Quinnipiac Poll: Bloomberg/Other Dems Would beat Trump

Looks like Donald Trump didn't have his best week after all, notwithstanding his acquittal.

The new Quinnipiac poll shows Bernie on top of the other Dems and all Dems would beat Trump in November

Quinnipiac poll Feb 5-9:

  • Bloomberg beats Trump 51-42
  • Sanders beats Trump 51-43
  • Biden beats Trump 50-43
  • Klobuchar beats Trump 49-43
  • Warren beats Trump 48-44
  • Buttigieg beats Trump 47-43

Where they stand:

  • Sanders 25% (+4)
  • Biden 17% (-9)
  • Bloomberg 15% (+7)
  • Warren 14% (-1)
  • Buttigieg 10% (+4)
  • Klobuchar 4% (-3)


In the final New Hampshire CNN poll, conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, Bernie leads.

In the final numbers, 29% of likely primary voters say they back Sanders, 22% back former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, 11% support former Vice President Joe Biden, 10% support Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and 7% back Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar. The rest of the field falls at 5% or less.

There is just one problem all the Dems have: Michael Bloomberg and his money.

Last night I saw a pretty amazing Bloomberg ad. It consisted of joint appearances with Barack Obama and Obama's voice praising him to the hilt. It never says that Obama has not endorsed him. Really cheap trick and Bloomberg endorsed it.

As I've also mentioned a few times in comments, I see Bloomberg ads every night on Telemundo going after the latino voters.

Hopefully Biden will continue to slide. I'm not sure who I'm going to endorse yet, but I suspect it will be Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.

< Oscar Night 2020 | DOJ Lowers Sentencing Recommendation for Roger Stone >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    It's (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by FlJoe on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 09:57:27 AM EST
    I don't know what the breakdown is by state. (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 11:21:47 AM EST
    But I do not believe that Bernie can win the PA primary (May). I have my doubts Bernie could win PA in the general. And that's a good enough reason not to nominate him. PA is one of the states that MUST go blue in 2020. orange jesus won PA by a miniscule amount. But I don't see Bernie winning here. Warren is questionable. Bloomberg, Biden (unfortunately), Klobuchar, no problem, even Buttigieg and Yang could win here in the general. Not feeling it for Bernie here.

    I was thinking about that ad (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 10, 2020 at 06:25:48 PM EST
    After Mr Bot brought it up.  I had not really considered if Obama was asked.

    But I think it's interesting he has not as far as I have seen  said anything about it as far asking to stop running it.   As Devils Advocate he didn't say he did endorse him.

    I think it will be interesting to see if Obama shows up in other ads because I bet they are already cutting them.

    And we do know Obama has talked about coming out against Bernie.

    I assume you are talking about the gun control ad?

    I think this is a better ad

    Obama is in (none / 0) (#3)
    by CST on Mon Feb 10, 2020 at 06:41:52 PM EST
    A Warren Ad.



    I wonder (none / 0) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 10, 2020 at 06:55:59 PM EST
    if it will help her numbers.

    Also posted this (none / 0) (#5)
    by ragebot on Mon Feb 10, 2020 at 07:53:44 PM EST

    And the key blurb from the link

    Six candidates -- Joe Biden, Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg, Elizabeth Warren, Deval Patrick and Tulsi Gabbard -- have included the former president in at least one of their TV and digital ads. This week alone saw five new Obama ads on airwaves in New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

    I was not impressed with the ad (none / 0) (#6)
    by ragebot on Mon Feb 10, 2020 at 08:15:06 PM EST
    Truth be told to most folks it is nothing new.

    If anyone is not aware that Trump is a loud mouth braggart that goes over the top every time he starts blabbing they have not been paying attention.  An add that stresses that gets old and boring real

    The thing is while most of us have been bombarded by Bloomberg ads I can't recall the last ad I saw from any other candidate.  As I mentioned I am getting mail from Bloomberg and when I went to my boat today the same was true of folks in the marina.  Kinda little bit of a shock since folks who live on boats are often viewed as homeless since they don't really have an address.

    Bloomberg is simply shoving his campaign in everyone's face with no effort at all at targeting.  The ad I was talking about did mention gun control; something that is not a real popular subject in rural Florida.

    From what I have read about Trump's operation a lot of it is based on very narrow targeting.  Even with Clinton outspending Trump in 2016 Trump seemed to get the better of things because he is such a showman who knows how to manipulate the MSM.

    I am still betting Sanders wins NH and heads into Super Tuesday with the delegate lead.  Maybe the make or break point will be when/if Bloomberg finally gets into the debates.  I just saw a replay of hard hitting Biden ad bashing Buttigieg.  Already Sanders, Warren and Biden have said the nomination should not be for sale and I suspect this is not the last we will hear of this.

    For sure Trump will have some hard hitting statements about Bloomberg that will get wide spread media coverage.  The Capt made a comment about the box Bloomberg will be standing on will be filled with money.  I don't really see that as a good look to convince independents to vote for a dem.


    I liked the ad (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 07:19:13 AM EST
    It's certainly true everyone knows Trump is a loud mouthed moron who never shuts up and does not even have a passing acquaintance with things like "presidential".  IMO the point is not to remind people of what they already know.  It's to remind people what it was like to have a president who was not like this.  To remind them there was a time when we expected our president to be and act in ways that at least attempt to inspire us and not divide and provoke us.

    Trump has been so normalized it's easy to forget that.  

    Trump did not need to spend money last time because he got hundreds of millions of free promotion because as you say, he played the media well.  And last time they were completely unprepared for him.  Remember how long they agonized before anyone dared utter to word "lie"?

    Those day are gone.  Trumps positive free media is gone to FOX.

    Bloomberg is going to be running hard on gun control.  That should have been clear from the $10,000,000 super bowl ad.  No doubt that will not be popular with some.  But it was very popular in 2018.  It won several house seats.

    This you can know.  Bloomberg is a data guy.  He, or his people, knows down to the granular state by state how much that subject will sell.  You can be very very sure of that.  Starting with the super bowl ad buy.

    I think it's interesting he is reaching people on boats.  Who the hell even does that.

    Sanders is leading.  Yes.  But GA is right that it's a tenuous lead.  And the truth is 75% of the democrat base is terrified of him.

    One last thing.  About the box comment and Trump "hard hitting" comments.

    Trump is so far around the bend to say anything he says is hard hitting is imo literally laughable.  No one takes anything he says seriously.  Not even his supporters.  And here is the key stone idea.

    Bloomberg doesn't really need to convince independents. He just needs to be a viable alternative for the almost 60% of the country that hates a Trump, one, and two get those people out to vote.

    The second thing will be key.   You are going to see the largest most coordinate best funded GOTV effort in history.   That's all it has ever about and all it has ever taken is data and money.


    Just (none / 0) (#12)
    by FlJoe on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 07:41:10 AM EST
    heard a radio ad for Bloomberg.

    Got into work and the first thing my evangelical coworker said to me was "looks like Bloomberg will be our next president" and he didn't seem that unhappy about it.


    Mica stole my joke (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 08:30:51 AM EST
    "Mini Mike is only mini unless he's standing on his wallet"

    I still remember in 2016 (none / 0) (#20)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 09:41:37 AM EST
    Clinton was viewed as having the big bucks and spending them in the best possible way to destroy Trump's very limited ad buys.

    As I remember Clinton was fined by the FEC for a few trivial election violations (most candidates as far back as I can remember got similar fines with Obama having to pay a couple of million dollars out of his billion dollar war chest).  Funny thing was after the election the dems blamed the Russians spending a few thousand dollars on facebook ads as turning the election.

    I don't doubt for a second that Bloomberg will spend mountains of money; I am just not convinced how much good it will do him.  It was only a few months ago that Biden had the biggest war chest of any dem along with leading in the polls.  Not to mention Biden also had the best head to head poll against Trump.  Plenty of talking heads said Trump was afraid of facing Biden; guess what happened to that.  Same thing to a limited extent about Warren when she was riding high, and now she is barely an after thought.  Only a couple of weeks ago Buttigieg was the newest shiny thing who could take down Trump; at least till folks realized he had zero support from POC.

    Bottom line is the dems have seen multiple candidates as their knight in white armor only to see them fall on their face.  Through this all only Sanders, against fierce headwinds from establishment dems, has consistently performed up to expectations.  A big reason for this is that once the candidates were put under the microscope they did not live up to the hype.

    I still think Bloomberg's biggest problem will be that he is not "woke".  There are claims he has 27 confidential settlements with women and refuses to release him.  This will not play well with 'white women in the suburbs'; a group most folks view as the most targeted by the dems.  While Bloomber does have some support from what I will call 'black lower level elected officials' he has supported with big bucks I am not sure how well 'stop and frisk' will play with black voters.

    In 2016 there seemed to be multiple Sept, Oct, and Nov surprises and I expect the same this year.  One thing I have noticed about every Bloomberg ad I have seen is that every time there is a shot of Bloomberg the camera is shooting up from waist level or lower making Bloomberg seem taller/bigger than he is.  Truth is Bloomberg is a good six inches shorter than Trump (and Clinton as this pix shows).  Once Bloomberg gets on stage for the dems debate it will quickly become obvious he is really a tiny guy physically.  No one has ever been elected prez with such a small physical stature in over a hundred years or more.  I am sure Donald will remember better than I do how FDR went to great lengths to hide his physical issues and the MSM went along with it.  This will not be possible in this day and age and once the voters see the reality of Bloomberg's size compared to others he will take a hit.

    Even Sanders has an imposing physical presence compared to Bloomberg; not to mention how bad it will look to the Bernie Bros if Bloomberg is seen buying the nomination.  The big question is how many of the Bernie Bros will hold their nose and vote for Bloomberg if this happens.


    You lost me at (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 09:49:21 AM EST
    Bernie's imposing physical presence.

    That said,  no one but me may remember it but way the heck back in 2015 I wondered out loud that IF Trump by some miracle won the nomination Sanders actually might be a better candidate to run against him than Hillary.

    We will never know if that was true but I agree its possible a loud angry "actual" populist might be more of a problem for the fake populist in the White House than is generally thought.

    Who really knows.

    One thing I think is that if there is a contested convention and Sanders wins it will make him a much stronger candidate.

    Going to be a helluva year for junkies like all of us.


    The entire quotation was (none / 0) (#26)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 10:00:15 AM EST
    Even Sanders has an imposing physical presence compared to Bloomberg

    Sanders is taller and weighs more than Bloomberg.  Sanders is six months older than Bloomberg.  There is a reason Bloomberg has asked for a box to stand on; he is a very small guy.

    Every modern president has been over six feet tall and as a rule the taller candidate wins.

    Going into the debates Bloomberg will be at a physical disadvantage.  While we may not think this is fair history tells us it is a factor.


    Here is a (none / 0) (#27)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 10:03:58 AM EST
    pix of Bloomberg standing between Trump and Clinton that shows the size difference.

    Rudy, Trump, and Clinton all have smiles on their faces; something I would expect of retail pols.  I am not convinced Bloomberg has the retail political skills his opponents have.


    LOL (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 12:58:47 PM EST
    From that picture it looks like Clinton is the tallest. But that picture explains the real concern of Trumpers. Trump looks like a land whale compared to the rest of them. It's not Bloomberg's height that is going to be the problem but his weight which appears normal against an incredibly obese Trump.

    Ok (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 10:05:28 AM EST
    First, he did not ask for a box.  

    Second if you are basing your predictions on how tall Trump is......

    I really don't know how to finish that.


    About the debate thing (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 10:13:27 AM EST
    You hear all the time Bloomberg has not been "exposed to the people".  This is just false.  He has been traveling the country and doing appearances 7 days a week for months.

    It's interesting that the media seems to be lowering expectations for him in this debate.  He hasn't debated in years.  The others have "gotten so good at it" ( I actually just heard that, pffft).

    Bloomberg is not new to politics.  He has hired several of the best consultants in the business.  The idea they would let him walk into this unprepared is laughable.

    I will predict the story after the debate is how "surprisingly well" Bloomberg did.  He better.  IMO

    Finally, he can actually be a pretty funny guy.


    He WILL (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 10:27:37 AM EST
    host SNL

    What the matter? (none / 0) (#33)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 11:15:07 AM EST
    You seem to fear an actual successful businessman and billionaire. As opposed to the phony billionaire the GOP has latched onto. The phony has no real business success other than being a successful grifter.

    Maybe everybody (except Trump)... (none / 0) (#35)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 11:44:10 AM EST
    would be happier if Bloomberg ran as the Republican he really is?  Or is that harder to buy than the Democratic Party nom?

    Tell you what Chuck...I have, do, and will continue to fear billionaire businessmen buying or attempting to buy politicians or political office outright. Call me crazy lol.

    Where does that road to hell lead?  Zuckerberg 2028?  Bezos 2036?  Sh*t if corporations are people why not just cut to the chase and let Amazon be president and forego the last of our illusions.


    I'm not rallying Bloomberg. (none / 0) (#41)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 01:38:39 PM EST
    I was just pointing out to Mr. Bot that while the pretender at 1600 PA claims to be a successful businessman and a billionaire, Mr. Bloomberg is actually both. And can prove it.

    I don't fear Bloomberg so much. What end game or personal gain is in it for him?


    Preserving income inequality... (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 02:17:28 PM EST
    and wealth disparity for the next generation of billionaires.  Saving billionaire socialists from some socialism for the rest of us. I think that is his end game...preserving the no bueno status quo.  

    Life got harder from poor and working people in NYC under his twelve years as mayor.  As recently as 2015 the f*ckin' guy was against raising the minimum wage...but now he is down with $15 by 2025? Gimme a break.  He will work for big business, not for the people.  



    You seem (none / 0) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 01:58:21 PM EST
    to think having money is evil. Remember Bernie is a millionaire too but you don't seem to have a problem with that. Warren made money flipping foreclosed houses. I mean honestly there's nobody that is going to pass your test. Bloomberg also supports gun control and has given a lot of money to organizations like Moms Demand Action and helped us flip the house in 2018. Sorry to say but Bloomberg has done more for the party than Bernie has. All Bernie did in 2018 was cost us house seats and governorships.

    Millionaires can happen... (none / 0) (#44)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 02:20:53 PM EST
    nobody makes a billion or more without being some kinda criminal.  Nobody.

    You can (none / 0) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 02:37:01 PM EST
    grift your way into being a millionaire.

    Sure can... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 03:09:55 PM EST
    You can grift your way into 20 bucks dealing 3 card monty outside the bus station. Or you could earn your way into 5 bucks, 5 million, maybe even 50 million.  A billion?  That's high crimes and misdemeanors.

    The fact billionaires even exist is all the evidence we need that our brand of capitalism is beyond f8cked.  Some of us would like to at least try to change that, despite the long money odds against us...I see no indication Bloomberg is one of those people.  



    Miss you, kid (none / 0) (#48)
    by Dadler on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 03:12:35 PM EST
    Hope all is well. And I more than agree with your point here, as I'm sure you know. Peas & Loaves.

    LIkewise Dadler man.... (none / 0) (#50)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 03:48:21 PM EST
    been a long time since Katz's Deli...which I am surprised survived the Bloomberg administration unlike so many cherished mom and pops that are now Chase bank branches, Starbucks, or Duane Reades.

    Sorry, Mr K, that's just not true. (none / 0) (#49)
    by vml68 on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 03:44:01 PM EST
    nobody makes a billion or more without being some kinda criminal

    I cannot go in to too many details but I have met a billionaire through a family member who worked with him. Immigrant and son of holocaust survivors. Made his money by making a product very popular with women and probably a few men! Did not need to be a criminal to make the money.
    Honestly, if you met him, you would never know how much money he has.


    I'm sure he is a lovely man... (none / 0) (#52)
    by kdog on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 03:51:33 PM EST
    and a brilliant inventor...but he should probably be paying his factory workers more if he banked a billion.  And paying more taxes.

    Can't speak for each individuals salary (none / 0) (#56)
    by vml68 on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 04:10:21 PM EST
    but his employees seemed to like him. One of the ways he thanked them when times were good is flying all his employees to Europe for an all expenses paid vacation. Another time, it was a private Caribbean cruise.  

    Totally off topic (none / 0) (#58)
    by CST on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 04:13:47 PM EST
    But this similar bargain has come up recently in my family where an Aunt is selling Grandma's family heirlooms and wants to use the money to pay for a family vacation.

    Every single member of my generation would rather have cash.

    Just saying.


    I understand. I guess, it depends on each (none / 0) (#59)
    by vml68 on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 04:41:31 PM EST
    individuals situation. I can't speak for anyone else but since I was not an employee but still got to partake, I was not complaining :-)

    Well (none / 0) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 10, 2020 at 09:05:54 PM EST
    NH only has 24 delegates and if Bernie wins with his best polling number which is 29% that will only net him 7 delegates. He's already trailing by 2 due to losing Iowa. Of the 1st 4 primaries the big enchilada is SC with 54 delegates and Bernie will not meet viability there and will get zero delegates. So it's unlikely that Sanders is going to head into Super Tuesday with the delegate lead after being wiped out in SC. I don't know what he's going to do in Nevada but I do know the culinary union is dead set against him and they are basically the deciding factor in the NV caucuses.

    You have to remember that the data that Trump's campaign used in 2016 was stolen by hacking and given to Trump by Russian Intelligence. With social media now cracking down on Russian propaganda I would not count on that working again. Trump or his campaign was also in contact with Russian intelligence to the tune of over 140 times in 2016. We're going to be watching for any contact with the KGB in 2020 because we're onto the GOP's treasonous behavior.


    The first place I look for (none / 0) (#8)
    by ragebot on Mon Feb 10, 2020 at 10:11:21 PM EST
    projections is the Real Clear Politics polls since they are averages.

    Their numbers are quite different than yours.  Maybe more to the point I also look at what I call tracking trends.  I have not seen any realistic source dispute Sanders is the front runner and is trending up.  Most analysis has Bloomberg trending up but with the expectation that once he starts taking hits that most likely will slow.

    Trump has even better numbers and trends than Sanders moving up.  Of course Trump has the advantage of not fighting headwinds like Sanders in terms of major dem figureheads dissing him.  Clinton just came out bashing him and Obama seems to be talking out of school bashing him.  The DNC is viewed by many as doing all it can (just like last election) to hurt Sanders any way possible.

    While it is early it seems to me it is better to be in the lead than chasing the leaders.


    He is not (none / 0) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 06:51:10 AM EST
    trending up. I know you want him to be the nominee because you can beat him. He has been stagnant for months. The reason he is leading now is because of the collapse of Biden not because he's getting any more supporters.

    The problem is that Sanders has so much baggage the DNC really doesn't need to do anything. I mean the entire party has you guys numbers. Trump got a small bump yes but he cannot break 50% ever. Still around 55% of the country wants him out. You're pushing Sanders the victim as a divide and conquer strategy. Hillary didn't go to Cuba and beg for an audience with Castro. Obama didn't to go the Soviet Union for his honeymoon and come back and praise them. Bernie did. You know that Trump cannot win without dividing and you're attempting to help that strategy along.  


    Bernie (none / 0) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 08:17:50 AM EST
    Rallied with 7,500 of his closest friends last night.

    I have agreed with you his lead is not probably forever.  But it's a mistake to dismiss him.  More of a mistake to dismiss his fanatic followers.  

    And you may be right the Right thinks they want to run against him.  The Carter people had a party when Reagan was nominated.

    I do not dismiss Bernie.  Bloomberg notwithstanding Bernie will not be easily dispatched.  By us OR them.

    Here is the consolation prize.  B has made it clear whoever wins everything I said about organizing and GOTV will happen whoever the nominee is.

    And Bernie might sulk and refuse to take Bloomberg's billions but he can't stop him from spending them bashing Trump.  And he will.

    It's worth considering what an earthquake it would be for our politics if Sanders won.

    Jus sayin.


    And (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 08:33:44 AM EST
    I said above 75% of democrats are afraid of him.

    Thats not really true.

    They are afraid he can't win.  Most would be more than fine with him actually winning.  IMO


    A familiar liberal (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 08:45:29 AM EST
    Just predicted "blood on the streets of Milwaukee" if anyone challenges Sanders.

    Eye roll.  I was just picturing AOC in cammo.

    Still.  It will be unpleasant.


    IMO (none / 0) (#19)
    by FlJoe on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 09:15:46 AM EST
    He would be a very iffy candidate, even if he wins his coattails will possibly be negative.

    I also think he would be a terrible president as the "political revolution" he sees himself leading is one gigantic pipe dream that will be smashed and end up being a setback for the progressive movement.


    Bernie (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 10:11:00 AM EST
    is going to have to answer a lot of questions. First of all there is the call as to why he is hiding his records about his heart attack? Serious concern among a lot of voters.

    Sanders would be a disaster on par with Trump. Can you imagine Tulsi for SOS? Also can the senate be flipped with Sanders at the top of the ticket? Very doubtful and so Mitch is majority leader and nothing Bernie has promised comes to pass and his unicorn followers become 100% cynical.  Bernie has not a clue as to how to govern.

    Seriously I could make the argument that the GOP would have been better off with Trump losing in 2016 than winning. Our country certainly is not better off with Trump winning though.

    Oh, I don't dismiss is followers. My argument is that we won in 2018 without them and we can do it again. Our Revolution went something like 0-118 in 2018. People are going to have to start jumping on Bernie every time one of his surrogates or his supporters start acting up. Cynthia Nixon did a good job shutting them up yesterday.


    Hard (none / 0) (#9)
    by FlJoe on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 06:22:02 AM EST
    hitting comments like calling him Mini-Mike? That will surely get the independents to turn on him.

    Methinks what we are seeing now in Florida is just preliminary carpet bombing, the precise targeting will come after Super Tuesday.

    Bloomberg is no fool he is reportedly hiring some of the best PR, Advertising and Social media experts from industry and paying them top dollar.

    What ever you think about Mike, he will leave no stone unturned.

    Billionaire Bloomberg's campaign, which has already burned through $300 million on television ads boosting his late-starting presidential campaign. is plunking down big bucks to pay "social-media influencers" to say why they like Mike on Instagram and Twitter.
    You can bet the farm on that.

    Political ads aren't meant to entertain you. (none / 0) (#39)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 12:56:30 PM EST
    ragebot: "If anyone is not aware that Trump is a loud mouth braggart that goes over the top every time he starts blabbing they have not been paying attention.  An add that stresses that gets old and boring real fast."

    And something important like that is clearly worth repeating, especially since so many in the media seem to regularly forget it.



    Warren can (none / 0) (#2)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 10, 2020 at 06:26:02 PM EST
    unite the party. Sanders would not be able to. Both have problems with POC support.

    This (none / 0) (#13)
    by FlJoe on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 08:11:48 AM EST
    is going to sting
    On Tuesday, a video from 2013 resurfaced showing former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg defending "stop and frisk" -- the policy of New York City police subjecting passersby to random searches that disproportionately targeted people of color, most of whom had done nothing wrong:

    Every liberal blog (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 08:25:13 AM EST
    Slate, Salon, Beast have all decided it's time to run the Bloomberg hysteria stories
    It's what their readers expect.

    RawStory mostly just reposts them

    This is the beginning.  I would listen to what a black journalist said yesterday.

    Paraphrase but close:

    Black voters are mostly not saying wow I can't vote for that Bloomberg because of that S&F thing that he has apologized for has ended 10 years ago.  They are looking for someone who can win.

    It will get way worse.


    The theory is (none / 0) (#21)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 09:44:33 AM EST
    better to get it out now rather than later.

    I still think Bloomberg is not 'woke' will hurt him the most.


    Here's the interesting thing about that (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 12:41:34 PM EST
    The nominee will be chosen ultimately, as everyone has been saying over and over and over, by one thing.


    This poll shows what I have been reading for a while.  The POC support is going to Bloomberg.  Everything I have seen says this will continue and increase.

    So, here we are.

    Will Slate,Salon, Beast yadda yadda go against the minority base if the Democratic Party?


    I think I want to see that.  Does that make me a bad person?


    Obama had great support from POC (none / 0) (#46)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 02:59:05 PM EST
    Clinton not so much.  While I agree they are an important voting block a lot of talking heads claimed Trump did much better than expected with white women in the burbs; also an important voting block.

    It will be interesting to see if Bloomberg's support is from what I will call AA community leaders and low level AA pols or the much larger voting block.

    Obama caught fire in a bottle with AA turnout; no dem since then has come close.  It was not so much that Obama had great support from local black pols; rather that Obama was black.

    As Jerlyn posted in the new thread the MSM seems to only want to talk about Bloomberg who is currently sucking all the oxygen out of the room.  Sanders and Biden are in it for the long run and even if Bloomberg does well Super Tuesday it is not likely he will go into the convention with enough delegates to win.  In fact it is no sure thing he will even have more delegates than Sanders.

    This is the nightmare; Sanders has the most delegates and gets dissed in the convention.  Then the real question is what do the Bernie Bros do; fall in line for a rich guy who bought the nomination or have a depressed turnout.


    Unless (none / 0) (#51)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 03:50:19 PM EST
    Sanders figures out a way to get more than 25% he's not going to have the most delegates. Right now he's trailing in delegates behind Pete. Projections are after NH he will be tied with Pete in delegates. Nobody knows what is going to happen in NV yet and Sanders will likely get a goose egg out of SC.

    Nobody is going to get Obama's level of support from POC. As far as the suburbs go, I live in them and every woman except for the crazed evangelical women have turned against Trump. It's a double whammy down here in GA with Kemp aiding in pushing women away from the GOP. Trump benefited from complacency and Russian Intelligence in 2016 which is not going to be the case in 2020.


    Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 06:55:19 PM EST
    Just wondering if this was leaked by the Bloomberg campaign as a little inoculation to be drowned out by the rest of this big news day.

    Does not seem impossible to me.


    Not uncommon (none / 0) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 07:08:08 PM EST
    to dump that kind of thing to get it out of the way.

    Bloomberg (none / 0) (#22)
    by MKS on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 09:44:46 AM EST
    also has strong poll numbers with African Americans.   Better than Bernie and better than anyone except Biden.

    Bloomberg's commercials are impressive.  Short, crisp, hitting a message well.   Good marketing.

    Bloomberg could really be in play.

    So much for stop and frisk (none / 0) (#23)
    by MKS on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 09:45:50 AM EST
    A truly interesting development.

    Was looking for a link (none / 0) (#29)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 10:07:55 AM EST
    While it may well be true only Biden has even half way decent AA support.  Saying someone has better AA support than Sanders is like saying someone is the tallest midget in the circus.

    I still claim the real question is once Bloomberg is dissed for not being 'woke' what support will he get from white women in the burbs.


    I'm (none / 0) (#36)
    by NoSides on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 12:26:04 PM EST
    hoping for Bernie Sanders.

    I just saw in the NYPost a "poll" saying that people wouldn't elect a socialist.

    If he wins the nomination, as I hope he will, people will vote for him. Lots. Especially when he is compared with Trump - who wants to cut funding for social programs. Quite a contrast there.

    The ceaseless propaganda from the mainstream press is angering. They are constantly trying to manipulate us.
    I find particularly distasteful the Times and the Washington Post telling us "what to look for" in a debate. Who do they think they are? Don't they think we can listen and respond without their coaching?

    I like Sanders. He seems real. Truly with our best interests at heart.
    And - of all of the candidates, he gives me the most hope about getting out of the wars in which we have been engaged since Bush.

    Newsweek | February 11, 2020
    Trump Jr. Greeted With Chants of 'Forty-Six' at New Hampshire Rally - "President Donald Trump's fans chanted "forty-six" when his eldest son took the stage at a campaign event in New Hampshire on Monday, showing their support for a potential Donald Trump Jr. presidential campaign."

    That is, if he isn't too busy trophy-hunting endangered species.

    Here's a thought (none / 0) (#53)
    by CST on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 03:58:17 PM EST
    We don't actually have to settle for problematic, divisive 77+ year olds, even if their last name starts with B.

    Or for that matter (none / 0) (#54)
    by CST on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 03:58:59 PM EST
    Their first name.

    We do have (none / 0) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 04:04:09 PM EST
    a lot of B names don't we? Even a young one with a B name.

    And that doesn't even include (none / 0) (#57)
    by CST on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 04:10:59 PM EST
    Booker, Beto, or Bennet.  Or Bill Weld if you want to go bipartison.

    But (none / 0) (#60)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 04:52:49 PM EST
    you do have to settle on a candidate.

    No question but Sanders is divisive; problem if it is not Sanders any other candidate will be viewed as divisive by the Bernie Bros.

    I am amused to see some folks here make the claim that the Bernie Bros are not important while at the same time blaming them for now supporting Clinton so much that she lost.

    There is a real split between Sanders/AOC/Squad and the establishment dems.  Trump was able to basically take over the pubs and currently Romney is the only Never Trumper of note.  The majority of dems seem to be Never Sanders.  The question is if this majority is enough to beat Trump in the general if the Bernie Bros repeat what they did last year.


    Bernie (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 05:10:04 PM EST
    Bros lost in 2018 which I guess is what you are meaning by "last year". Our Revolution endorsements were 0-118. Don't you think we've figured something out in the intervening years between 2016 and now? We may have needed their votes in 2016 but no longer need them.

    My hot take (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by CST on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 05:46:35 PM EST
    We need the establishment and the left.

    There are going to be so many shenanigans by the Republicans.  Only one person I can think of that comes close to bridging that divide - Warren.  Maybe she can't, maybe its too late.  But IMO she's the only one who even has a shot, and if Bloomberg can make a play for a contested convention - so can Warren, as long as the cash and the margin holds up.


    Uniting (none / 0) (#65)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 06:22:39 PM EST
    the party seems to be what Warren has been pushing lately. I actually think it's not a bad idea but I wish she had started that theme earlier. It might have helped her more.

    Just saw Bernie on Lester Holt. (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by fishcamp on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 05:50:05 PM EST
    He looked like a ghost with sunken cheeks and strange makeup.
     I like all our candidates but none of them can get over on Trump., in my opinion.  The heart and soul of Trump is greed.  Bloomberg has thousands and thousands of millions of dollars more than Trump, so maybe you have to fight money with money.

    Just watching are pretty remarkable thing (none / 0) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 06:20:23 PM EST
    Joy Ried and Karine Jean-Pierre are on MSNBC explaining why voters of color are moving to Bloomberg.

    Joy said almost exactly what Jason Johnson and Al Sharpton said in that link of Nicole Wallace's show I put in the last thread.    She has been shocked by how POC all over the country are talking Bout Bloomberg.  They want a winner.  That's all that matters.


    One thing (none / 0) (#67)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 06:27:55 PM EST
    Bloomberg is doing that nobody else seems to be doing is running directly against Trump. Forget the primary. Point the ammo at Trump. It seems to be working so far at least.

    Bernie (none / 0) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 11, 2020 at 06:26:25 PM EST
    has all the signs of heart failure, weight loss etc. After his heart attack he should have pulled out of the primary but an old man his ego will not be denied. Same for Biden. Biden looks so frail. He should have passed on running too.