Benefit? How is participating in a debate where everyone wants to slaughter you a benefit? Having him get into the debate is to his detriment
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
He's a bad person
Bloomberg's sexist remarks fostered company culture that degraded women, lawsuits allege
Mike Bloomberg has on repeated occasions faced and fought allegations that he directed crude and sexist comments to women in his office.
abcnews.go.com
Solitaire Costs Man His City Job After Bloomberg Sees Computer (Published 2006)
Edward Greenwood IX is fired from his job in New York City's lobbying office in Albany after Mayor Michael R Bloomberg notes game of solitaire on his computer screen during visit; photo (M)
And then two people on the rules committee (the committee responsible for changing those rules) had two people jump over to aid his campaign. Like thats just all around shitty. Bloomberg is a bad person, with bad policies. He literally is only in this because of how much money he has.
Putting him on a debate stage and giving his campaign legitimacy is a benefit to him. Theres a reason why not a single candidate is happy about this and have all been outspoken over the fact this shouldn't have happened.
At this point, it would be best for the other candidates to attack Bloomberg asap to stop his momentum. Otherwise there wont be much chance for the candidates to call him out on stuff before big states start voting.
A few of the candidates are actually in favour of him attending the debates as it makes it easier to criticise his positions.
I'm inclined to agree with them.
At the moment he gets to just realise TV ads with little to no rebuttal.
It makes him a legitimate candidate. Either way I think it's wrong to change the rules for a billionaire.
Hart:
Klobuchar 6
Warren 4
Yang 3
Sanders 2
Steyer 1
Steyer 1
Biden 1
Gabbard 1
Millsfield:
Klobuchar - 2
Biden - 1
Buttigieg - 1
Sanders - 1
KLOB now leads the NH primary!
Klobuchar 6
Warren 4
Yang 3
Sanders 2
Steyer 1
Steyer 1
Biden 1
Gabbard 1
Millsfield:
Klobuchar - 2
Biden - 1
Buttigieg - 1
Sanders - 1
KLOB now leads the NH primary!
You can not change the rules a full year into the game to make it easier for them to get into a debate for starters. Design the rules to actually try and mitigate the absurd advantages people with infinite money would have
you could even put a cap on what candidates can spend on themselves actually. No reason why they couldn't
I mean, you realize he's gaining so far without being at any debates and without even showing up to the initial caucuses, right?
He's able to run basically is own private primary with nonstop sensible enough ads to a national audience in a general election format while the rest of the field basically can't even directly address his record. He needs to be at debates ASAP or eventually there will be no shot to counter him effectively.
Also, summer 2019 isn't exactly some long-standing tradition or history...
The fact he's at 15% makes him a legitimate candidate.
Or would you rather Bloomberg win primaries, and win the nomination without Bernie, or hell, even Klob or Pete being able to question him about anything?
I would. He shouldn't be recognized as legitimate by the party, let alone given special privileges.
LIz!
(which is surprising, considering Warren and Klobb don't agree on 'reaching across the isle')
None of the candidates have praised this, or are in favor of it. All of them have said this shouldnt have happened.
User Banned (1 Week): Ignoring the Staff Post With Regards to Hostility
He was already a legitimate candidate and this stupid belief that your changing the rules just to aid Bloomberg so the candidates can shit on him in a debate is ridiculous.
You know how poorly thought out what youre saying is. You absolutely want them to change rules just so Billionaires dont hijack the electoral process and have 0 excuses to refrain from debate. Do you think Bernie can compete with a Bloomberg ad campaign the entire primary? As opposed to a combined effort of each candidate shitting on Bloomberg on stage in a highly publicized event?
People acting like ignoring Bloomberg will make him go away. Polling in the mid teens overnight all on his own at this point...
Bloomberg is a virulent racist to the point where he used his money and influence to scrub the web of stuff like this:
There's an argument that he could be worse than Trump because he wouldn't be as overt.
Seriously we cannot allow this person to get the nomination.
There's an argument that he could be worse than Trump because he wouldn't be as overt.
Seriously we cannot allow this person to get the nomination.
I mean, you actually couldn't do the second thing. At least on a national level. Each state determines their own rules for how a candidate can get on the ballot, and many of those state will be controlled by state legislatures that have no reason to limit campaign spending.
I think Bernie can easily keep up with Bloomberg. People like Bernie, and look at the clip of Bloomberg making the rounds now. We wouldn't be talking about him now if he didn't pay his way into endorsements and the debates. It's not right.
Even if we ignore it, the mainstream media does not.
Anytime there is any reporting of polls or the priimary, they ALWAYS have to sneak in that "by the way Bloomberg incoming." Going to be really absurd when he is like on the debate stage and the pundits are ass kissing for him.
Because he's been legitimized by the DNC, to the point where they changed the rules of the primary debates to include him.
I think people's arguments are that it will not work in Bloomberg's favor. He's not exactly the most charismatic figure and while neither is Bernie, he is also insincere as hell, which I would say is not a problem Bernie has.
Either way we need Citizens United gone.
Bloomberg can literally spent 1 billion dollars during this primary...and still come out of the campaign with a larger net worth than before. The Bernie campaign can't do that.
More importantly, that terrible video is currently being shared on Twitter, where nobody but committed partisans will see it, and since this thread has assured me that the entire Democratic Party, all the cable networks, and every non-Bernie supporting journalist in the world is working to stop him from getting Bernie the nomination, why would they publicize something that would hurt Bloomberg, and likely help Bernie? Now, if maybe you want to say there isn't a giant conspiracy, then maybe that video may get some airtime, if the moderators don't want to ask about M4A for the 295th time.
yeah and I don't necessarily disagree, but it's still blatantly a wrong thing to do imo
But he hasn't actually been to any debates. And nationally? People aren't going to know about obscure rules being changed for anyone. That's not a relevant factor to his poll performance. People don't follow politics to that level like they do here.
They're going to see his ads, think,"Oh that makes sense or I'm glad he's shitting on Trump, and he was mayor, I think." And be open to supporting him.
Why are you getting so upset about this? And its crazy to suggest that simply putting someone up on a debate stage would result in them being successfully stopped when you have literally donald trump in 16 proving how beneficial it was to be up there and taken seriously. Every republican attacked him and it didn't matter or hurt him at all.
Uh we would be talking about him regardless because he's surging in the polls and had a widely watched super bowl ad that most people here went "oh thats good".
Bloomberg literally spams ads on TV constantly to boomers. Bernie will launch clips of Bloomberg being racist to Twitter users. These are two different audiences and I bet the TV watching boomer is a lot more likely to vote.
Anyway the point is to cap Bloomberg momentum. You being stubborn doesn't even make sense. Being in a debate isnt even an inherently good thing. When Peterson debated Zizek he was obviously out of his league and it ended up diminishing any credinility he had even within his own fanbase, etc etc.
The fact that Bloomberg getting shit on at the debate stage is what riles you up is nonsensical. Its literally absent of any strategic thought whatsoever. Bernie and Warren are both taking clear shots at Bloombergs head and the performance of a candidate in the debates has been noted to have some impact on polls. So why not let them take their shots at Bloombergs neck on the debate stage and stall his forward momentum.
Like honestly, I feel like people want Bloomberg on the debate stage but just want to attain some weird moral righteousness by saying "Cant believe theyre changing the rules to have this Billionaire get shit on in the debates".
its not. we got some other national polls today (albeit from less reputable sources) that are effectively comparable
I don't think there is a giant conspiracy but certainly there are people on those networks who would rather have Trump than Bernie because of their family's wealth. Whether that factors into things isn't something I feel qualified enough to determine.
That video needs to be shared. Instead what's happening is Bloomberg is targeting African American communities and inundating them with commercial after commercial because he feels like with Biden in a free fall those votes are up for grabs.
That video and Bloomberg's policies in NYC in general have to be newsworthy. Instead all people know is a meme about sodas probably from SNL.
You are killing me with this haha.
Maybe because Donald Trump literally embarassed the entire RNC in the debates and thus many of the audience thought he was better of that and entertainment value alone?
If you think Bloomberg is analogous to Donald Trump in personality and that the democrat base would even entertain that kind of clown show... If Bloomberg has better rhetoric than Bernie or Warren thats a failure on their behalf alone. Fortunately I have faith in those two not being utterly incompetent and getting mulled over by Bloomberg of all people.
The biggest concern I have is with regards to the race breakdown. For example, Economist which was a few days prior, had Bloomberg at 9% nationally (7% White, 12% Black, 11% Asian). Q usually gets there eventually but just like with Gallup, they have wild swings in their polling. Media needs to be cautious with things like that.
I prefer to wait to see more polling before jumping to conclusions.
Holy FUCK!!!
Klob might surprise people later today
My point is bringing someone up on stage and having them be attacked by everyone on stage is not indicative that it will be successful in stanching their rise in the polls. He doesn't have to act or behave like donald trump. Theres no reason to be changing the rules for him specifically (and not for actual members of the party like booker, whom they completely fucked over with this) just because he has infinite resources. If he wants to run ads fine. But then when national debates are on not and people realize hes not even up on stage they would get the message that he isn't to be taken seriously.
Let alone the fact they even allowed a republican on their ticket in the first place.
If that happens all polling data would have been wrong and that would be hilarious.
Pete said he was fine with the rule change. I can also remember Klobuchar complaining to the press he wasn't at the debates.
I keep asking for what I want but the waiter wont bring me what I want.
- Status