Got an unsolicited text from the Bloomberg campaign:

[hurl]

"Hi I'm Jon from Mike Bloomberg's campaign. As we await the Iowa Caucus results, Mike has teams in 40 states and is ready to defeat Donald Trump. Will you support Mike?"

My response: "Of course not. The last thing we need is another billionaire. Remove me from this distribution and tell Mike to buy Fox News instead."

That said, if Mike somehow ends up being the D nominee, I will absolutely support him wholeheartedly and without reservation.

[underthematrix]

1. This is the main reason all the drama is pointless.

Everyone I know is voting for the Democratic nominee. It doesn't matter who it is. This is about believing in democracy, our Republic, not a specific candidate. Of course I respect people's choices but the bottom line is our democracy cannot survive with a GOP controlled senate or #TraitorTrump in the White House.

[ibegurpard]

5. It's why "undecided" is the biggest group

and no one is breaking through. I think the majority are just waiting for a nominee.

[MoonchildCA]

6. I agree.

I think that’s why Iowa turnout was not quite what was hoped for. People are waiting for the nominee to be chosen, then they will rally behind her/him.

I’ve never been undecided at this point in my life. I’m waiting for someone to come out strong and convince me they have what it takes to win against Trump. I like all our candidates. Ideologically, I align more with Bernie or Elizabeth, but I have my reservations about both of them. Honestly, I wish Bernie didn’t run this time around. He’s too divisive.

I truly feel my “agenda” can wait. We need to even the keel on this ship. I’m fine with a moderate candidate this time around, but no one is giving me that sure-fire vibe as a candidate. Buttigieg has something that others are missing, but I’m not sure if the African American community will rally around him in the numbers we need.

I hope things are clearer by the time my primary comes around...

[left-of-center2012]

2. Bloomberg must be doing well.

The attacks on him are increasing.

[Awsi Dooger]

9. Agreed...but we'll probably screw up and fail to nominate him

Then we'll be sitting here in the fall clutching all of our rationalizations, while the incumbent lies and lies and lies some more as our safe choice is always on defensive and steadily giving way.

Newsflash: This is no longer late 2017 with Trump at 35% approval and a sitting duck against anyone we nominate. It is no longer late 2018 with independents swarming our way, leading to 8+ point generic ballot edge. Sorry, this is very standard evolving electorate when an incumbent whose party has been in power only one term seeks re-election. Only Jimmy Carter has failed in that scenario in more than a century. Carter would have won with economic perception anything close to current level.

Unless we wake up and throw away our incredibly ignorant perception that Donald Trump is likely to lose, we won't understand the need to gamble toward someone who can turn the tables on him.

[mainstreetonce]

3. I have already gotten calls from team Bloomberg

I donated to Biden,but get calls from Bloomberg.

[Beartracks]

4. To be fair, we may not REALLY have a billionaire in the WH now. Perhaps...

... if we could see Trump's tax returns...?

It's probably just billions of rubles in credit, with those chits being called in constantly.

============

[keithbvadu2]

7. 'another billionaire'

[scheming daemons]

8. I agree. I want his money attacking Trump... but I don't want him as our nominee.

He can be our sugar daddy.