Are Bloomberg's racist views disqualifying?

[redqueen]

Previously the media had only reported that Bloomberg "defended stop and frisk" in 2015. Now video and audio has gone viral, and it is way more than just defending stop and frisk.

Bloomberg rattles off crime statistics without a care in the world about the reality behind those statistics. This is the kind of stuff I'm only used to hearing from right wingers.

So I'm curious, is this disqualifying?

This absolutely terrifies me. I don't like his history of sexist crap but I know most voters don't care.

This? This is something that could kill us in the GE.

43 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes, his remarks are racist and it's disqualifying.
	34 (79%)
	Yes, it's disqualifying but I don't consider his remarks to be racist.
	0 (0%)
	No, it's not disqualifying.
	9 (21%)
	Something else (hope you'll share your views below.
	0 (0%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[IronLionZion]

1. Trump is disqualified

That was easy. Next!

[left-of-center2012]

2. OMG ! Another attack on Mike

I guess Mike's really on the rise to get the nomination.

[redqueen]

3. Is all the stuff he's saying in these viral clips racist or not?

What is your opinion?

[MicaelS]

11. I do not give a flying FUCK!

I am sick and tired of people looking for anything they can to smear people running against Trump.

Everyone makes mistakes. And purity tests suck.

Trump must lose, all other considerations are secondary.

[redqueen]

13. "Purity test" is about stuff like climate change policy, healthcare policy.

This is not a purity test it's a basic human decency test.

[kcr]

60. If there are no standards, then what is the point?

Why do you even care about getting rid of Trump?

[Bradshaw3]

4. So using his actual words is an attack?

Here they are, not from some repub or a Democratic rival, but from HIS OWN MOUTH, as recorded by the Aspen Times:
"Ninety-five percent of murders- murderers and murder victims fit one M.O. You can just take the description, Xerox it, and pass it out to all the cops. They are male, minorities, 16-25. That’s true in New York, that’s true in virtually every city (inaudible). And that’s where the real crime is."

Rather than attacking the messenger, how about commenting on his own words, said just four years ago.

[zentrum]

9. OMG--This Mike guy who gave a

.....big speech at The Repug National Convention in support of Bush in 2004 and is now a Democrat? Oh, let's not suspect and attack him!

Here, BTW, is part of racist screed.

95% of your murders -- murderers and murder victims fit one MO. You can just take the description, Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops. They are male. minorities, sixteen to twenty-five. That's true in New York. That's true in virtually every city. And that's where the real crime is.

You've got to get the guns out of the hands of the people that are getting killed. You want to spend the money on a lot of cops in the streets. Put those cops where the crime is, which means in minority neighborhoods. So, one of the unintended consequences is people say, "Oh my God, you are arresting kids for marijuana that are all minorities. Yes, that's true. Why? Because we put all the cops in minority neighborhoods. Yes, that's true. Why do we do it? Because that's where all the crime is.

And the way you get the guns out of the kid's hands is to throw them up against the walls and frisk them. And they start, "Oh, I don't want to get caught." So they don't bring the gun. They still have a gun. But they leave it at home.95% of your murders -- murderers and murder victims fit one MO. You can just take the description, Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops. They are male. minorities, sixteen to twenty-five. That's true in New York. That's true in virtually every city. And that's where the real crime is.

.... Put those cops where the crime is, which means in minority neighborhoods. So, one of the unintended consequences is people say, "Oh my God, you are arresting kids for marijuana that are all minorities. Yes, that's true. Why? Because we put all the cops in minority neighborhoods. Yes, that's true. Why do we do it? Because that's where all the crime is.

And the way you get the guns out of the kid's hands is to throw them up against the walls and frisk them. And they start, "Oh, I don't want to get caught." So they don't bring the gun. They still have a gun. But they leave it at home.

Not to mention how he removed restrictions on lead paint in NYC.

Oh--let's not attack poor misunderstood Mike.

[AtheistCrusader]

17. "You've got to get the guns out of the hands of the people that are getting killed"

Um.. I'm just going to assume that's miss-spoken.

[LanternWaste]

15. I too pretend valid concerns about racism are 'attacks..'

And from that mere discussion on racism, we get to pretend he's on the rise.

Your 'it does not follow' fallacy was as bemusing as slivers of used soap.

[Dr. Strange]

67. The worst thing is...

they're using the words of a racist bigot to attack him!

[2naSalit]

5. I think

that I would NOT want him as president, ever. Don't think he's qualified AND I don't like him but... I have heard on several news outlets that African American would hold their nose and vote for hi if hes nominated. I don't trust him.

I truly hope he's not the nominee in the end.

[MenloParque]

6. Nope

Threads created to cause division amongst voters who are fighting for their lives only do one thing...help the incumbent. Please post positive threads about your candidate without being a troll towards other candidates.

[redqueen]

7. Welcome to DU nt

[fallout87]

12. Oh, so just act like it didnt happen

No thanks, I want to know who's trying to be the nominee, and what they truly stand for. This is healthy.

[LanternWaste]

16. Ostriches sticking their heads in the sand seem your favored voter-block.

[DesertRat]

19. Welcome to DU, MenloParque

[hlthe2b]

8. He's not my candidate at all, but he is running as a Democrat...

I think it is fair game to discuss past positions and statements, just as we have with Biden and others. But, declaring his current views to be "racist?" I think we have to ask him, just as we have other candidates who've said and held controversial views in the past.

[fallout87]

10. Yes, 100%

And to see the amount of people defending these vile racist remarks is sickening

[Devil Child]

14. Yes, absolutely n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

18. Is the cynic in me allowed to observe that those positions may appeal to centrists and soft-right

wingers that might have reasons to seek an alternative to Trump?

I think I might enjoy seeing Trump and Bloomberg mix it up on-stage in a debate. That would be fucking lively.

[BusyBeingBest]

28. Well, since they seem to hate people who are woke...

nobody is mistaking Bloomberg for being that. That IS pretty cynical though, LOL.

[LAS14]

20. Oh, #$@$... Is EVERY candidate going to be burdened with somethin? I'm not a Bloomberg fan, but...

... I'll be interested to see how he does with POC, whe are currently being lauded for their "practicality."

[spicysista]

21. Mike, along with a lot of other people....

.....have said something racist. Most black voters are very highly informed. There is nothing new about an old white man saying and doing something racist.

Black voters tend to be more concerned about what a candidate has been doing for the last 10 years. Will they be able to carry state and local Democratic candidates across the finish line? What's the candidates story? What has he or she learned/experienced to show they can even begin to know our issues? What are some plans you've put into place? What has worked and what hasn't?

I think many older black people will hold their nose and vote for just about anyone who is an actual Democrat. I'm not sure about my age group. It seems more regional, to me. For example, my hometown has a huge HBC. So, you'd think Sanders would have had a shot, right? Well, Hillary ran away with every precinct in my city and all age groups of African Americans. Joe Biden seems to be doing the same this time, too.

I have no idea how things are going to shake out this time. I just know we can not afford to have any group disenchanted with our nominee.

[PunkinPi]

27. This! Especially after the viable black candidates are no longer in the race.

Black voters tend to be pragmatic and like you said highly informed, they don't necessarily have the luxury of voting on purity, especially when the goal is to rid the country of Trump.

[spicysista]

29. Pragmatism...that's the word!

[PunkinPi]

32. I got you :) ...

and while I'm here, I'm just going to add this, since it may help illuminate some things for folks.

Link to tweet

Black voters generally don't trust white voters or that most of the Democratic candidates will actually fight on their behalf. Thanks @SRuhle for being open to this and other thorny conversations during campaign 2020

[spicysista]

36. This should be it's own thread!

I'm serious! I really think a lot of people around here need to see this! Jason Johnson is absolutely correct. Although.....I'm not sure but this may be considered dinner talk... Oh, well. It was on national television.

[PunkinPi]

39. Duppers just posted another interview with JJ...

and added a link to my post.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287501126

[Duppers]

41. I posted about Jason in another thread last night.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287498833

We are on the same page, my friend!



And, btw, Bloomberg hates Trump's guts; this is personal for him.

[H2O Man]

22. Recommended.

I think this is an important issue. It deserves a serious discussion. If another forum member's opinion is different than your's, please focus on the issues involved, rather than the person who holds the different opinion.

[thesquanderer]

23. I don't like the word "disqualifying", but for this and numerous other reasons,

Bloomberg is way down on my list. I'd certainly take Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, or Biden ahead of him. But of course I'd vote for Bloomberg against Trump. So in *that* context, he's not disqualified, I'd pull the lever for him over Trump.

[redqueen]

24. I don't either but it seems to be really popular during this primary

so I thought I'd use it too. Since, to me, if anything is going to be considered disqualifying, it's this.

[AtheistCrusader]

31. After Howard Dean, I have little paitence for that word.

The Right proudly parades around in their own filth, and doubles down on every slimy thing they do or say, and we eliminate every single candidate of our own that has so much as a single skeleton in their closet.

The primary will decide who is and is not 'disqualified'.

[BusyBeingBest]

25. He will have a chance to explain his views and actions on the debate stage.

That should be enlightening. SOMEONE is going to bring it up.

[tishaLA]

26. I'd appreciate it if I could find a candidate who's been consistently

engaged in racial justice issues and has known the terrain for the entirety of his or her career. That isn't the case with any of the candidates, although to my mind Sen Warren is the closest of those still in the race.

Any vote I make will have to be a compromise of my principles.

[honest.abe]

30. Racist.

a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

Racism is the belief that groups of humans possess different behavioral traits corresponding to physical appearance, and can be divided based on the superiority of one race over another.

I do not think Mike is that.

[LanternWaste]

61. Racist. I do think Mike is that.

(it's adorable how we minimize and trivialize racist behavior, action, words and policy for the expediency of political conveniences and our own biases...)

[honest.abe]

62. I disagree. In fact he trying to stop a racist political party from taking over this country.

And he loves President Obama!

[jmg257]

33. Considering he may be off a few % with his "95% perps & victims are minority" stats,

Unless more conclusive data comes out, I'll say it does NOT disqualify him.

Per 2012 NYPD Police Report

Murder and Non-Negligent
Manslaughter victims are most frequently
Black (60.1%) or Hispanic (26.7%).

The race/ethnicity of known Murder
and Non-Negligent Manslaughter suspects
mirrors the victim population with Black
(53.7%) and Hispanic (34.8%)

The race/ethnicity of known Shooting
suspects is most frequently Black (78.2%).
Hispanic suspects accounted for an additional
(18.9%) of all suspects

The Firearm Arrest population is most
frequently Black (73.2%) or Hispanic (21.5%).

The most frequently occurring
race/ethnic group within the Violent Felony
suspects is Black, accounting for (66.0%).
Hispanic suspects account for an additional
(26.1%)

https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/nypd/downloads/pdf/analysis_and_planning/2012_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf

[tishaLA]

34. "A few % off"?

WTAF? Did it ever occur to you that there are more arrests of brown and black people for firearms because they are disproportionately targeted by law enforcement? Does a "felony suspect"--usually poor--mean that they have actualy committed the crime or that they have been accused and, often, convicted without regard to whether they are guilty or not?

That post is all kinds of horrible.

[jmg257]

38. Interesting points. I often refer to the reports by the local PD - Chicago's are very similar.

Not sure of the specifics as listed in these reports - or under "arrests" as in Chicago

https://home.chicagopolice.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Chicago-Police-Department-Annual-Report-2017.pdf

In Chicago, they actually had a whole program where they KNEW who like 80-85% of the victims and perps would be.
Strategic List or some such; mostly due to the high number of repeat offenders. They have since ended it on its ineffectivness. working...

ON Edit:

Chicago police have quietly ended a controversial data-gathering effort that rated tens of thousands of residents on who was most likely to be caught up in violence — either as a victim or criminal.

A report last week by the city’s government watchdog disclosed the demise of the eight-year program — referred to by police as the “Strategic Subject List” or SSL — while raising concerns about its operations on a number of fronts, including the accuracy of the ratings and the sharing of the data with other law enforcement agencies.

"The Police Department had revised the SSL numerous times since its inception in 2012, including a significant overhaul last year that included a name change.

In quietly dumping the program in November, the department acknowledged that the data-scraping effort hadn’t reduced violence, citing a national study released last year that found the SSL ineffective.

[tishaLA]

42. Chicago PD isn't known for its equitable policing of communities of color

whatever the data might say.

[jmg257]

44. Seems so, and goes along with points the other poster who also replied to me made...

...Chicago magazine reports. Among its findings: more people on the list end up arrested than are offered help through social services; more than half of the black men aged 20 to 29 in the city are on the list; entry on the list is based on arrests instead of convictions; and officers are arresting more people with a SSL score in heavily policed neighborhoods.

https://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2017/08/22/an-inside-look-at-the-chicago-police-departments-mysterious-strategic-subject-list-and-other-news

[Laelth]

35. I don't think so.

Democratic voters are so focused on defeating Trump that they're willing to overlook quite a few sins in this cycle. It's a strange place that we find ourselves in at the moment.

-Laelth

[dalton99a]

37. The only thing disqualifying a Democrat for office is a felony conviction

as far as I'm concerned

And that's how I vote in the general election.

[sarisataka]

40. How can we say he is racist

Just based on a statement that minorities need to be thrown against a wall and frisked? Didn't he compliment Cory Booker when Bloomberg described him as "well spoken?"

[TreasonousBastard]

43. Did anyone notice that Bloomberg apologized for stop&frisk? He admitted he made a mistake.

[tishaLA]

45. That happened after he defended it for years

Now, granted, I don't believe Bloomberg is substantially different from the former small town mayor or the former MN prosecutor or the junior senator from VT who couldn't be bothered to know that thousands of black folks are locked up in jails because they can't pay bail, but a speech and an appearance on a couple talk shows don't really cut it.

[uponit7771]

48. "no one told me about stop and frisk" is not an apology

[phleshdef]

50. Fuck his disingenuous apology.

[uponit7771]

46. "no one told me about stop and frisk" is more disqualifying than stupid racist statements

[redqueen]

49. Who said that? nt

[uponit7771]

51. Mike, 3 months ago

[redqueen]

55. I'm continually amazed that people actually support this person. nt

[uponit7771]

58. +1, IDK what's happening here but Mikes run in the most cynical I've seen in politics. He has made

... some of the most racist statements when it comes to non whites outside for a public figure outside of Trump.

IDK what they hell mike was thinking and his "non change" changed mind doesn't help.

[SpazzTheCat]

47. According to CNN this came from Bernies Camp

[link:https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/11/politics/bloomberg-stop-and-frisk-comments/index.html|

From the link
"The audio was posted to Twitter by writer and author Benjamin Dixon on Monday. Dixon said earlier this year that he believes Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is the best option in the Democratic presidential field. While promoting the clip, and several other critical articles and videos of Bloomberg, Dixon has repeatedly tweeted "#BloombergIsaRacist." He also did a podcast episode attacking what he called Bloomberg's "racist, classist past.""

I think Bernie is scared of Bloomberg

[phleshdef]

53. It doesn't matter WHERE it came from. Its true. He said it. He implemented it as policy.

You spamming every thread to let everyone know "it came from Bernie" is NEVER going to change that fact.

[redqueen]

54. It should have come from the MSM.

It's interesting that they can write about decades old shit about other candidates with no prompting, but this they not only ignore but when it does come out they point fingers at others trying to create more division and avoid explaining why they kept this under wraps.

[dsc]

52. It certainly cements his next to last rank for me

but it is only disqualifying if enough primary voters agree with me. That is an open question.

[Garrett78]

56. For decent people, of course.

And him buying the nomination will destroy us by alienating much of the base for years to come.

I've been saying for weeks and I'll say it again, this Bloomberg talk is absolutely nuts.

[bunny planet]

57. I say make Bloomie get on the debate stage

and defend himself, allow him to be exposed to the public warts and all, not just present himself the way he wants to by buying ads. You bought yourself on to the debate stage when others had to drop out unable to meet the former rules. The rules were changed for you Mike, so, now get on the stage and let us see what you've got. #makebloombergdebate

[LakeArenal]

59. Anyone of the candidates that can't get votes from POC

are going to lose.

I think it’s under-discussed and underrated.

[emmaverybo]

63. Yes. He defended the draconian policy until he decided to run, laughing at the idea of an apology

tour. He implemented a much more aggressive version of “stop and frisk”than had been in place, shredding thousands of AA and Latino males’ civil liberties.

Then he claimed that he had brought the crime rate down, when no correlation between this ruthless profiling policy and a crime drop could be shown. When the policy was suspended, crime did not rise. Still, he insisted. Now we see that his own distorted belief system justified his racist policy. His ideas about crime hark back to the days of slavery and Jim Crow.

Based on unproved theory and stereotype, Bloomberg not only systematically violated search and seizure laws, he intensified whole communities’ distrust and fear of law enforcement, exacerbating problems in the already strained relationship between the communities he harmed and law enforcers. He encouraged and unleashed policing abuses.

He never had AA and Latino support for his approach to crime. He did not consult with experts or community leaders. In fact, he persisted in the face of outcry and legal attempts to stop these abuses in fighting to sustain them.

[redqueen]

64. That should be an OP

Outstanding summary of his bankrupt moral code.

[LanternWaste]

65. I hope we're not currently watching in real-time, a revisionism of racist actions

I hope we're not currently watching in real-time, a revisionism of distinctly racist actions, obvious racist policies and overt racist words as something other than what they in fact, are.

By ignoring the core values of the Democratic party simply to elect a Democrat seems at best a short-sighted Pyrrhic victory... illustrating that our own convictions are as mutable and weak as the very republicans we condemn.

I'd hate to think this is a genesis of some new "we-have-met-the-enemy-and-he-is-us" wing of the Democratic party. If it is, we should tell them the name Dixiecrat has already been used.

[redqueen]

66. That seems to be exactly what is happening. nt

[LexVegas]

68. ...

[robbedvoter]

69. No more than Biden's, Burnie's Buti's. At least he apologized.

I wanted Kamala, but now, these are the choices. Let's just say, there are people at the bottom of my list following Bloomberg.