The reason she isn't winning is that she is too damn good for our country.
-
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.
US PoliEra 2020 |OT 2| Dershowitz says "Quid Pro Quo on the Go?" [See Staff Post]
- Thread starter TheHunter
- Start date
- Status
The reason she isn't winning is that she is too damn good for our country.
Just gonna leave these here:
Holy SHIT.. never heard about any of this until now (story is from Dec. 15 of last year)
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
Fuck this scumbag.
I've posted this image before, but just for clarity:
"These People Are Not Your Friends" the JPEG
Even though i agree, this isn't actionable. Like you cant do anything about it.
When Bloomberg becomes the nominee in July, you all can look back at these two posts.
You two are spot on.
I didn't expect Bloomberg to suddenly eat literally half Biden's lunch in African American support when literally none of other candidates could touch him, and still are having troubles. Biden is a terrible campaigner but I felt it was his race to lose considering he did next to nothing and still seemed to be getting rewarded for it. Between Bloomberg and Buttigege winning in Iowa, its a one two punch of people eating into his support at the last moment and his own campaign inability to actually challenge it because they haven't bothered to campaign properly from the start.
I like how Biden's polling was completely unmoved by his rambling old man debate performances only to flop the second people actually started voting.
I'm not concerned about his personal opinion, but instead the notion that the Democratic Party isn't a leftist party and that will prevent sanders from being dominant as the primary moves along. The data doesn't bear that out.
So my cynical side says that she's just really good at saying the right thing, but the rest of me feels like if she were that skilled at manipulating she'd have gone at the other candidates much more than she has... So my read of this is just that maybe she's just being honest; she has all these plans out here for how to get her goals done, and whether or not she gets to be the one to enact them is a secondary concern to seeing them implemented well.
Super disappointed things this time around played out as they have; the field is weird and not a good place to be if you're more concerned with advancing your overall positions than your personal brand. I don't see how she pulls out of the tailspin without going for blood against the frontrunners, and I don't see how doing that would fit with her general approach.
If you think about it, this country elects Republicans for president all the time, so the Democrats nominating one in Bloomberg seems like a winning strategy to me!
Hoping something like this happens for Bloomberg too but that's being optimistic.
As much as I dislike the guy, he hasn't made any missteps yet. His ads are potent and widespread, people are ready to vote for him despite even seeing him next to the candidates. Opposite of Biden really.
The thing is even if she drops out she's still a US Senator and an amazing legislator. She isn't going to retire for a while, she has more to accomplish.
My God, we weren't just supposed to reach across the aisle, we were supposed to jump over to it!
As I said, I would imagine that Bloomberg doesn't show up at the debates. Seems like he has a better time getting his message across doing ads and personal events in places like Philadelphia and Texas. Add a few televised town halls and he's golden.
That said, I really don't think it'll happen. Maybe if he decides to campaign in South Carolina I might be swayed more. Still, him winning would be so unprecedented. It's not actually happening. I'll believe it when I see it. Probably just some fad of the moment thing.
Yep.
People hate Trump. They want someone to knock the shit out of Trump. Bloomberg has taken the fight directly to Trump.
If I have to choose between Sanders and Bloomberg, I'll choose the former, and I think he can paper over a lot of his problems by going full apeshit anti-Trump. Negative partisanship rules all.
Warren needs to go out with Bloomberg's head. Make her last mark.
And yeah I don't think the Steyer IA effect will happen to Bloomberg. Canvassers are hearing about him all over the country and people legit want to vote for him. Scary.
I wonder if this stuff is more effective in ads than in debates because the anti Trump stuff gets exhausting in debates when it's 13 people agreeing with each other.
Kamala brought the fight to Trump in debates and people said "meh".
Last edited:
DOJ Gave $500K Anti-Human Trafficking Grant to 'Hookers for Jesus'
The U.S. Justice Department is under fire after a whistleblower complaint revealed that the DOJ's anti-human trafficking grant program gave over $1 million to Hookers for Jesus and the Lincoln Tubman Foundation rather than recommended organizations.
www.newsweek.com
I like Warren but she is atrocious at going on the attack. This is a job for Klobuchar.
DOJ Gave $500K Anti-Human Trafficking Grant to 'Hookers for Jesus'
The U.S. Justice Department is under fire after a whistleblower complaint revealed that the DOJ's anti-human trafficking grant program gave over $1 million to Hookers for Jesus and the Lincoln Tubman Foundation rather than recommended organizations.
Amazing.
Bloomberg has considerable appeal going for him especially with those that aren't as aware of his bullshit. And some are more than fine overlooking that. He's a very viable "safe" alternative to Bernie for those that aren't onboard Bernie's train.
I mean, the question is leading in the sense that it's basically "Assume you don't win...", so her answer is obviously going to imply that she knows the jig is up.
I think it's an interesting answer, in the sense that I don't think any other candidate - trailing or front-runner - would say anything even vaguely similar. To Warren, it seems the policies are more important than the person leading, and that is a) not how other people talk about the Presidency, and b) what is needed in a good politician. The greater good (policies) come before the personal gratification.
The show itself is bit above his IQ level, so he still wouldn't get it.
Bloomberg would be the most boring President. I honestly can't even say I remember hearing him speak when I lived in NYC while he was mayor. It'd be refreshing after Trump.
Daniel Dale on Twitter
“Trump encourages supporters to go vote in the Democratic primary tomorrow for "the weakest one you think."”
twitter.com
the president is a ratfucker
Except for minorities. We can be stopped and frisked even more nationwide!
How is this legal Volume #8573
His advisors just admit it to the press even. It's like they think they'll get away with it.
Can't wait for Bloomberg to publicly reject Nancy Pelosi's Congressional agenda on campaign finance reform.
Bloomberg barely gets media coverage on his speeches or public appearances and he's never been in a debate. Folks are literally shaping their entire opinion on him on his ads just like low information voters.
Last edited:
Couple disclaimers:
I don't want Bloomberg, at all
I would absolutely vote for Bloomberg if he was the nominee
THAT BEING SAID
The political/elections nerd in me is insanely curious to see what a Bloomberg-Trump GE would look like, just because Bloomberg could run a billion dollar campaign in every state if he wanted to. It speaks to everything wrong with our political system, but still, from a purely academic standpoint, I'd be very interested. Could see some fascinating results when money is no object and a presidential candidate could actually run a 50-state strategy.
I don't want Bloomberg, at all
I would absolutely vote for Bloomberg if he was the nominee
THAT BEING SAID
The political/elections nerd in me is insanely curious to see what a Bloomberg-Trump GE would look like, just because Bloomberg could run a billion dollar campaign in every state if he wanted to. It speaks to everything wrong with our political system, but still, from a purely academic standpoint, I'd be very interested. Could see some fascinating results when money is no object and a presidential candidate could actually run a 50-state strategy.
It's easy to seem "with it" when your sum total of interaction with Americans is "I'm Mike Bloomberg and I approve this message." Trump seems pretty "with it" in his commercials too!
Hope we can count on your lifelong Democrat grandpa to vote Bernie in the general, though.
I mean if Bernie was such a weak nominee, I feel as if we'd see it reflected in the general election polling. The quinnipac poll doesn't suggest that there exists a meaningful anti-Bernie bloc in America that would vote for another candidate. There are a decent amount of white college graduates that would vote Pete but not Bernie, but Pete has horrible numbers with every other demographic. I guess Amy Klobuchar could potentially be better and has a lot of room to go because of low name recognition / awareness, but she also has not been attacked yet.
Imagine if Bollier, Winter, Doug Jones, and Mike Espy had about $120-150 Million to play with between them. Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas and Montana ads can't cost as much as all the ads in other states. Imagine in Georgia, South Carolina, Maine, Iowa, Alaska... Texas...
Money talks. That said, Bloomberg isn't winning*.
*Probably. We'll see after tomorrow. If Biden dropped that fast after a fourth in Iowa, how will he look like after finishing fourth in NH for a second consecutive time?
Bernie is weak among older voters and that's the most reliable voting block. He would have had this nomination wrapped up by now if he didn't struggle so badly with old people.
Seems like he is just banking on old white folks to mostly be for Republicans and the rest of the field go for him mostly. He is banking hard on young people and minorities. That's why his running mate has to be appealing to older voters.
Ah, there's been some catching up on Bloomberg now. Still, Warren or Sanders (should they be apparent winners) each would gladly accept Bloomberg's resources and help for the general election.
We'll see what the first exit polls for NH say shortly after midnight.
We'll see what the first exit polls for NH say shortly after midnight.
Latest NH polls seem to indicate he might even come in 5th LMAO
I'd prefer Biden over Bloombito because I know he'd pass a left agenda and fill his Cabinet with qualified people. Bloombito, I don't trust him to do that at all.
So this thing basically might come down to when Warren, Pete, and Amy drop out
Also biden should drop if he loses SC
Also biden should drop if he loses SC
I don't see why Bloomberg can't do this while not being the nominee. Sure, he won't get preferential rates. But he can still advertise. I also wonder where all this money was in 2016.
edit: okay that was a triple negative. I'm not not not sorry.
Counterpoint: old people vote reliably, and they tend to stick with a party come hell or high water. Old people who've voted Democratic forever will vote for Bernie.
- Status