. I didn't mind pointing out that Trump is an incumbent. Those things don't happen to an incumbent. I have no details. I paid no attention to politics yesterday. Meanwhile anything I knew from 30 years earlier allowed me far greater predictive ability than all those details, all those issues.

Who can beat Trump? Issues don't matter at all. It has to be someone who places Trump on the uncomfortable defensive. It has to be someone powerful and commanding enough to instantly own respect of the type of voter who always opposes us, those white idiots with the pickup truck and twin American flags. That type will instantly laugh at Elizabeth Warren. They will pause only briefly before laughing at Bernie Sanders. They won't laugh at Mike Bloomberg. They won't vote for him but some of their neighbors will, the ones we desperately need to save.

[Renew Deal]

138. Sanders is unelectable.

You can't be president if you can't win

[Kaleva]

141. For many, all that matters is which of the two has the better chance of beating Trump

[Gothmog]

144. And who can best help down ballot candidates

I like what Bloomberg is doing and I think that he could really help down ballot candidates

[Kaleva]

146. Very true

[Happy Hoosier]

145. My refusal to support Sanders isn't based on policy...

... it’s based on my opinion that he has all the grace and leadership qualities of an angry badger. And his staffing decisions demonstrate very poor judgement.

[Gothmog]

147. Record and positions do not matter

If we pick a weak candidate, trump will win

Link to tweet

?s=20