Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

still_one

(98,883 posts)

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

Reply to JaneQPublic (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 30, 2019, 10:32 AM

Jan 2019

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.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Perfect name for Schultz, Bloomberg, Trump, Steyer... [View all] JaneQPublic Jan 2019 OP

working link here.... CurtEastPoint Jan 2019 #1

Thanks! JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #2

I think it was the final " CurtEastPoint Jan 2019 #9

I see. Much appreciated! JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #22

At least Steyer said he won't be running in 2020...so that's one down. nt PunkinPi Jan 2019 #3

Hope he sticks with it. (nt) JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #5

At least Bloomberg is doing the honorable thing by running as a Democrat. octoberlib Jan 2019 #4

I agree. JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #7

HA HA HA THAT is a good one. pangaia Jan 2019 #20

+1 Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2019 #27

Exactly. Putting Bloomberg in that group is not fair because of those very important still_one Jan 2019 #8

I'm not a fan, especially after his recent comments. JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #13

It isn't a question about being for or against him, it is the fact that he recognizes that to run as still_one Jan 2019 #14

Schultz is little more than Donald Trump in disguise. Lonestarblue Jan 2019 #24

+1 Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2019 #29

I've got a strong case of "Billionairephobia". Eyeball_Kid Jan 2019 #32

Bloomberg and Steyer are OK Loki Liesmith Jan 2019 #6

Similar feeling about Steyer, but he owns his opinions/policies bigbrother05 Jan 2019 #16

Except Trump's not a billionaire EffieBlack Jan 2019 #10

Exactly - 12 years as mayor of NYC is very significant. Lucky Luciano Jan 2019 #25

I'm not a big fan of Bloomberg, but he IS a serious politician and government exec EffieBlack Jan 2019 #30

Two reasons for a loud "NO". n/t Eyeball_Kid Jan 2019 #33

Wow. Look at all these Dems here jumping to defend the One Percent! (nt) JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #11

There are plenty of reasons to be against Schultz or Bloomberg. Because they are the 1% still_one Jan 2019 #17

So you think it would be fine for Dems to nominate a billionaire in 2020? JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #18

First of all if Bloomberg runs, he isn't going to win the Democratic nomination. Do I think it is still_one Jan 2019 #21

On that we agree! (nt) JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #23

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ still_one Jan 2019 #26

I believe the term is Plutocrats mitch96 Jan 2019 #12

+1. I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I think Ted Lieu has it right ... we already tried that KPN Jan 2019 #15

Billionaire white boyz club pangaia Jan 2019 #19

I don't necessarily disagree MontanaMama Jan 2019 #28

I greatly admire Oprah, but I don't want her for POTUS. JaneQPublic Jan 2019 #31

Agree 100% MontanaMama Jan 2019 #35

No more non-lawyers or business men in the White House, whether they're billionaires or not. ancianita Jan 2019 #34