Unfortunately, Bloomberg might be the Dems best bet to win

Author: Imabench

Posts

Total: 38
Topic's author
#1
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
Anyone who knows me or has clicked on my threads in the past knows that I support Biden. I like Klobuchar probably the most, but she doesnt have a chance of winning, Biden has that. Buttigieg I dont like his experience level, Warren is too liberal for me, Sanders is even further then that, and Steyer is a billionaire trying to buy the nomination and failing at it badly. Bloomberg I dont like. Same thing with Steyer, hes a billionaire just trying to buy the nomination with about the same amount of experience as Buttigieg since both were mayors. In a contested nomination, if Bloomberg beats out Bernie and he comes in second, half the base would fucking riot. Sanders supporters didnt like Hillary, I know they would hate Bloombergs fucking guts, cause I do for really fuckin things up for Biden 

But then this came out, which made me really have to think about things: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/clint-eastwood-2020-election-just-150921450.html

Clint Eastwood, the guy who was so much against Obama that he went to the 2012 GOP convention and became the star of the show, who went on to support Trump and still even sticks up for some of the things Trump does, wants Bloomberg to win the whole presidency. Not the Dem nomination, the whole Presidency..... Do you have any idea, how fuckin hard it is to flip an openly conservative actor in Hollywood? James Woods and Tim Allen's entire claim to relevancy these days are their undying conservative leanings, and Eastwood was kind of in their camp albeit more reserved. So for ANY candidate of the Democratic party to be able to convince a high profile conservative like Eastwood to flip from TRUMP to the other side, that is really something. 

For those of you skeptical of Eastwoods mental state, RCP polling also shows that the two best candidates in a 1v1 vs Trump is Biden, Sanders, and Bloomberg, at 4.8, 4.6, and 4.6 respectively..... Biden hasnt convinced any conservatives to openly flip from Trump to him, and Sanders is building his support entirely off of trying to appeal to those already in the Dem base. Furthermore, Biden's campaign has inherent flaws to it as we can see from bad performances in the first two states, while Sanders' reliance on increased turnout might not pan out since Dem turnout in the primaries is lower than what was projected


300,000 expected votes turned out to be about 173,000. If Biden cant hold on to the votes he thinks he has, and Sanders cant expand his base past the coalition he already got in 2016, then if the goal is to oust Donald Trump from the White House, Bloomberg unfortunately might be the best candidate for the job 
#2
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
-->
@Imabench
Imo I don't see Eastwood flipping as any relevance to be honest. Yes he was outspoken, but one person won't make a difference or change anything
#3
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,698
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
it's just money, Bloomberg and Trump both has massive businesses which is why Clint likes them


#4
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,698
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Vader
 Yes he was outspoken, but one person won't make a difference or change anything
<br>
Except Clinton, LOL
#5
WaterPhoenix
WaterPhoenix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,094
3
3
10
WaterPhoenix's avatar
WaterPhoenix
3
3
10
-->
@Imabench
I was actually rooting for bloomberg before I found out he wanted hilary as his vp
#6
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Imabench
I think we have to assume that Barr intends to manufacture a criminal investigation/charges vs. any Democratic Nominee.  Of all the candidates, it seems to me that Bloomberg is the easiest to stick with criminal charges because

  • Bloomberg has always demonstrated a sort of "Damn the Torpedoes" outlook
    • Case in point- expanding term limits.  No ethical public servant changes a law and then stands first in line to benefit from the law's change.
    • Changing party affiliation from democrat=>republican=>independent=>democratic for strategic reasons independent of any ideological shift. (That is, who cares what party members think, party membership is a only a means to an end).
  • In 2009, in the throws of the Great Recession, Bloomberg reported financial gains of more than $4.5 billion- more than any other person in the world that year while he was mayor of the city where the crisis began, where hundred year old corporations were imploding.  Bloomberg's financial services (somehow) profited off that crisis while nearly all the other financial institutions under his wing suffered.   Somewhere in that dynamic, a damning (and potentially just) criminal charge ought to be easily discovered. 

Topic's author
#7
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@Vader
Its not about the pull that Clint Eastwood has, its about the fact that there is a Dem frontrunner who unlike everyone else in the race has shown they can actually flip Trump supporters to their cause, and notable ones that you wouldnt expect to flip as well. 


#8
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,255
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
After Nevada, it appears Sanders has all the momentum with little opposition.
#9
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
-->
@Imabench
I understand, but can you really judge that based on 1 person though? That's just my belief

#10
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Shut up, Warren 2020 end of discussion.
#11
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@RationalMadman
I will admit, she is a good liar. Heck, she even got Harvard administrators to believe she was Native American.
#12
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
Other than that one strange event, can you highlight any other time she has 'lied'?
#13
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@RationalMadman
Her brother said their dad was never a janitor, when she said he was.
She said her kids went to public schools, but they went to private schools.
She pledged to serve her whole senator term if re-elected in 2018, and she started a presidential campaign soon afterwards


I’m pretty sure we both know Bernie didn’t say that a woman couldn’t be president, either

#14
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,620
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
Interesting. However, Bloomberg probably doesn’t have much of a chance to win the nomination. Being capitalist a rich old white male, he will be a turn-off for many progressives in the Democratic Party. He’s been hit with a lot of controversies lately, and he wasn’t even on the ballot in Nevada.
#15
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,255
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Mharman
It is interesting how many Dems are willing to vote for Bloomberg... cause Orangemanbad.
#16
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
Sanders said he very much doubted it. That wasn't a lie.

I would like you to link me to the evidence of her saying the lies, not of the truths.

I don't trust the Washington Examiner to be a reliable source.
#17
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Imabench
Can we agree he lacks charisma?

I didn't know a multi-billionaire couldn't prep himself for those obvious questions. Guess him being the first to kinda pay his way in wasn't able to pay his way to being charismatic. Welp. Hope he does fix that or you know carry on being moronic about his debate performance. His team had to resort clipping the debate out of context for him to look good. Link
#18
WaterPhoenix
WaterPhoenix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,094
3
3
10
WaterPhoenix's avatar
WaterPhoenix
3
3
10
Bruh rat, I literally sent you a steven crowder on this with video evidence and documents.
#19
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Imabench
Do you have any idea, how fuckin hard it is to flip an openly conservative actor in Hollywood?
why would one really old, kind of crazy, actor be relevant? Bloomberg is able to buy endorsements from lots of people. 

Bottom line, Bloomberg has absolutely no chance of winning a general election. Trump would eat him alive and cruise to an easy re-election. Bloomberg being the nominee would get a huge chunk of the democratic base to stay home because their options would be a misogynist, right wing billionaire, or a different misogynist, right wing, billionaire. But Bloomberg is probably fine with that. Bloomberg entered the race for 1 reason, to stop Sanders. He wants to protect his own interests. 

It is time for the democratic establishment to start practicing what they preach. It is becoming increasingly clear that there is 1 stand out candidate and the party needs to start to unify behind him. If they (and I assume they will) refuse to do that, they are only further proving that the "party unity" they have been preaching doesn't mean a thing to them. They have been lying and scheming this whole time to hold onto power. And they would rather lose to trump than win with Bernie. 
#20
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
How is Bloomberg right wing?

Correction: Trump is barely a billionaire, Bloomberg is a multi-billionaire. 

#21
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@TheRealNihilist
How is Bloomberg right wing?
Other than a handful of social issues, how is he not? He is against any meaningful regulations of corporations, he fought for racist "tough on crime" laws, he lobbied hard against healthcare reform, he doesn't believe in raising the minimum wage etc. 

Correction: Trump is barely a billionaire, Bloomberg is a multi-billionaire. 
my sentence was "their options would be a misogynist, right wing billionaire, or a different misogynist, right wing, billionaire". this is an accurate statement. 
#22
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
Other than a handful of social issues, how is he not?
His social issues are more left than right. 

His stance on climate change is left.
He is against any meaningful regulations of corporations, he fought for racist "tough on crime" laws, he lobbied hard against healthcare reform, he doesn't believe in raising the minimum wage etc. 
No proof he will carry on using policies like stop and frisk.
Literally wants a minimum wage but okay.

Literally wants an improved ACA. Right wingers don't even want an ACA and he wants an improved version. 

Literally everything you bought up is null. Please stick to the topic instead on your typical diatribes. Spare me this one time please. Focus on my points say how they are right wing don't give me your feelings and stories. I beg you.

#23
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@TheRealNihilist
His social issues are more left than right. 
he has a handful of social issues he goes left on. But the basically everything else about him is right wing and authoritarian. 

His stance on climate change is left.
There is no such thing as left or right wing about climate change. There are those who acknowledge science and those who don't. That is not a political spectrum. 

No proof he will carry on using policies like stop and frisk.
He was defending stop and frisk until the moment he decided to run for president. Even now, he has "apologized" for how it turned out, but has not acknowledged that the entire policy was designed to be racist and he wholeheartedly embraced that. 

Literally wants a minimum wage but okay.
of course, because on this issue, like most others, he is way too right wing to possibly be considered for the democratic nomination. So he has had to pretend to be democrat and copy other people's platform. Here is him advocating against raising the minimum wage 5 years ago. The exact quote is:

"I, for example, am not in favor, have never been in favor of raising the minimum wage,"

Literally wants an improved ACA. Right wingers don't even want an ACA and he wants an improved version. 
again, he says that now. He argued against the ACA. Here is a speech he gave where he called the ACA "a disgrace". Timestamp 29:20. 

He didn't want the ACA. But he has to pretend like he likes it now because to say otherwise would be political suicide. 

Literally everything you bought up is null. Please stick to the topic instead on your typical diatribes. Spare me this one time please. Focus on my points say how they are right wing don't give me your feelings and stories. I beg you.
I've already pointed to multiple areas where he is right wing. Other than a handful of social issues, he has been right wing for a long time. 

#24
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
he has a handful of social issues he goes left on. But the basically everything else about him is right wing and authoritarian. 
<br>
Name them.
There is no such thing as left or right wing about climate change. There are those who acknowledge science and those who don't. That is not a political spectrum. 
Right wingers deny climate change, left wingers don't. I think the right are still not agreeing on it being human influenced. He also wants to do something about climate change whereas Trump removed himself from the Paris agreement.
Even now, he has "apologized" for how it turned out, but has not acknowledged that the entire policy was designed to be racist and he wholeheartedly embraced that. 
Apologizing is an admittance of fault. People I think do this in order to imply they won't do it again. 
of course, because on this issue, like most others, he is way too right wing to possibly be considered for the democratic nomination. So he has had to pretend to be democrat and copy other people's platform.
Calling him a liar requires proof if you can't find him being a liar on the minimum wage issue your attack on his minimum wage plan is null.
"I, for example, am not in favor, have never been in favor of raising the minimum wage,"
I never knew Bloomberg could tell the future oh wait he can't so he can change his mind thus making this statement null.
again, he says that now. He argued against the ACA. Here is a speech he gave where he called the ACA "a disgrace". Timestamp 29:20. 
29:40. If you actually watched the video you would understand his problems weren't that Obama knew what the issues were it was that it didn't address them with the ACA. This heavily implies he would like a plan that addresses the issues. Do you even watch the video and how uncharitable are you?
He didn't want the ACA. But he has to pretend like he likes it now because to say otherwise would be political suicide. 
Him being liar requires proof and make it about the ACA if you can. No a video 10 years ago doesn't count because he has changed his mind that is if I take your uncharitable view that he says there are issues but he doesn't want to fix them. I don't think you can comprehend someone literally changing their mind.
I've already pointed to multiple areas where he is right wing. Other than a handful of social issues, he has been right wing for a long time. 
No you haven't. I have literally rebutted all your claims. You still went on your diatribes and know you are moving the goalposts that he was a right winger for a long time? I don't care about someone's past unless it is relevant to today. Given everything you have given is literally null since Bloomberg has changed his mind it doesn't count now you resorted in using the past instead of the recent present as if that matters? 


#25
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@TheRealNihilist
he has a handful of social issues he goes left on. But the basically everything else about him is right wing and authoritarian. 
Name them.
He opposed raising the minimum wage. He opposed healthcare reform (the ACA), he was in favor of authoritarian "tough on crime" laws such as stop and frisk, he supported redlining and even said that the 2008 financial crisis was caused by cracking down on redlining rather than the greed of wall street. 

Right wingers deny climate change, left wingers don't.
There are lots of people on the right who acknowledge climate change. I agree there is more denial on the right than on the left. But that is not a political ideal that can be associated with right or left. 

Apologizing is an admittance of fault. People I think do this in order to imply they won't do it again. 
true, and if he had apologized when he was mayor, or in the aftermath of being mayor then that would be fair. But he didn't. He defended it for years and years. As recently as about 6 months before the primary race started he was defending it. The fact that he did a 180 change the moment he decided to be president should tell you he is lying. He doesn't think stop and frisk was a mistake, but he knows that he can't say that any more. 

"I, for example, am not in favor, have never been in favor of raising the minimum wage,"
I never knew Bloomberg could tell the future oh wait he can't so he can change his mind thus making this statement null.
What do you mean? He says that he is not, and has never been, in favor of raising the minimum wage. He said that just a few years ago. Now that he wants to pretend he's actually a democrat he is saying the exact opposite. This is evidence that this part of his platform (along with alot of it) is a lie. 

Do you even watch the video and how uncharitable are you?
to bloomberg? extremely. He is an authoritarian, right wing billionaire who is trying to buy the nomination just to protect his own money. 

Him being liar requires proof and make it about the ACA if you can. No a video 10 years ago doesn't count because he has changed his mind that is if I take your uncharitable view that he says there are issues but he doesn't want to fix them. I don't think you can comprehend someone literally changing their mind.
why do you choose to believe him? He has been right wing and opposed progressive policy for decades. Now he is saying the exact opposite of what he has proven he believes and you are choosing to believe him. I see no evidence that what he says now is true. 

No you haven't. I have literally rebutted all your claims
no you haven't. He opposed minimum wage laws. That is a fact. He supported authoritarian tough on crimes laws and still did until very recently that is a fact. 

You still went on your diatribes and know you are moving the goalposts that he was a right winger for a long time? I don't care about someone's past unless it is relevant to today.
how is a politician's record not relevant to today? He has spent decades showing he believes in right wing principles. Now he suddenly claims he believes the opposite of everything he has done. His past shows that he is lying. 

Given everything you have given is literally null since Bloomberg has changed his mind it doesn't count now you resorted in using the past instead of the recent present as if that matters? 
wow, you really are choosing to ignore decades of his record (including things he said very recently) and just believe whatever he says now? Just because a right wing politician claims to be a democrat does not make him one. 

your argument appears to boil down to "well he was right wing 5 years ago, but he says he isn't now". Choosing to believe a politician in his late 70's has changed massively from the beliefs he has held for decades is just sad. He is lying to you to try to protect his money and power. 
#26
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
He opposed raising the minimum wage.
The link I gave says he is pro it. Guess he changed his mind. Wow
He opposed healthcare reform (the ACA), he was in favor of authoritarian "tough on crime" laws such as stop and frisk, he supported redlining and even said that the 2008 financial crisis was caused by cracking down on redlining rather than the greed of wall street. 
You just can't help yourself with your diatribes. Even your own links heavily implies he wants to fix the issues as in an improved ACA.
There are lots of people on the right who acknowledge climate change. I agree there is more denial on the right than on the left. But that is not a political ideal that can be associated with right or left. 
Literally 18% of Republicans don't even think it is a problem as in only 18% worry "a great deal" about climate change.
The fact that he did a 180 change the moment he decided to be president should tell you he is lying. 
So people apologizing and changing their mind is lying? It doesn't matter if it was in a 6 months span or he was defending it back then (which you haven't given that evidence), it matters if he has changed his mind, if you listened to the debate he admits fault. 
He says that he is not, and has never been, in favor of raising the minimum wage. He said that just a few years ago.
Are you telling me he can't change his mind in a few years?
to bloomberg? extremely. He is an authoritarian, right wing billionaire who is trying to buy the nomination just to protect his own money. 
Extremely uncharitable and have yet to bring any evidence with the personal attacks you gave.

You missed this please respond
"29:40. If you actually watched the video you would understand his problems weren't that Obama knew what the issues were it was that it didn't address them with the ACA. This heavily implies he would like a plan that addresses the issues. Do you even watch the video and how uncharitable are you?"
why do you choose to believe him? He has been right wing and opposed progressive policy for decades
A decade is a long time and more than enough time to change. 
He opposed minimum wage laws. That is a fact. He supported authoritarian tough on crimes laws and still did until very recently that is a fact. 
Is he now?
how is a politician's record not relevant to today? He has spent decades showing he believes in right wing principles. Now he suddenly claims he believes the opposite of everything he has done. His past shows that he is lying. 
Tell me why can't he change his mind and admit to his faults?
wow, you really are choosing to ignore decades of his record (including things he said very recently) and just believe whatever he says now? Just because a right wing politician claims to be a democrat does not make him one. 
What makes a Democrat and how long do they have to be one to be considered one and also does an official DNC body accept your definition?
your argument appears to boil down to "well he was right wing 5 years ago, but he says he isn't now". Choosing to believe a politician in his late 70's has changed massively from the beliefs he has held for decades is just sad. He is lying to you to try to protect his money and power. 
This is conspiracy nonsense. Unless you can back up that Bloomberg wants the presidency as a financial investment. I'll await for your conspiracy to be met with evidence if not I'll always call what you are saying here conspiratorial. 
#27
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@TheRealNihilist
The link I gave says he is pro it. Guess he changed his mind. Wow
lol he has opposed something his whole life, then suddenly decided he wanted to be president and now he believes the exact opposite. why are you choosing to believe obvious lies?

Literally 18% of Republicans don't even think it is a problem as in only 18% worry "a great deal" about climate change.
ok, you just proved that there are millions of republicans who worry "a great deal" about climate change. a) that kind of disproves your point that the right doesn't believe in it. b) you have yet to show how believing in science is in any way a result of being right or left wing. 


So people apologizing and changing their mind is lying? It doesn't matter if it was in a 6 months span or he was defending it back then (which you haven't given that evidence), it matters if he has changed his mind, if you listened to the debate he admits fault. 
It very much does matter when they apologized and how long they advocated for the thing they are apologizing for. He has fought for over a decade for racist policies. It took a court order to make him even slow down on that racist policy. He continued defending it long after he left office. He then suddenly did a complete conversion on the issue (along with at least a dozen other issues) the moment he decided he wanted to run for president. It isn't even a good attempt to hide the lie. I don't understand why anyone would believe him. 

also, he didn't apologize for the policy. He apologized for "how it turned out". He designed a policy to target minorities, harass them, and violate their constitutional rights. It isn't "how it turned out" that is the main issue. It is that anyone would support such a policy in the 1st place. He has not apologized for that. 

Are you telling me he can't change his mind in a few years?
I'm telling you that if someone has strongly advocated for a series of beliefs for decades, then suddenly changes a whole bunch of them all at once when he decides to run for president, that is a very strong sign that he hasn't changed his mind. He is just saying whatever he has to in order to win an election. That would be a lie. 

A decade is a long time and more than enough time to change. 
I'm not saying he believed these things a decade ago. I am saying he has believed these things for decades. He has been giving speeches advocating right wing positions the whole time. He only changed those positions in order to run for president. 

He opposed minimum wage laws. That is a fact. He supported authoritarian tough on crimes laws and still did until very recently that is a fact. 
Is he now?
To which one? I already showed you a clip off him saying he has never believed in raising the minimum wage. He had to be told by a court that his stop and frisk policies were unconstitutional before he would even consider slowing it down. He also fought against monitors being sent to see how bad stop and frisk was. 

Tell me why can't he change his mind and admit to his faults?
of course people can change their mind. But you don't hold the same beliefs for decades, then have a huge epiphany the minute you decide you want to be president and decide you have been wrong your entire life. However, a politician telling people he supports whatever they want to hear in order to get elected happens all the time. There is no reason to believe he is telling the truth. 

What makes a Democrat and how long do they have to be one to be considered one and also does an official DNC body accept your definition?
I would argue that if you are an authoritarian, you are not a democrat. From stop and frisk to banning soft drinks and lots of other issues, he loves the idea of having the power to order people to do what he wants. I even saw a video of him musing about how he would love to fire half the teachers and double class sizes. 

This is conspiracy nonsense. Unless you can back up that Bloomberg wants the presidency as a financial investment. I'll await for your conspiracy to be met with evidence if not I'll always call what you are saying here conspiratorial. 
he is a billionaire trying to buy an election. Why do you think he is running?
#28
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@TheRealNihilist
But all of the discussion of precisely why bloomberg is right wing aside, he is absolutely not the best choice to win. He would almost certainly lose to trump. For every republican he could get to vote for him, 10 or 20 democrats or independents would stay home. 

The options at this point are Sanders is the best bet to beat trump. There is an argument to be made that Biden could win, but it seems highly unlikely to me. I think he would collapse in the general election. 

I don't see anyone else with a path to beating trump. 
#29
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
lol he has opposed something his whole life, then suddenly decided he wanted to be president and now he believes the exact opposite. why are you choosing to believe obvious lies?
Still have not proven that he is a liar. Never thought people could never change their mind but guess you think so. 
ok, you just proved that there are millions of republicans who worry "a great deal" about climate change. a) that kind of disproves your point that the right doesn't believe in it. b) you have yet to show how believing in science is in any way a result of being right or left wing. 
Do you know how data works?
18% is less than 50% which can be summed up as less than half. You saying millions is ignorance on what the numbers are. The right does not believe in climate change which can be shown by the majority of right wingers not believing in it is a threat. 

My burden was not to show science is a left or right thing it was to show the left care more about climate change than the right. Did you miss that or are you mis-characterizing me on purpose? Here is what I said and I quote:

"His stance on climate change is left."
Followed up by
"Right wingers deny climate change, left wingers don't."

This wasn't about belief it was about which side denies climate change. Please read what I say before uttering whatever comes from your mouth.
It is that anyone would support such a policy in the 1st place. He has not apologized for that. 
So your telling me someone before they understand they did wrong should be apologetic for something they don't even know is wrong? I guess I am forgiving left winger while you are the begrudging left winger. Who would've thought you envied people so much that they need to know they did wrong before they actually know they did wrong.
I'm telling you that if someone has strongly advocated for a series of beliefs for decades, then suddenly changes a whole bunch of them all at once when he decides to run for president, that is a very strong sign that he hasn't changed his mind.
Do you have anything other than your word supporting this? As in a data point showing a person can't simply changing without intentionally misleading people? 
I already showed you a clip off him saying he has never believed in raising the minimum wage.
I just showed you a link earlier that he is for the minimum wage. Is he for the minimum wage currently?
But you don't hold the same beliefs for decades, then have a huge epiphany the minute you decide you want to be president and decide you have been wrong your entire life.
Most of my life I was a theist then I wasn't. Are you calling me a liar because you are certainly calling Bloomberg a liar for the exact same thing?
From stop and frisk to banning soft drinks and lots of other issues, he loves the idea of having the power to order people to do what he wants. 
No proof that he will enact stop and frisk when he could be elected nor would he ban soft drinks? Are you being hyperbolic because I certainly didn't hear him say he wanted to ban soft drinks or still support stop and frisk?
he is a billionaire trying to buy an election. Why do you think he is running?
To prove what? Are you saying he is doing it for the fun of it?
But all of the discussion of precisely why bloomberg is right wing aside
You have yet to give me one point but okay.
I don't see anyone else with a path to beating trump. 
Separate argument, I just want to know how Bloomberg is right wing. 
#30
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Still have not proven that he is a liar. Never thought people could never change their mind but guess you think so. 
lol other than electing him president there is literally no way to prove he is lying. There is also no way to prove he is telling the truth. The available evidence says that he is lying though. So why would anyone choose to believe him?

My burden was not to show science is a left or right thing it was to show the left care more about climate change than the right. Did you miss that or are you mis-characterizing me on purpose? Here is what I said and I quote:
You implied that Bloomberg's belief in climate change was an issue he is "left" on. Since science is not a left or right wing belief, this is simply untrue. Believing in science is not a left wing policy position. 

So your telling me someone before they understand they did wrong should be apologetic for something they don't even know is wrong?
no, i'm telling you he has not acknowledged what he did was wrong. He has said that he is sorry for how it turned out. He isn't sorry for doing it. He isn't sorry for violating people's constitutional rights. This is the weakest apology possible. And the reason it is so weak is because he still thinks stop and frisk was a great idea. And he was making that case fairly recently. 

Do you have anything other than your word supporting this? As in a data point showing a person can't simply changing without intentionally misleading people? 
You are asking me to difinitively prove something inside Bloombergs head. That us obviously not a fair request. We know he advocated right wing positions for decades. Until very recently, he was still advocating them. Then he decided that he wanted to be president and announced he believes the exact opposite on a dozen issues. Why would anyone believe that? He has a proven track record showing the things he believes. Other than his pinky promise that he isn't still a right wing oligarch, we have no reason to think he isn't. 

I just showed you a link earlier that he is for the minimum wage. Is he for the minimum wage currently?
lol i showed you what he has believed his whole life. You showed me a campaign promise that is the exact opposite of what he has believed his whole life. Why do you think that the campaign promise is his real beliefs?

Most of my life I was a theist then I wasn't. Are you calling me a liar because you are certainly calling Bloomberg a liar for the exact same thing?
you changed your mind on 1 issue, probably after years of reflection on that issue. Bloomberg is claiming he has changed him mind on like a dozen issues and he did it at the exact moment he decided he wanted to be president. The timing, the number of issues he has swung on, and the fact that he has something to gain by saying he now believes this are all factors that should suggest that he is lying. Other than his word, there is no evidence to support what he says. His entire record says the opposite. 

No proof that he will enact stop and frisk when he could be elected nor would he ban soft drinks? Are you being hyperbolic because I certainly didn't hear him say he wanted to ban soft drinks or still support stop and frisk?
i'm not suggesting those specific policies are things he would try to enact. But it shows what kind of man he is. He is willing to take people's rights, to violate the constitution to get what he thinks is right. A man who is willing to knowingly engage in and defend wildly racist government harassment is not a man who should be trusted with power. 

To prove what? Are you saying he is doing it for the fun of it?
No, i'm saying he is doing it to try to protect his money. Bloomberg profits massively off of the broken economic and political system as it exists today. If Biden looked like he was going to win, he never would have gotten into the race. He is running to try to stop a progressive candidate from winning. He is trying to protect his wealth, power and influence. 

Separate argument, I just want to know how Bloomberg is right wing. 
opposing minimum wage, he supported the war in Iraq, he is a corporatist (ie supports the government giving handouts to corporations)

But again, I'm obviously not going to convince you he is right wing. I have shown multiple ways he is and you just keep repeating yourself that because despite his decades of right wing views, he now says he doesn't believe those things so this somehow means that he isn't.

So lets come at it from a different direction. Much of the county sees that he is right wing whether or not you do.  Much of the country sees him as a misogynist, a racist and an oligarch. If he is the nominee, progressives will not show up to vote for someone they perceive to be a right wing oligarch. So why would picking him as the nominee be a good thing? He will get crushed by trump.