Bloomberg— would you consider voting for him?

[TexasTiger 13,028]

If so, why? If not, why not?

https://www.mikebloomberg.com/getting-it-done

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

Consider?  Maybe.  I haven't heard the man be tested in a debate yet and that matters to me.  Anyone can put out an ad.  I want to see him get pushed by fellow nominees and moderators.

But for now, he's too far behind two other candidates for me and would have to make up a lot of ground.

On the Bloomberg topic, someone brought up a really good point last night as I was watching NH coverage.  Let's assume for a second that Bernie wins the nomination and Bloomberg keeps with his promise to spend whatever it takes to beat Trump.  How would Bernie reconcile using Bloomberg's money considering the guy is a billionaire?  I don't think most folks truly understand how far behind Democrats are on the fundraising side right now in comparison to Trump and quite frankly, the party and eventual nominee needs Bloomberg's money.

[McLoofus 35,182]

15 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

On the Bloomberg topic, someone brought up a really good point last night as I was watching NH coverage.  Let's assume for a second that Bernie wins the nomination and Bloomberg keeps with his promise to spend whatever it takes to beat Trump.  How would Bernie reconcile using Bloomberg's money considering the guy is a billionaire?  I don't think most folks truly understand how far behind Democrats are on the fundraising side right now in comparison to Trump and quite frankly, the party and eventual nominee needs Bloomberg's money.

Good question. Perhaps a little less conflict of interest if the money is coming from an individual and not from a PAC devoted to bad energy, banking, health insurance, 2A, etc? Very favorable and naive reading, I know. I do hope that Bernie has *some* pragmatism.

I'm leaning Bernie in the primary. Would have no issue whatsoever voting for Bloomberg in the general. 

 

[TitanTiger 20,511]

I don't care for him and probably would not.  But then, I'm more or less center-right and social conservative so it will take a particular sort of Democrat to get me to cross over.  So when he puts ads like this one a friend sent me that popped up on his timeline on Facebook, I'm not inclined to support him:

One might try to argue he's talking about all sorts of reproductive care but in the code the current iteration of the Democratic Party is using, "reproductive care" and "reproductive freedom" are generally just a softer way of saying "abortion."  So "defend our rights and expand access" isn't an appealing pitch to a disaffected conservative looking for a Trump alternative from the Dems.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

3 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

I don't care for him and probably would not.  But then, I'm more or less center-right and social conservative so it will take a particular sort of Democrat to get me to cross over.  So when he puts ads like this one a friend sent me that popped up on his timeline on Facebook, I'm not inclined to support him:

One might try to argue he's talking about all sorts of reproductive care but in the code the current iteration of the Democratic Party is using, "reproductive care" and "reproductive freedom" are generally just a softer way of saying "abortion."  So "defend our rights and expand access" isn't an appealing pitch to a disaffected conservative looking for a Trump alternative from the Dems.

I think you see what you look for here. One of the right’s attacks on Obamacare has been that it covers women’s reproductive care without additional costs, mean that cost is spread across all plans whether someone needs it or not. Obamacare is still being threatened along with all the protections it made routine.

https://newrepublic.com/article/115479/obamacare-rate-shock-men-why-they-should-cover-maternity-services

[TitanTiger 20,511]

9 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

I think you see what you look for here. One of the right’s attacks on Obamacare has been that it covers women’s reproductive care without additional costs, mean that cost is spread across all plans whether someone needs it or not. Obamacare is still being threatened along with all the protections it made routine.

https://newrepublic.com/article/115479/obamacare-rate-shock-men-why-they-should-cover-maternity-services

Really it's not as complicated as all that.  It comes down to this:  I don't want to support anyone who sees elective abortion as healthcare and wants to pass laws that expand its use or access to it.  If your pitch includes that, I'm out.  If your pitch is to work with pro-life people to find ways to reduce the number of abortions significantly, I'm all ears.

[DKW 86 7,441]

1) I predict he will be the nominee. 

2) He is literally buying the WH.

3) His policies are not all bad, BUT can be nade to look horrible when looked at in the wrong light.

4) His history is going to get demagogue-d to death, but the Dems look like they really have no other place to go.

5) As far as Abortion, I am as Prolife as it comes, but I really wont allow a second tier, "no one is doing much with topic" to kill my vote. 

[TexasTiger 13,028]

12 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Really it's not as complicated as all that.  It comes down to this:  I don't want to support anyone who sees elective abortion as healthcare and wants to pass laws that expand its use or access to it.  If your pitch includes that, I'm out.  If your pitch is to work with pro-life people to find ways to reduce the number of abortions significantly, I'm all ears.

I know that’s your issue, but you provided this as an illustration of something I don’t believe it is. Most women don’t get abortions, but most I know feel strongly about access to quality reproductive healthcare.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

11 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

1) I predict he will be the nominee. 

2) He is literally buying the WH.

3) His policies are not all bad, BUT can be nade to look horrible when looked at in the wrong light.

4) His history is going to get demagogue-d to death, but the Dems look like they really have no other place to go.

5) As far as Abortion, I am as Prolife as it comes, but I really wont allow a second tier, "no one is doing much with topic" to kill my vote. 

Look up “literally buying...”

Charles Woods spent a ton of money as a candidate, only bought airtime.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

Look up “literally buying...”

Charles Woods spent a ton of money as a candidate, only bought airtime.

Hasn't worked for Steyer at this point either.

[alexava 6,973]

On 2/12/2020 at 1:39 PM, TitanTiger said:

Really it's not as complicated as all that.  It comes down to this:  I don't want to support anyone who sees elective abortion as healthcare and wants to pass laws that expand its use or access to it.  If your pitch includes that, I'm out.  If your pitch is to work with pro-life people to find ways to reduce the number of abortions significantly, I'm all ears.

You sure waste a lot of time and stress over something that probably won’t ever change and shouldn’t. With that said, how do you work with pro life people to reduce abortions significantly? I mean give me an example of an idea that could accomplish that? I’m seriously interested. 

[TitanTiger 20,511]

4 hours ago, alexava said:

You sure waste a lot of time and stress over something that probably won’t ever change and shouldn’t.

Slavery existed in this country for over 200 years.  Africans weren't human persons, they were something less than human persons which gave the justification in the minds of white Americans to use them as property.  I imagine as generation after generation just accepted that this is just "how it is" and accepted it as self-evident and all they'd ever known, it didn't seem it would ever change.  And many probably thought it shouldn't.  But they were wrong and eventually people realized that black folks were every bit as human, every bit a person as they were and it was wrong to own them and force them to be slaves.

So yes, I care about it and will continue to care about it.  One day I can only hope that humanity wakes up to realize their inhumanity toward the unborn and until then I'll do whatever I can to move us toward that day.

 

Quote

With that said, how do you work with pro life people to reduce abortions significantly? I mean give me an example of an idea that could accomplish that? I’m seriously interested. 

Politics is the art of compromise.  Everyone involved gets things they want and offers concessions on others.

An example?  Let's shoot for the moon.  What if a Democrat who wants universal healthcare coverage put on the table for pro-life Republicans:  Let's establish a public option that anyone can buy into and that anyone who makes under $X gets for free or a sliding scale of discounted cost.  Private insurance can remain for those who prefer it but the end goal is that there will no longer be anyone in the US who lacks healthcare coverage they can easily afford and no one will be facing bankruptcy over medical bills.  And all pre and post-natal care is part of this obviously.  On top of that, at least three months of paid parental leave will be mandated through tax incentives and a small tax to help subsidize it.  Furthermore, we will create tax credits and incentives for businesses and colleges to provide on-site daycare for working parents so that no one has to drop out of school because they had a child.  Remove the notion that having a kid means all your plans to get an education and avoid a lifetime of poverty and struggle go out the window.  

In exchange for conservatives giving in on that, Democrats will agree to some serious concessions on abortion and related matters.  Maybe we end abortions after 20-22 weeks (age of viability) unless the mother's life is in danger (but all effort will be made to save mother AND child).   Or perhaps it's after the first trimester.  Taxpayers are never to be on the hook to pay for abortions.  No doctor, nurse, or pharmacist can be compelled to participate in facilitating or providing abortion services or abortifacient medications.  And no religious organization can be compelled to provide contraceptive services that violate their beliefs and conscience.  And for God's sake, stop trying to put a new marketing and PR face on abortion as if it's nothing more than removing a wart.  Send dumb stuff like "#ShoutYourAbortion" to the dustbin of history under a heap of shame and disgust for ever thinking it up.  Outlaw at the federal level being able provide an abortion to a minor child without parental consent.  Expand tax credits and streamline processes to make adoption easier and more affordable for more families.

That's a big picture example, but several of the components of it could be broken down into separate initiatives.  We give this, you give that.  

Right now, we've got most Democrats pledging to repeal the Hyde Amendment and basically tripping all over each other to prove how in favor of expansion of abortion rights and access they are the same way Republicans fall all over themselves to prove how much of a Trump ass-kisser they'll be.  Bernie Sanders all but told pro-life Democrats they aren't welcome in the party.  It's sickening and counterproductive. 

That's just me spitballing in 15 minutes time so if you're into nitpicking the details, save your breath.  This is a framework - an idea of the difference in disposition that is possible on the issue in my mind and what I'd like to see as the approach going forward.  

[alexava 6,973]

Good luck with all that. 

[Mikey 16,740]

I would not vote for hm under any circumstances. He's a gun control freak and I'm a 2nd amendment freak. Never the twain shall meet. There's more than that, but all else aside this one factor is a complete deal breaker for me. to Bloomberg.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

9 hours ago, alexava said:

Good luck with all that. 

You asked.  I answered.  Sorry it wasn't satisfactory.

[Grumps 3,704]

8 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

You asked.  I answered.  Sorry it wasn't satisfactory.

Thanks for giving it a shot. I disagree with some of it, but putting it out there for consideration is a good thing!!! It is really sad that NO progress is ever made even on the things that both sides mostly agree with. For example, streamlining citizenship for immigrants who will make the country better, preventing medical illness from financially crippling a person for life, reducing the cost of medications (especially those that should be generic) and others.

[alexava 6,973]

15 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

You asked.  I answered.  Sorry it wasn't satisfactory.

I appreciate the answer. Don’t really oppose it. I wish all states would adopt the 22 week ban just like Alabama. ( even lower maybe 18 or 16 weeks). The problem we have is the far left won’t budge for the sake of just not budging. Republicans ( a huge number of republicans) are pro life just because it’s the conservative status quo. They don’t give a rip about anything or anyone living or not they just want to oppose the crazy left. I just wish this didn’t have to be a thing. I don’t ever see any significant change happening. 

[DKW 86 7,441]

On 2/13/2020 at 10:38 PM, TitanTiger said:

Right now, we've got most Democrats pledging to repeal the Hyde Amendment and basically tripping all over each other to prove how in favor of expansion of abortion rights and access they are the same way Republicans fall all over themselves to prove how much of a Trump ass-kisser they'll be.  Bernie Sanders all but told pro-life Democrats they aren't welcome in the party.  It's sickening and counterproductive. 

That's just me spitballing in 15 minutes time so if you're into nitpicking the details, save your breath.  This is a framework - an idea of the difference in disposition that is possible on the issue in my mind and what I'd like to see as the approach going forward.  

I have found that the rhetoric around abortion is just talk.  Personally I think both sides just trot it out to grab $$$ every four years and forget about it. I cant see any real movement on abortion in 40 years. I am about as Prolife as you can get, but this is really a non-action issue for 98% of the political class.
Dems and Reps know any movement will trigger the other side into ending your career. 

As a side note: I was asked by Mr MSNBC about the Jones Senate Race. I told him the ads and posturing sounded a lot like this:
Sessions: "I once kissed Trump's ass. And if you re-elect me I will kiss it again."
CTT:  " Sessions failed to keep kissing Trump's ass. No one will kiss Trump's ass more than I will."
Byrne: "I will gladly french kiss Trump's ass."

[TitanTiger 20,511]

On 2/14/2020 at 11:57 PM, alexava said:

I appreciate the answer. Don’t really oppose it. I wish all states would adopt the 22 week ban just like Alabama. ( even lower maybe 18 or 16 weeks). The problem we have is the far left won’t budge for the sake of just not budging. Republicans ( a huge number of republicans) are pro life just because it’s the conservative status quo. They don’t give a rip about anything or anyone living or not they just want to oppose the crazy left. I just wish this didn’t have to be a thing. I don’t ever see any significant change happening. 

Well here’s what may happen instead:  the SCOTUS knocks down Roe. The US becomes a patchwork of states who ban abortion outright, restrict it severely, or offer it without restriction. Nothing is done to actually help women and babies and families. And we continue to bitch about it for decades. 

From a purely cynical political perspective, conservative states will end up with higher birth rates, liberal ones will have theirs plummet and it will change the political and economic dynamic for decades. 
 

 

[AuburnNTexas 7,174]

On 2/13/2020 at 10:38 PM, TitanTiger said:

Slavery existed in this country for over 200 years.  Africans weren't human persons, they were something less than human persons which gave the justification in the minds of white Americans to use them as property.  I imagine as generation after generation just accepted that this is just "how it is" and accepted it as self-evident and all they'd ever known, it didn't seem it would ever change.  And many probably thought it shouldn't.  But they were wrong and eventually people realized that black folks were every bit as human, every bit a person as they were and it was wrong to own them and force them to be slaves.

So yes, I care about it and will continue to care about it.  One day I can only hope that humanity wakes up to realize their inhumanity toward the unborn and until then I'll do whatever I can to move us toward that day.

 

Politics is the art of compromise.  Everyone involved gets things they want and offers concessions on others.

An example?  Let's shoot for the moon.  What if a Democrat who wants universal healthcare coverage put on the table for pro-life Republicans:  Let's establish a public option that anyone can buy into and that anyone who makes under $X gets for free or a sliding scale of discounted cost.  Private insurance can remain for those who prefer it but the end goal is that there will no longer be anyone in the US who lacks healthcare coverage they can easily afford and no one will be facing bankruptcy over medical bills.  And all pre and post-natal care is part of this obviously.  On top of that, at least three months of paid parental leave will be mandated through tax incentives and a small tax to help subsidize it.  Furthermore, we will create tax credits and incentives for businesses and colleges to provide on-site daycare for working parents so that no one has to drop out of school because they had a child.  Remove the notion that having a kid means all your plans to get an education and avoid a lifetime of poverty and struggle go out the window.  

In exchange for conservatives giving in on that, Democrats will agree to some serious concessions on abortion and related matters.  Maybe we end abortions after 20-22 weeks (age of viability) unless the mother's life is in danger (but all effort will be made to save mother AND child).   Or perhaps it's after the first trimester.  Taxpayers are never to be on the hook to pay for abortions.  No doctor, nurse, or pharmacist can be compelled to participate in facilitating or providing abortion services or abortifacient medications.  And no religious organization can be compelled to provide contraceptive services that violate their beliefs and conscience.  And for God's sake, stop trying to put a new marketing and PR face on abortion as if it's nothing more than removing a wart.  Send dumb stuff like "#ShoutYourAbortion" to the dustbin of history under a heap of shame and disgust for ever thinking it up.  Outlaw at the federal level being able provide an abortion to a minor child without parental consent.  Expand tax credits and streamline processes to make adoption easier and more affordable for more families.

That's a big picture example, but several of the components of it could be broken down into separate initiatives.  We give this, you give that.  

Right now, we've got most Democrats pledging to repeal the Hyde Amendment and basically tripping all over each other to prove how in favor of expansion of abortion rights and access they are the same way Republicans fall all over themselves to prove how much of a Trump ass-kisser they'll be.  Bernie Sanders all but told pro-life Democrats they aren't welcome in the party.  It's sickening and counterproductive. 

That's just me spitballing in 15 minutes time so if you're into nitpicking the details, save your breath.  This is a framework - an idea of the difference in disposition that is possible on the issue in my mind and what I'd like to see as the approach going forward.  

Thank you for this like you I am Pro-life and like you I want all people to come to the realization that a baby inside a woman is a human being and has the right to life but like you I believe that there are compromises that can be made .As  you pointed out there are many things that we can do to allow somebody to bring the baby to term without ruining the woman's life. Most conservatives are for pre-natal and Post-natal health care but a new baby is at minimum an 18 year commitment. I work with right to life groups and we do a good job of helping woman who were thinking about an abortion but change their mind. For the women who decide to have the baby but put it up for adoption we will help with that if family kicks them out we have homes they can stay at and we help them with pre-natal care and the adoption process. If the woman decides to keep the baby but needs help financially or even learning how to care for a child we do a pretty good job of helping them with pre-natal and post natal care including putting them up in homes if they need that. 

What we don't do a good job of is helping for the next 17 years of the child's life, we don't do a good enough job of finding or providing affordable child care, finding them a place to stay and a decent job. This is an area where both sides could and should work together.  

There are multiple reasons a woman choses to have an abortion and I am sad to say that some on the Pro-Life side don't try and address the reasons for the abortion and sadly don't follow their own believes in loving and praying for the woman who made this very difficult choice. If both sides of the issue could work on some of the reason that woman make this difficult choice and address some of these reasons it could go a long way to cutting down the number of abortions,

You touched on some of the things. Making adoption simpler and cheaper, Help the woman with a better support structure both while carrying the baby and after the baby including cheap or free child care, education {not limited just to getting a career but in how to care for a child, how to find and cook nutritious food on a limited budget, how to dress and speak at a job interview].  There is probably hundreds of million dollars spent by both sides in the political arena that could and should be spent on providing what a mother or mother and father need to raise a family.

I will continue to fight for life and I am sure that those who disagree with me will continue the fight on their side. But lets stop demonizing people on each side and instead work together on the areas we agree on.  In talking with people on the Pro-abortion side I have found a very ,very small minority who are against the idea of helping a woman in a way that they don't have to make the very difficult decision to have an abortion.

[RunInRed 16,492]

Speaking of ads on Facebook, he's the first candidate I've seen from either party for any office go after Trump on this issue ... 

[RunInRed 16,492]

Back to the original question, would I vote for him?  Over Trump?  Sure.  Would he be my first choice?  No.  Why?  Simple, literally buying a political election seems like a further erosion of our democratic values.  And heavens knows we've seen enough authoritarianism with DJT.

[Grumps 3,704]

1 hour ago, RunInRed said:

Speaking of ads on Facebook, he's the first candidate I've seen from either party for any office go after Trump on this issue ... 

I admire him for going after Trump on this.

[AURex 2,031]

Years ago, I actually met and talked with Bloomberg on many *non-political* occasions. He was on the board of the organization I worked for and as a member of the executive team, I attended all the board meetings and gala events. I was never impressed with him and didn't like his politics much, but he did a much better job as mayor than that moron Rudy.

That said, although I like Sanders' ideas and message, I think Bloomberg would have a much better chance of beating Trump. Trump actually congratulated Sanders on his win in Nevada. Why? Because Trump is salivating at the thought of running a campaign against socialism/communism -- terms that still scare the crap out of conservatives. Trump would find it much harder to mock Bloomberg, or make a laughingstock of him, or dredge up stuff anyone cares about. And the Russians would have a harder time discrediting Bloomberg.

So yeah, I'd vote for him.

 

[alexava 6,973]

1 hour ago, AURex said:

Years ago, I actually met and talked with Bloomberg on many *non-political* occasions. He was on the board of the organization I worked for and as a member of the executive team, I attended all the board meetings and gala events. I was never impressed with him and didn't like his politics much, but he did a much better job as mayor than that moron Rudy.

That said, although I like Sanders' ideas and message, I think Bloomberg would have a much better chance of beating Trump. Trump actually congratulated Sanders on his win in Nevada. Why? Because Trump is salivating at the thought of running a campaign against socialism/communism -- terms that still scare the crap out of conservatives. Trump would find it much harder to mock Bloomberg, or make a laughingstock of him, or dredge up stuff anyone cares about. And the Russians would have a harder time discrediting Bloomberg.

So yeah, I'd vote for him.

 

He can get some of the “ middle votes “. Sanders will not get those middle votes. We can’t run Sanders against trump.