#major reason why i will never vote trump even if i loathe biden | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

polss · 4 years

Text

Political Swizzlestick: The ethical problem the Bloomberg candidacy presents for Dems.

I wanted to blow off the prospect of Micheal Bloomberg being the democratic nominee when he announced his candidacy. “Feh!” I arrogantly scoffed, “You think America’s going to rush to vote for another New Yorker?! Ha! Typical New York Media overrating their local candidate’s chances. You still have to connect with the rust belt voter.”

But time has smacked sense into me.

Bloomberg was at 19% nationally with Dems, sight unseen.

Nobody outside of New York knew a damn thing about him, but 19% of America had seen enough commercials to say, “That guy I’ve never seen before....he’s my guy!”

That is crazy.

But that’s kind of where we are in America. Do the majority of Trump Supporters know all of the things he has done? Can they tell you his position on any number of issues? No... But they know he drives Democrats crazy. The moderate segment of their support had been somewhat underwhelmed by the Obama-Biden management of the economy, so if it drives Dems crazy, he must be taking the country in the right direction that businesses want to go...right?

“He’s a businessman and the unemployment rate is at record lows.” is what they’d say if pressed. We have always measured the health of the economy by the unemployment rate so we have to do so now.

They are just as ignorant to the vast majority of their guy’s views as we are of our candidates.

In a world where no one cares about details, why couldn’t Bloomberg win?

If the race is two shady New York businessmen against each other and one is worth maybe a billion by now and the other is worth $64 Billion, is Donald trump going to be able to lord his economic knowledge over Bloomberg? No. Bloomberg will treat him like a peon. If Bloomberg says, “You aren’t a businessman, you are a con man. I am surprised you haven’t throttled the economy yet. Step aside an let someone who actually understands how to succeed in business run this country.” it resonates with moderates everywhere.

You could legitimately see Trump supporters jump ship. Every trump fan I know likes Bloomberg and thinks “that’s the guy the Dems should run.” He fits their idea of what they want as a president. Is it difficult to see 1-4% of them jumping ship to escape the Trump sideshow? Not at all.

Donald trump lost more money than any other American over a 20 year period. Bloomberg is without a doubt a successful businessman. Donald Trump looks very much like a failure in business compared to him over a 3 month or so lead up to the election.

I am late to the game. A lot of people on the Democratic side have pointed at this very thing and proclaimed Bloomberg the Dems best hope. I am inclined to agree now after looking at the financial picture and how easily voters can be swayed by a simple advertising campaign.

Bloomberg takes away all of trump’s best arguments. Business expertise? Not even close.

Trump uses his lack of morality to dig at the political correctness that Dems foolishly cling too. There is every reason to believe that Bloomberg is so rich that morality largely no longer applies to him. Any mistake or lack in judgement can be erased with a check. Donald Trump is not going to be able to use his lack of morality as a weapon against Bloomberg. And frankly since Dems would have voted for this guy, that is a tacit acknowledgement that morality doesn’t matter to the Dems either.

Want to smear Bloomberg with an ad campaign? Bloomberg can run 10 commercials with Trump’s voice talking about grabbing women by the pussy and showing all the women who tried to sue Trump in the 2016 election for every one trump can run. Literally every 15 minutes you could hear Donald trump talking on TV about grabbing women by the pussy. You think that wouldn’t have a cumulative effect?

Really all you have to do is move 1-2% from the trump column to the anti-trump column in say 6 states and that is the election.

“But the Bernie Bros will revolt!” What if Bloomberg make Bernie VP? Does Bloomberg care who is his VP? At all? Bernie is an old warhorse who has been selling his rhetoric to no one in particular for 40+ years. You think he would turn down being a heartbeat from the presidency? Bloomberg is an old dude too. If Bernie has a legitimate seat with power like the VP job, you won’t lose any Bernie fans. They have seen Bernie get screwed out entirely by the DNC. This would be an acceptable loss for them. “We may have lost the battle, but we won the war”.

Bernie Bros aren’t running against Trump....not yet anyway.... they are running against the DNC.

Bloomberg is worth $64 Billion. He spent $200 Million LAST MONTH. That is 1/320th of his wealth. That spending is almost double what Bernie (the Democratic front runner) has had in his entire account this election.

Let’s say you were fairly well to do and between 40 and 80. How much of your money would you be willing to spend to cross “get elected president” off your bucket list? How much would you spend if you were in your late 70′s? 30% of your wealth? 40% of your wealth? More?

If Bloomberg spent 30% of his wealth that would be $19.2 Billion dollars.

Hillary spent $585 Million in 2016. Donald Trump spent $350M and has roughly $240 Million donated so far for 2020.

Let’s say Trump end up with $600M. Bloomberg would in his $19.2 Billion have 32 times the amount of money.

So lets say Donald Trump runs a TV ad of Bloomberg not wanting to release former employees from non-disclosure agreements. Bloomberg could run 32 TV ads with the clip of Donald trump weirdly fondling his daughter as she sits on his lap and Trump talking about how if he wasn’t her dad he’d be all over that.

Think we couldn’t get there?

Don’t count on it.

If you watched the last debate you saw the democrat’s Donald Trump on stage. A win at all cost guy.

Now I have long bemoaned that the democratic party is run by a lot of folks who proudly display their participation ribbons.

The GOP tells the Dems, “You can’t do that! It is a betrayal of our country!” then the next time there is a GOP president he does exactly that and the Dems say, “Gorsh, you got us again, lol!”

It drives me nuts and is even worse by the fact that the GOP has a guy in Trump who could give a shit about any of the social norms and is playing a win at all costs game, damn the constitution!

But do we truly want to run a “win at all cost” guy? Are we willing to turn a blind eye to the obvious disdain Bloomberg has for the common man’s opinion to get trump out?

Are Dems and left leaning voters willing to embrace a guy who doesn’t even want to say how many non-disclosure agreements he has had to payoff to buy ex-employee’s silence? And let me assure you, if they were all off color jokes as he claimed, Bloomberg would have just released them all and taken the momentary polling hit. You could argue that a business has non-disclosure agreements to protect business information but Bloomberg himself admitted his non-disclosure agreements were to protect his bad behavior.

For him to insist no one would be released suggests there is what would be a career ending story for someone whose budget for this election wasn’t potentially larger than the combined budgets of the last 30 presidential elections.

This guy is so out of touch he doesn’t even understand what people want him to apologize for about his policy of targeting the African American community in New York City for shake downs of their kids.

If you watched the debate you saw a guy who was not all that dissimilar to trump who wants to be president. That is clearly goal 1. I think there is a lot of evidence that unlike trump, Bloomberg isn’t running to profit off the presidency and legitimately wants to do right by America. I think he legitimately does want to put an end to all of the Trump nonsense, but he still seems like a guy we would deem morally unfit in any election prior to the slimeball derby of 2016.

I am not advocate for purity tests, but this isn’t a purity test. If we were looking for angels we wouldn’t have let him in the door. Frankly we wouldn't have let any of these people in. Which is why I'm glad that we don't have purity tests.

My question is are we truly at a point where we can accept running a lesser demon against another lesser demon just because we think he would likely be favored to win and willing to do whatever it took to win?

Are we willing to elect a guy who we really have no idea what he is going to do in office just to get rid of Trump? He could easily be just as disdainful of the constitution.....We don’t know and the early returns are we don’t care.

Are we willing to turn a total blind eye and be just as hypocritical as the Republican voters we have vilified for the last 3 years?

Are we willing to potentially forever destroy any argument by either side that ethics matter in a president? Are we willing to say that no American voters at all care about fair play and moral behavior?

Or are we willing to stand on principles and risk defeat with a more morally acceptable candidate like Bernie, Tom, Elizabeth, or Joe who might be at best 50/50 propositions against Trump?

I'll make it personal. Am I willing to betray all the women out there who have ever been shit on by, feilded unwelcome propositions from , or been ridiculed by their bosses at work for better odds that we'll get Trump out of office? I am half Jamaican. Am I willing to betray solidarity with the greater african American community which finds this man unacceptable, for better odds?

Am I willing to sell my soul for 4 years for better odds? Am I willing to look in the mirror and loathe the face looking back for 4 years just for better odds?

Melania says "Be Better". I want to be but after 3 years of this shit, the apple that snake is holding looks so...so... good.

I don’t have the answer. All I’ve got are the questions.

0 notes

anthonybialy · 5 years

Text

Left from a Left Turn

We are calmly headed toward the joyous people's republic socialist ideal that embodies if only voters are wise enough to embrace communal decency. This will be the time it works.

Liberal maniacs ensure they'll have enough rage fuel for another term by helping Donald damn Trump get reelected. All the rather boastful president will have to do is belittle his opponents' drive to copy the most optimistic goals of the Sandinistas. Thanks to those who help him in his lifelong goal to avoid listing accomplishments.

Pushing Democrats to embrace daft semi-communism causes a chain reaction which will keep their enemy in place so they can keep condemning him. To be fair, whining is way more fun than governing. Hmmm, it's almost psychological.

Please don't demean pinkos by comparing them to the Democratic field. Statist presidential hopefuls don't want to completely replicate East Germany, as they hate walls. And said enmity is not even for the right reasons, as keeping people from leaving is kind of the opposite of keeping people out. Stripping America's wealth in order to fuel class warfare fantasies is one way to keep illegal immigration low.

The alliance between reparations fans and Electoral College enemies is not electable, but at least it’s for sinister reasons. Awful ideas are the only way to lose to an awful candidate.

The biggest chance for Democrats to take over in awhile is being provided by a reality show buffoon who compensates for his lack of sales by bragging that he's the best at sales. But wholly calm dissenters can only shriek how they hate the president more than Hitler, which they justify by claiming he's the ruder modern incarnation. Such a histrionic strategy is as bad as their platform, so at least they can manage consistency.

Seeing Trump as an opportunity to offer contrast is wise. Inflicting Medicare on everyone is just a bit too much. Disregard how often an ostensible Republican spends as government fans wish.

Preposterous debt used to be something the alleged pro-business party pretended to fight. But better management of an unwieldy federal government isn't thrilling. Instead, the opposition guarantees they'll give us an economy to make Venezuela proud. Now, there's a country that cares about fighting childhood obesity and large carbon footprints.

Every issue is on steroids. The Democratic lust for gun confiscation is almost as fervent as trusting a Godzilla-style government with your health. The real problem is you’re allowed to keep money that belongs to all of us. Stop being greedy and hand over what you earned to everyone else. The contempt for success may seem un-American, but that's the price of strangling the economy until everyone can't breathe equally.

The ceaseless freakout is helping the man they hate most stay in office. Hillary already did her part, which is one of the only amusing things about enduring a Trump presidency. It's important to avoid lessons if you're certain you are never incorrect. Present politics don't inspire any feeling greater than relief someone even worse fails to access power. I remain a crazy dreamer who hopes someday to have a leader so competent that we forget the person exists from day to day.

Let's not use a pompous buffoon's reign to learn to limit power. Trump's enemies promise to use the same government they say gives him too much authority to make life pleasant. It's different when they are granted authority because they're responsible about believing a president can micromanage nationally. They don't want to use their worst enemy abusing power like it's his mandate to prove liberalism's perils.

Change the names if you want the other side cheering. Tariffs will be cool again if, say, someone as wise and decent as Woke Joe Biden gets the chair. Those who shriek about how the incumbent does everything as crudely as he does foolishly may have a point, but they don’t have to govern.

Yelling that you're doing it wrong is easier, which is why most people enjoy watching sports. Trump wishes he didn't have to quarterback anymore, which may be the same reason he sunk the USFL. Building a vertical surface on the southern border when the congressional majority was ostensibly from the same party would've meant so much work.

Emboldened Trump-loathing Democrats are unabashed in their demands to keep you from doing anything you want, especially if that involves a bigger paycheck. Like Fox turning into a hardcore sex channel so gradually that viewers don't even notice, Democrats lust to seize authority in little steps. The incremental assault was either so the shift was imperceptibly gradual or because those bits were all they could grab at once. Voters can decide which invasion strategy is better.

You notice if all your cash is gone in a way you won't if one bill disappears at a time. Confiscating more of what's yours before you even noticed what's missing was the only thing Democrats did well. Sneakily taking small steps got the government sort-of in everything like they wanted. But now they lurch for the rest. Have they gone insane or are they just more honest about it?

The government will care for you, according to those who hate the head of state more than cancer. The opposition party is as good at reading the electorate as they are human nature. Sure, it's possible to win some votes and even many elections by promising that unlimited free junk is obtainable if we just believe hard enough. But mathematics does not succumb to peer pressure.

The only thing funnier than thinking government is good at anything is figuring the most successful will continue to toil to keep the federal furnace stoked with currency. Our only consolation is the hope that shrieking socialism is unpalatable to enough voters even if appeals to a disturbing sliver of ironically greedy voters.

The self-styled resistance is so emotional about Trump's presidency that they forget to pretend they don't want to control every aspect of our lives. They're just letting him win again, which is sure to make them happier.

0 notes

thisdaynews · 5 years

Text

There’s a plan for that: 2020 field bombards voters with big ideas

New Post has been published on https://thebiafrastar.com/theres-a-plan-for-that-2020-field-bombards-voters-with-big-ideas/

There’s a plan for that: 2020 field bombards voters with big ideas

Sen. Elizabeth Warren‘s proposals have led to a rush of policy proposals from other Democratic candidates. Warren’s popularity has inched up alongside her focus on churning out detailed policy plans. | Paul Sancya/AP Photo

In the last week alone, Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren released trillion dollar-plus climate change plans, while Jay Inslee added to his voluminous set of tracts on the issue.

Julián Castro unveiled a wide-ranging proposal to address “overaggressive” policing, Beto O’Rourke produced a raft of government and electoral reforms and Cory Booker unfurled a housing plan heavy on land use, estate tax and federal grant rules.

Story Continued Below

In a presidential primary system that doesn’t always reward substantive policy debates, the 2020 contest is beginning to stand out for featuringan unlikely renaissance of ideas. Twelve hours rarely passes without a candidate offering some new plan.

“Right now, the primary is an ideas contest,” R.L. Miller, founder of the super PAC Climate Hawks Vote, said. “Jay Inslee’s policies are getting talked about, even if he himself is not rising much in the polls. Kamala Harris is putting out some very bread and butter, kitchen table policies. One of the ways in which candidates stand out right now … is to write smart, compelling policies. And that’s why every day or so it seems like another candidate has released another policy.”

One reason for the rush of policy proposals is Warren, the Massachusetts senator whose popularity has inched up alongside her focus on churning out detailed policy plans. It’s even created a fundraising opportunity for her campaign: the sale of “Warren Has a Plan for That” T-shirts.

“Now the others are saying, ‘I’ve got to get me some positions, too,’” said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion.

But broader forces are at work, as well. Never before has a presidential primary opened with an incumbent president who is as loathed by Democrats as is Donald Trump — or who has so dramatically altered the policy landscape on issues ranging from climate change and health care to immigration and trade. At the same time, the president is famously disinterested in policy details.

For brooding Democrats, the primary field’s position papers are an emotional refuge — this summer’s dreamy must reads.

“I think that what is happening is the voters are taking the policy proposals as visions of hope after the 2½ years of Trump, where everything has been so negative, so horrific,” Ray Buckley, chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, said. “Voters are starving for some positive, hopeful, aspirational things to look forward to.”

as Doug Herman, a California-based Democratic strategist, put it this way: “If you’re looking at the plans as a solution, then today is dystopia and tomorrow is utopia.”

The yearning for changed policies in the White House — regardless of the Democrat shouldering them — is so acute that when 14 presidential contenders traveled to Herman’s state recently for the California Democratic Party convention, supporters of Bernie Sanders and Warren temporarily suspended rival demonstrations to join together in a chant for Medicare for all.

For candidates who are still introducing themselves to voters, the substance of a plan can carry significant political weight. Biden’s $1.7 trillion climate proposal served to blunt some criticism from the party’s left flank, though it inadvertently drew unfavorable attentionwhen it appeared to include passages copied from existing documents.

Harris (D-Calif.) has used policy proposals involving teacher pay and maternal mortality to reinforce her credentials as an advocate for working people and women — especially women of color. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) put infrastructure investment at the center of her campaign with her first major policy proposal. And even longshot candidates can rely on policy proposals to generate some media attention — as John Delaney received for his own climate change proposal and his plan to create a national service program for young people.

The sheer multitude of plans is staggering, reflecting both the breadth of the 24-candidate Democratic field and the lack of any one dominant issue within it.

“Obviously the economy’s important,” Miringoff said. “But I don’t think there’s one thing that’s driving the electorate, other than Donald Trump, and there are a lot of things Democrats are interested in.”

How closely most voters are scrutinizing the policy proposals they come across is unclear. There is also some risk to laying out detailed proposals since it offers a fixed target in the general election — particularly if it contains controversial elements.

Following the midterm elections last year, only 9 percent of Democrats listed policy reasons for votes they cast that cycle, with a majority of voters citing partisan concerns instead, according to a Pew Research Center survey in November.

But Democratic voters do appear to want their candidates to have plans. And they have frowned on those who are slow to introduce them. O’Rourke, despite once writing a book about legalizing marijuana and espousing specific positions on any number of issues early in his campaign, was widely perceived as light on policy before releasing a robust climate plan in April. He has now released plans, as well, on immigration, reproductive rights and government and electoral reform — a plan that is divided into three parts with footnotes and nearly 30 bullet points.

“The one thing you’ll always hear in focus group research is, ‘I want to see the plan,’” Herman said. “But what that translates to in real life is that they want to see you hold up a stack of papers and say, ‘This is my plan.’ Most voters don’t really care what’s in it. They just want to know you have a plan.”

That is a departure from the last presidential election, which was defined less by policy than by Trump’s bombast and Hillary Clinton’s emails. Antjuan Seawright, a South Carolina-based Democratic strategist who worked for Clinton’s campaign in 2016, said “policy got lost in the conversation because the current president … wanted to have personality conversations instead of policy conversations.”

Now, Seawright said, “I think the American people are so hungry and thirsty for [policy] that I think it’s the candidate’s job to really feed the electorate’s thirst for a real policy agenda that will have an impact.”

That is, if the interest holds.

Paul Maslin, a top Democratic pollster, said it is possible that voters next year will be exceptionally interested in policy. But it is also possible the interest is temporary, the function of a “monster of content that has to be filled somehow.”

“There’s so many things spinning around that are part of the game that you have to fill them, and it’s sort of like, let’s do policy now, because there’s only so much viral campaigning or town halls on CNN or door to door in Iowa or New Hampshire or driving in the country,” Maslin said. “I don’t know that the policy push means that’s going to be a crucial criterion that’s going to determine people’s votes next January or February, or whether it will just be one building block on a very complex road.”

#Foreign #ideas #Politics #voters

0 notes