US election 2020

[Jezza]

Mike Bloomberg is officially doing a Clive Palmer and trying to win over the youth vote through cringeworthy memes:

https://mobile.twitter.com/JessReports/ ... 64/photo/1

Serious question: have he and Mr Burns ever been seen in the same room?

I think the Democratic nomination is down to two: Sanders and Bloomberg.

Warren had good poll numbers for a while, but she's lost momentum and Biden is a basketcase.

[David]

I see Krugman has a similar view on the 'democratic socialism' nonsense: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/13/opin ... alism.html

Nails it: Bernie plays right into his opponent’s hands. Merit and logic are not features of the right wing in the US. They much prefer the simply disastrous health care system they have now where millions are without health cover.

It’s far easier to exploit fear and encourage resentment

With respect, this reads like typical NYT hand-wringing. Sanders has built up a constituency from nothing, and has done it precisely through his own chosen slogans and self-descriptors. To ask him to walk it all back now and rebrand is to ask him to become like every other politician: willing to bend to whatever the latest focus group is responding positively to. Sanders receives support precisely because people see him as sincere and principled. I’m very sceptical about the degree to which Trump and the Republican Party can exploit the socialist boogeyman, because they’ve cried wolf too many times. Clinton and Obama were socialists too in their eyes. There’s no small power in being able to say "yeah I am, so what?"

[Pies4shaw]

At least he’s not a lying billionaire sociopath. The bar is obviously set fairly low in US politics.

[watt price tully]

At least he’s not a lying billionaire sociopath. The bar is obviously set fairly low in US politics.

May I introduce you to “Fatty McF*ckface” as he’s not affectionately known Clive Palmer, Scotty from Marketing Mr Sports Rorts (why won’t this go away) Morrison, Pauline Hanson, David (glass jaw)Leyonhjelm?

[pietillidie]

I see Krugman has a similar view on the 'democratic socialism' nonsense: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/13/opin ... alism.html

Nails it: Bernie plays right into his opponent’s hands. Merit and logic are not features of the right wing in the US. They much prefer the simply disastrous health care system they have now where millions are without health cover.

It’s far easier to exploit fear and encourage resentment

With respect, this reads like typical NYT hand-wringing. Sanders has built up a constituency from nothing, and has done it precisely through his own chosen slogans and self-descriptors. To ask him to walk it all back now and rebrand is to ask him to become like every other politician: willing to bend to whatever the latest focus group is responding positively to. Sanders receives support precisely because people see him as sincere and principled. I’m very sceptical about the degree to which Trump and the Republican Party can exploit the socialist boogeyman, because they’ve cried wolf too many times. Clinton and Obama were socialists too in their eyes. There’s no small power in being able to say "yeah I am, so what?"

Yes, but having your own 'base' is hardly an achievement; that's the easiest bit by miles and frequently a major part of the problem. I respect Sanders' consistency, like him as a person and public figure, and consider him as trustworthy a person as you're probably going to find in public life. But they're not the only considerations here. I want to know what he's going to do for business, trade and the economy; to see if he has a full platform and can reach across constituencies.

For the record, from what I can tell neither the institutionals nor Sanders captures my own position, which sees redress, social quality, business success, economic strength, incentive and security as things which need to be held in permanent tension. Hawke-Keating and a few others have come close to pursuing it. It's a pity, because I think Elizabeth Warren understands this balancing act and could potentially nail the policy mix, but again she lacks traction as a public figure beyond her base.

All of this, of course, set against the background of the Creep-in-Chief's extraordinarily dangerous fasco-protectionism, which is unlocking forces his diseased mind and tiny hands have no hope of grasping.

[David]

[Wokko]

Democrats spent years dredging up every off colour remark made by Trump to try and sink him and it looks like they're going to be hoisted on their own petard.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/employee ... =mattwalsh

Unlike Trump's bawdy jocularity, Bloomberg seems to be nothing more than a total c***.

[stui magpie]

Democrats spent years dredging up every off colour remark made by Trump to try and sink him and it looks like they're going to be hoisted on their own petard.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/employee ... =mattwalsh

Unlike Trump's bawdy jocularity, Bloomberg seems to be nothing more than a total c***.

Quite possibly, but this was 25 years ago FFS. Not a very pleasant thing to say to someone, I struggle to see how you could take court action against them though.

[David]

Wokko is spot on in his diagnosis, I reckon. This is no one-off thing; Bloomberg has a long, long record of saying stuff like this. There's no need to overthink this: if it crawls like a snake, it's a snake.

[Jezza]

Bloomberg with Hillary as his running mate?

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/1 ... -vp-115407

[David]

The right-wing press have been trying to conjure a 2020 Clinton candidacy for ages; now that's impossible, I guess this will be their next obsession. I'm not saying it's totally beyond the realm of possibility (who really knows with Bloomberg), but I'll take anything on that coming from the Drudge Report with a grain of salt.

[stui magpie]

In reality, neither Bloomberg or Sanders should be being seriously considered.

The Democrats have usually gone younger than the Republicans.

Obama - 47 at start of Presidency
Bill Clinton - 46
Jimmy Carter - 52.

Yeah, we have to go back to Carter to get 3 Democrat POTUS's

Sanders, Biden and Bloomberg should be throwing dirty looks at each other in a nursing home, not running for POTUS.

[pietillidie]

Trump's bawdy jocularity

When you want something so badly you'll convince yourself of anything.

No one on the planet would leave their daughter alone with the Creep-in-Chief for 30 seconds.

[stui magpie]

Trump's bawdy jocularity

When you want something so badly you'll convince yourself of anything.

No one on the planet would leave their daughter alone with the Creep-in-Chief for 30 seconds.

I would. I've seen what aggravated 55kg chick can do to much larger male.

[pietillidie]

Wokko is spot on in his diagnosis, I reckon. This is no one-off thing; Bloomberg has a long, long record of saying stuff like this. There's no need to overthink this: if it crawls like a snake, it's a snake.

Except there is a need to use the rest of your brain because you're weighing up a list of factors that go beyond the visceral; you can't suddenly pretend you're non-utilitarian.

Trump is moral dog faeces, but you might otherwise consider voting for him despite himself if he had constructive policies rather than billionaire tax cuts, environmental protection rollbacks, healthcare rollbacks, national destabilisation, global GDP suppression, fasco-protectionism, fasco-executive abuse, etc.

The effects matter. Trump's second term will be about paying for the billionaire tax cuts and setting the mob on new victims to justify social service cuts. And do you think the world will continue to tolerate ongoing GDP suppression without biting back? So yes, there is a need to think harder.

Psychiatric stability and leadership credentials also need to be assessed. Trump was always an unstable narcissistic wrecker, had no mates except other cheap cons, and was never able to build a self-sustaining reputable organisation. And boy, does it show.

That still may mean Sanders is the right choice, but don't fall for the fundamentalist moral card trick until you get a better look at the policies. Ideally, of course, you get solid principles, leadership credentials and decent policy in one package, but it's going to take a serious tradeoff analysis.