Mark Zaid, JFK and Trump

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks for that William.  Very interesting stats.

BTW, i was at the gym today and while I was there for about an hour, I saw two ads for Bloomberg on two different stations.  They were both a full minute long.  During that time period I saw one ad for Bernie of a half minute.  Bloomberg is really going to spend close to half a billion when its over.  According to a poll I saw tonight, Bloomberg is now second nationally, overtaking Biden.

I have to say, don't his opponents understand that the more of them that stay in the easier it is for Sanders?

Fine with me.  But really I don't see how Steyer or Amy K have a chance in Hades.

Edited February 25, 2020 by James DiEugenio

[Kirk Gallaway]

Bloomberg's already at 410 billion. He says he'll continue no matter who the Democratic nominee is. He could go to a billion.

Steyer, Klobuchar, maybe even Warren gone in a week. But my guess is she'll be stubborn.

Edited February 25, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway

[Douglas Caddy]

Pat Buchanan: Will JFK's Party become Sanders' Party?

 

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/02/patrick-j-buchanan/will-jfks-party-become-sanders-party/

[Joe Bauer]

ks' in closed-door 2016 

New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg said at a private event in 2016 that his presidential campaign platform would have been to "defend the banks" and also labeled the progressive movement and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, now a rival for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, as "scary."

When asked his views on the rise of the far right in Europe, Bloomberg warned about the rise of progressive politicians in the US, citing Warren.

"The left is arising. The progressive movement is just as scary," he says. "Elizabeth Warren on one side. And whoever you want to pick on the Republicans on the right side?"

Bloomberg, who was elected mayor as a Republican and as an independent, also criticized President Barack Obama, saying that his 2012 endorsement of Obama was "backhanded" and that he thought Republican Mitt Romney could have done a better job if he'd been elected.

 

 

Bloomberg is now running a largely self-funded multi-million-dollar campaign for the Democratic nomination, positioning himself as a moderate as his rivals -- a crowded field that includes not just Warren but Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist who is now the front-runner -- are trying to paint him as an out-of-touch billionaire who is trying to buy an election. Bloomberg has argued that he is using his wealth to advance progressive causes and defeat President Donald Trump in November.

Audio of his comments, allegedly from a closed Goldman Sachs event for at Yankee Stadium on June 15, 2016, were anonymously sent to CNN by an email address called "CancelGoldman," with the author claiming he worked at Goldman Sachs for 14 years. The email called on Bloomberg to drop out of the race. The audio of the event, sent to CNN and a host of reporters was uploaded to audio hosting platform SoundCloud five days ago. Bloomberg's campaign confirmed the authenticity of the comments. CNN confirmed through Facebook photographs that Bloomberg took part in an event that day at Yankee Stadium. Goldman Sachs declined to comment, but did not dispute it was their event.

 

Stu Loeser, a spokesman for Bloomberg, said Bloomberg's comments about banks were a joke.

"The opening line was a joke," Loeser told CNN in an email. He added: "in the more serious parts of the speech, Mike tells very wealthy Americans that they need to break their addiction to cheap money that's exacerbating income inequality in America."

In the remarks, Bloomberg also spoke of the need for America to solve the problem of income equality before society "blows up."

"Well, to start, my first campaign platform would be to defend the banks, and you know how well that's gonna sell in this country," Bloomberg said in his remarks.

"But seriously," he went on, "somebody's gotta stand up and do what we need. A healthy banking system that's going to take risks because that's what creates the jobs for everybody. And nobody's willing to say that. The trouble is, these campaigns in this day and age, really are about slogans and not about issues anymore. And in this election you're going to see people are voting and they either love or hate, mostly hate both, but who you hate the least. That's what they're going to vote for. And they're not going to vote on issues."

Bloomberg added of the banking crowd, "these are my peeps."

He also said at the event that he had been prepared to run as an independent against both Trump and Hillary Clinton in 2016 and had lawyers in all 50 states to get him on the ballot, but as he's also said publicly, told the crowd that the best he could hope to get was a third of the electoral votes and said an independent had "no chance."

The head of privately held Bloomberg LP, a financial data and media company, said he didn't regret not running -- but joked that winning the presidency would have given him the benefit of using Predator drones on those who had "annoyed me or screwed me."

"It would have been a great job," says Bloomberg. "No, I mean, you think about it, you have Predators, and the Predators have missiles, and I have a list of everybody that's annoyed me or screwed me for the last 74 years, and bang-bang-bang-bang."

Bloomberg's spokesman acknowledged to CNN the joke on drones seemed inappropriate.

"Way back in 2016, when someone cracked wise about a President using military hardware to settle grudges, an audience would laugh," Loeser also wrote. "After three years of Donald Trump's daily drama, that might not seem so funny. What you hear in these remarks are a combination of jokes and detailed explanations of ways to make our government better that are far beyond what the current occupant of the Oval Office could read, let alone think."

Speaking about Obama, Bloomberg -- then still an independent -- described his 2012 endorsement as "back-handed" and said he did not think Obama did not do a good job in his first term, and that Romney would have done a better job if he could have governed as he did as governor of Massachusetts.

"The second Obama election I wrote a very backhanded endorsement of Obama," Bloomberg said. "Saying I thought he hadn't done the right thing, hadn't done, hadn't been good at things that I think are important and Romney would be a better person at doing that. But Romney did not stick with the values that he had when he was governor of Massachusetts."

Loeser, Bloomberg's spokesman, defended his comments on Obama.

"Regarding President Obama, he was making an important point," he told CNN in an email. "Everyone who read Mike's endorsement of President Obama saw that it was aimed at convincing Americans who saw merit in both candidates to vote for Obama. President Obama didn't need Mike Bloomberg to get out the vote from the strongest Obama voters. What Mike could and did do for President Obama is much like what he could and did do for Hillary Clinton when he spoke at the Democratic Convention in 2016 -- convince Americans who weren't already convinced of voting for the Democrat."

Former Vice President Joe Biden's campaign slammed Bloomberg's comments about Obama on Monday.

"Now we know that behind closed doors, Bloomberg described his last-minute endorsement of President Obama in 2012 as 'very backhanded' and said that he thought 'Romney would be a better person at doing' the 'things that I think are important.' Bloomberg may have changed his voter registration but he's still a Republican at heart," Andrew Bates, a Biden campaign spokesperson, said in a statement.

In his remarks, Bloomberg made historical reference to previous anti-elite revolutions.

 

"The ways you get Congress to work for you is the ways you deal with your family," Bloomberg said. "You bribe them. You say to your kid, you say to your kid to 'clean your room or you don't get your allowance.' That's a bribe, I'm sorry."

Another speaker interrupted Bloomberg to suggest curfews, and Bloomberg agreed. "Curfews or you threaten them, 'If you don't do this no television,'" he said. "Or you try to reason with them you know, maybe you'll find $2 under your clothes that are piled on the floor. But that's the way you deal with people and you deal with organizations. That's the way every big organization runs."

Bloomberg lamented the loss of earmarking as a means for congressional cooperation.

"We've taken away some of that with these member items that used to be that Congress had a certain amount of money and they would bribe each legislator to vote for the important things. We got rid of that and now it's so fractured. It's hard to get anything through Congress."

He also said he'd raise interest rates if he were president and called for passing the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, from which Trump ultimately withdrew the US.

In other comments, Bloomberg explained he backed Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey's reelection that year, even though he disagreed with him on most issues, because he supported his signature issue of guns. Democrats have criticized Bloomberg for his support of a small number of Republican candidates as late as the 2018 midterm elections.

 

I edited some of the above article for space considerations. Parts of which mentioned Bloomberg's comments on the coal industry, contributions to climate change groups and even some job creation proposals.

 

What I posted is the main thrust of the article imo and much more important in the context of understanding Bloomberg's true mind set , personal values system and agenda in his massive spending campaign to buy the presidency.

 

I have mentioned before that Elizabeth Warren has always been the 1% power people's biggest fear as a candidate.

 

Here Bloomberg tells his Wall Street brethren he will protect them from her. And he clearly states...Warren and the progressives are the number one enemy, not Donald Trump.

 

Bloomberg's 1/2 BILLION dollar campaign advertising effort is about splitting the Democratic primary votes and to deflate Warren's chances specifically. Bloomberg's comments at the Goldman Sach's Yankee Stadium get together reflecting this main concern about Warren and the "arising of the progressives" couldn't be clearer.

 

Warren would win it all if she had won the first primaries going into Super Tuesday and Bloomberg knows this.

 

Bloomberg is in AN ALL OUT WAR effort to take control of the Democratic party by this November with unprecedented war time urgency spending.

 

The fact that enough potential voters are now saying they are voting for Bloomberg just from seeing his generalized ads all over every media and not knowing anymore about him through any self-informing research reflects the intellectual weakness and laziness that I have always said is one of American society's greatest flaws.

 

Reminds me of the huge landslide of voters choosing the incredibly corrupt Nixon ( his whole team went to prison-25!) over the truly honest, patriotic and law abiding George McGovern in the 1972 presidential election because they fell for the massive Republican propaganda "LAW AND ORDER" campaign scaring them into believing McGovern was a dangerous commie/hippie/free love and drug promoting BOOGIE MAN who's election would turn their children into law disrespecting drug addicts and free love sex slaves.

 

Then just two years later when the truth was exposed that the REAL law and order breaking boogie men were Nixon and his entire staff (complete with his own private burglary team!) you would think that tens of millions of 1972 presidential election voters would have realized how duped and dumb they were to believe the false reality of McGovern being the bad guy versus Richard Millhouse Nixon.

 

And yet, I don't believe those Nixon law and order voters ever really took personal responsibility or blame for their placing the real crooks in office in 1972.

 

That same intellectual weakness and susceptibility to being influenced by massive false reality propaganda that inspired so many to vote the most corrupt group of politicians in American history into the White House in 1972 is still with us if Bloomberg is able to steal the Democratic nomination just by massive spending media advertising alone.

Edited February 26, 2020 by Joe Bauer

[W. Niederhut]

Good post, Joe.  It's becoming increasingly clear that Bloomberg is determined to sabotage the "progressive" Democrats in 2020 -- Bernie Sanders and (originally) Elizabeth Warren.

Two articles at CommonDreams.org during the past 24 hours about Bloomberg's smear campaign against Bernie Sanders.

I need to work on achieving Kirk Galloway's serenity and "detachment" about this stuff, which is not good for my blood pressure. 😬

'String of Intentional Outright Lies': Bloomberg Campaign Deletes Tweets Containing Fake Quotes of Sanders Praising Despotism

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/02/25/string-intentional-outright-lies-bloomberg-campaign-deletes-tweets-containing-fake

 

'The People Versus the Oligarch': Bloomberg Planning All-Out Media Assault on Sanders Ahead of Super Tuesday

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/02/24/people-versus-oligarch-bloomberg-planning-all-out-media-assault-sanders-ahead-super

[Jeff Carter]

Economist Michael Hudson has a useful essay on the Democrat’s “quandry”, with less on personalities and more on big-picture economics and historical resonance. He believes if the DNC broker Sanders out, then Trump’s second term is assured.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02/25/the-democrats-quandary-in-a-struggle-between-oligarchy-and-democracy-something-must-give/

[Bob Ness]

36 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

Economist Michael Hudson has a useful essay on the Democrat’s “quandry”, with less on personalities and more on big-picture economics and historical resonance. He believes if the DNC broker Sanders out, then Trump’s second term is assured.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02/25/the-democrats-quandary-in-a-struggle-between-oligarchy-and-democracy-something-must-give/

It's definitely a conundrum but assured may be too strong. I think there's more to the resistance than most think. As much as anything I think Trump support has been shedding as it becomes clearer why he's unacceptable.

That said I could just be whistling past the graveyard haha.

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks for those two links William, very important.  Wow, between Steyer and Bloomberg, it comes to something like 700 million.  Incredible for a primary.

But please note this:

"This is a bold move for Bloomberg, given his history of both racist comments and racist policies," said Vox reporter German Lopez of the new strategy by the billionaire's campaign. 

The news came two days after Joe Lockhart, a longtime Democratic strategist and former press secretary to former President Bill Clinton, in an opinion piece for CNN called on Bloomberg to take the frontrunner out."

 

Make no mistake, there are people inside the Democratic party that do not want Bernie to win. To the point that they are advising Bloomberg to train his machine guns on him.  Once the GOP veered radically right, and began winning with Reagan and Bush I, the Democrats figured they had to move right also. And they forged a formal organization to do so. This included Bill Clinton.

https://www.politico.com/story/2009/06/bill-clinton-defends-dlc-role-legacy-023833

Jesse Jackson called the DLC the southern white boy's party.  And although Obama tried to deny any affinity for it, there is little doubt that once he appointed Summers and Geithner, plus HRC at State, this was exposed as not being accurate.

There are people now who think that the only way the Dems can win is through this kind of Eisenhower Republican approach, that is how far right the GOP has pushed the spectrum .  They have completely forgot about JFK/MLK/RFK.  Especially the last campaign of Bobby Kennedy.  And Jessie Jackson's runs were a nightmare for them; especially the second time, where at the convention, he mentioned JFK's 1960 call to Coretta King once MLK was imprisoned.  It was RFK who got him out.  And it was RFK who suggested the Poor People's March on Washington to King.  People like Carville and Lockhart want all that to be erased. And they have been effective doing it.

As Bobby Kennedy said in 1968, his campaign  was a battle for the heart of America.  Bernie and AOC have revived that battle.  And the Podesta types don't like it.

Edited February 25, 2020 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

No one wins the Dem nomination without black support.

You’d think some here attending their first rodeo.

[W. Niederhut]

Should be an interesting debate in South Carolina tonight.

I'm hoping that Elizabeth Warren will continue to help Bloomberg with the socialist vote by insuring that he gets publicly owned.

Meanwhile, Axios reports that the Democratic establishment is trying to defame Bernie bigly in the Palmetto State's black communities.*

* Exclusive: Anti-Sanders campaign targets black South Carolina voters

https://www.axios.com/bernie-sanders-south-carolina-group-658e85b9-2434-4e04-94ce-4a01a8637900.html

Edited February 25, 2020 by W. Niederhut

[James DiEugenio]

God that is disgusting is it not?

Plus these attack groups can mask who gives them money.  

[W. Niederhut]

O.K., just in case anyone around here needs a good laugh after watching that depressing "debate" in Charleston.

This guy is funny, in a Hunter S. Thompson gonzo journalistic way.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02/25/what-will-you-do-if-the-democrats-steal-it-from-sanders/

[Joe Bauer]

Joining the New York Times, the Boston Globe just endorsed Elizabeth Warren for President.

The Boston Globe performed an astonishing U-turn on Wednesday when it officially endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) run for president.

The newspaper’s editorial board declared Warren to be “the best choice for Democrats,” hailing her track record and “tenacity to defend the principles of democracy, bring fairness to an economy that is excluding too many Americans, and advance a progressive agenda.” 

List of Elizabeth Warren 2020 presidential campaign ...

 

[W. Niederhut]

Joe,

      The Boston Globe's 11th hour endorsement of Warren is too little, too late, IMO, and it, frankly, strikes me as a somewhat cynical maneuver by a newspaper-owning U.S. billionaire (John Henry) to sabotage Bernie Sanders.  Where was the Globe when Warren was the front runner?

     My wife and have both been Elizabeth Warren supporters, but we have decided to vote for Bernie in Tuesday's Colorado primary-- mainly because we view Bernie as the best chance to nominate a progressive Democratic candidate in the horse race against Wall Street and the Democratic establishment.

    My hope is that Bernie will put Warren on the ticket, if he manages to win the nomination.  The two candidates (Sanders and Warren) share the same basic values and political vision for the future of Trumptopia.

Edited February 26, 2020 by W. Niederhut

[Ron Bulman]

9 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Joining the New York Times, the Boston Globe just endorsed Elizabeth Warren for President.

The Boston Globe performed an astonishing U-turn on Wednesday when it officially endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) run for president.

The newspaper’s editorial board declared Warren to be “the best choice for Democrats,” hailing her track record and “tenacity to defend the principles of democracy, bring fairness to an economy that is excluding too many Americans, and advance a progressive agenda.” 

List of Elizabeth Warren 2020 presidential campaign ...

 

Joe your link doesn't show the actual endorsement article that I could find.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/02/26/opinion/globe-endorses-elizabeth-warren/

Newsweek picked up the story.

https://www.newsweek.com/massachusetts-largest-newspaper-endorses-fearless-elizabeth-warren-president-after-democratic-1489217

I don't agree with everything she or any of them have to say.  But I do agree "Warren has the greatest potential among the candidates to lay bare Trump's weaknesses on a debate stage".  I worry about Biden's stuttering on that stage vs Trump, no matter how wrong that Should be.  I wonder about being hammered for months, then on the stage with Socialist regarding Sanders.  Liz in ways reminds me of JFK, trying to stand up to the powers that be, within the system, though more publicly.  Likely why she'll be shot down (hopefully not literally) with all the money it takes if she makes it much further.

Edited February 27, 2020 by Ron Bulman