Dems and Bloomberg Debate in Las Vegas

The Democrats and Mike Bloomberg will debate tonight in Las Vegas. Tom Steyer will not as he failed to qualify. It will air on NBC and MSNBC.

Everyone expects Bloomberg to be a major focus of the debate. I think it would be more fun if the moderators just didn't call on him so he got little air time. I'd like to see the Dems on stage ignore him as well, treating him like the interloper he is.

Of course that is not happening. Elizabeth Warren just blasted him. Amy Klobuchar is self-obsessed. She answers every question talking about herself.

Bloomberg "I can take out an arrogant con-man like Donald Trump". [More...]

Biden says a new NBC poll says he is best prepared to beat Trump. He doesn't say that the poll had Bernie in a double-digit lead.

Pete says Bernie and Bloomberg are the two most polarizing candidates in the Democratic party. He says Bernie wants to burn the party down. (crowd Boos). Pete says it's time for a midwesterner and middle class person to win. This crowd is defintely pro-Bernie over Pete.

Some unintelligible female debate host asks Elizabeth a question about Bernie's rude supporters. Elizabeth changes the subject. She is just so boring. I just don't track her thinking.

Bernie jumps in and disavows any rude supporters. Pete jumps in to challenge Bernie and his supporters. Waste of time topic.

7:23 pm: Amy K sounds shrill tonight. She's trying to get too many words in too fast.

Biden is now taking credit for Obamacare. Bloomberg looks like he is going to fall asleep.

Elizabeth Warren gets lost in the minutiae.

Bloomberg apologizes for stop and frisk. US #1 crime warrior and cop fan Joe Biden has the audacity to scream at him over it.

This is a terrible debate, getting lost in trivia and bickering. I'm learning nothing. And they are all bloviating.

< Trump Grants Clemency to Rod Blagojevich, Pardons Bernie Kerik | Roger Stone Sentenced to 40 Months >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    None of these candidates excites me. (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:38:51 PM EST
    The only thing that makes me want to run out and vote is getting rid of orange jesus. Definitely not one of these candidates. That's sad. Who else is available?

    Thoughts on a contested convention (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by CST on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 09:37:43 AM EST
    If you come in with a strong plurality and more than 40% of the vote, you're the nominee (or certainly should be)

    Right now the people thinking they might have that plurality can't even crack 30%.  No one is going to feel obligated to nominate someone with such a small plurality.  At that point, every candidate better be making friends.

    The big change that came out of the last debate is some people got paid.  That means more people in the race for longer, and a higher likelihood of the second scenario.  Warren was running out of money, she's not anymore.  Pete likely got a boost, maybe Biden too.  The field isn't clearing.

    Yeah, but (none / 0) (#169)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 09:50:38 AM EST
    I think losing is going to do in a number of candidate exactly who I don't know though. I have read that all this talk of Super Tuesday is nonsense and in 1992 NY is the state that settled who the nominee was. This would explain why Bernie's campaign is crapping in their pants about Bloomberg. They were counting on delegates from NY to make their demand for the nomination and Bloomberg likely killed their chances.

    And I agree with you regarding 40 plus. Someone really needs to be near 50% to even be considered. And the people who are demanding the nomination at 25% are the same people who argued the opposite in 2016.

    And Bernie is doing a great job of making sure he has no friends once again.


    I've seen people saying confidently (none / 0) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 09:54:28 AM EST
    The only thing they can say comfortably is no one would be "drafted" who was not a candidate in this election.

    So no John Kerry. Thank god.

    That sounds believable to me.  If there is no choice on the first ballot anyone who thinks they can predict what happens is I think misguided.  Anything could happen.

    As far as the field clearing I expect Super Tuesday will do that.


    I (none / 0) (#174)
    by FlJoe on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 10:10:02 AM EST
    was holding out for a draft Schiff movement.

    This whole argument is stupid, the rules are the rules. "Awarding" the nomination to the holder of a plurality  would be like declaring the winner of the super bowl after three quarters.


    All in (none / 0) (#175)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 10:11:18 AM EST
    Draft Schiff

    I think trying to (none / 0) (#179)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 10:37:54 AM EST
    Pick someone who has not participated would be a huge mistake.

    I can't think of a reason to do that.  Except maybe Michelle Obama.  That would just pi$$ everyone off.

    There are plenty of qualified choices who will have been campaigning.


    Why November is so Unpredictable (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by RickyJim on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 10:34:28 AM EST
    I don't know any way to calculate the odds that one of the 5 septuagenarians running for president will have a serious health problem before then.  Or even which one is the most likely to have one. I seriously doubt that Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Booker, Castro etc, would refuse the VP slot on the Democrat ticket no matter who is number #1.

    All the talking heads say (4.50 / 2) (#29)
    by ragebot on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 10:45:06 PM EST
    Bernie won by not losing.  Bloomberg campaing just put out an announcement saying this was just a warmup and he will improve a lot for the SC debate.  He better.

    After Warren bashed Bloomberg about the non disclosure agreements and he offered up a weasel response (which to me indicated a failure of his prep team for a question he knew he would get) Biden piled on commenting 'let the women choose'.

    Hard to dispute Sanders will go into the convention as the delegate leader.  After tonight I am not sure but if forced go choose I would put Biden in second place.  Bloomberg really needs to step up his game or he may well fade to the also rans.

    I have not seen anyone claim Bloomberg lived up to expectations.  What ever one thinks about what Warren did to Bloomberg it will hurt him with the women's vote; something the dems must have to win.

    Bloomberg (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 09:52:01 AM EST
    Bloomberg brought a wallet to a knife fight.

    Warren (3.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:53:54 PM EST
    needs to drop out. She's doing a decent debate but if she doesn't have the guts to go after Bernie then there's no point in her being in the race.

    I see what she's doing. (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 04:44:28 PM EST
    Warren's being entirely strategic in her thinking. She wants to be the last one standing alongside Bernie during the stretch run.

    Sen. Sanders' base of supporters is pretty solid, so taking potshots at him right now really doesn't hurt him and ultimately gets her nowhere. So, she's using what political capital she has this primary season to try and elbow Biden, Bloomberg, and Buttigieg off the stage first. If she can do that, then she'll deal with Sanders afterward.

    I have no idea whether or not Sen. Warren's strategy will succeed. But I think that realistically, it's also the only practical avenue to the nomination that's still available to her.



    Whatever (none / 0) (#67)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:20:45 PM EST
    the strategic outcome, her attack on Bloomberg was a tactical necessity. The MSM media has been trying to disappear her from the race for weeks. Now for a cycle or two she owns the narrative.

    Not matter what your political persuasion, that was an epic beatdown. Maybe it will show a lot of people that there is  real political warrior underneath that wonky exterior.


    Well, the read (none / 0) (#68)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:23:19 PM EST
    from a lot of people is if you can't stand up to Bernie you'll never be able to take on Trump.

    I guess she's probably trying your strategy but she also spent a lot of months talking about how bad these candidates were for taking PAC money while she chose to unilaterally disarm. So she spent the campaign in the lane that is dominated by the Bernie cult and now hopes to move moderates over to her side is not much of a winning strategy.


    It (none / 0) (#71)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:54:11 PM EST
    should be the moderates taking it to Bernie at this time. Warren had the perfect target last night in Bloomberg and she made the most of it, attacking Bernie would have been counter productive.

    She took some pot shots at Bernie the rest of them but her main guns were rightfully kept on Bloomberg.

    The four moderates, when they were not fighting each other did take some shots at Bernie but nothing like the onslaught Liz launched.


    I get the strategy of the moderate (none / 0) (#75)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:15:01 PM EST
    candidates because those of us that are their voting base keep moving from candidate to candidate but they think that they can move us around by attacking each other. It doesn't work. What they don't get is job 1 is getting rid of Bernie. Then we can worry about all the rest. If Bernie's base is immovable then frankly it's a win/win for the moderate candidate to appear to be taking him down.

    That's (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:30:49 PM EST
    the whole point of Bloomberg's run, he and his billions were the true Bernie (or maybe Warren) slayer. He is failing like the rest of them and it was never Warren's job to do that.

    I guess (none / 0) (#88)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:57:45 PM EST
    we will have to wait and see if the oppo dump on Bernie has any effect. Considering at one point Bernie was polling around 15% there may be some soft support there.

    I wouldn't say Bloomberg is failing yet. He has had a ton of experience with the bro types in NYC. So it remains to be seen if he can be effective in the primary but he sure has Bernie and his campaign shook.


    I would like to (none / 0) (#125)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 12:24:13 PM EST
    see someone other than Bernie....

    But, not looking like that.  It looks like a demoralized Democratic electorate and Bernie winning 10 states.

    A Bernie term would be a one term Presidency with loss of Congress and maybe a recession.  No progress on anything.....And Nina Turner as Press Secretary.

    Or, four more years of Trump.  

    Newsom in 2024.


    Tulsi Gabbard (none / 0) (#127)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 01:15:10 PM EST
    secretary of state. You can just start naming all the horrible appointments already.

    We wouldn't even get to pick supreme court justices with Bernie as president because he would not flip the senate and we all know McConnell would hold up every appointment Bernie made. And Bernie's answer would be to march. Yes, we have seen these last 4 years exactly how much influence marching has against Mitch McConnell.


    Only two states have thus far held their primary or caucus with 48 to go (plus the territories), and yet you've already pegged Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party's presumptive nominee, cast him as its prospective loser in November or at best a lame-duck president with a shrill harpy as his press secretary, we've lost the Congress and are in recession, and you're already looking forward to the candidacy of Gov. A. Jed Prettyman in 2024.

    Let's please take some deep breaths, compose ourselves, try to not swirl down any more rhetorical storm drains, and remember the real bottom line here:

    Unless and until Sen. Sanders actually garners the pledged support of the 1,991 convention delegates necessary to secure the Democratic nomination on the first ballot, he's not the presumptive nominee of anything. Right now, the number of Democratic delegates pledged to Sanders is 21.

    If the nominating process at the convention goes to a second ballot, the mountain Sanders has to climb becomes even steeper because the number of delegate votes necessary to gain the nomination actually increases to 2,375, which accounts for the addition of the convention's 771 automatic delegates to the balloting.

    Any talking head on TV who's suggesting that Bernie Sanders somehow all but has this in the bag really doesn't know what he or she is talking about. Don't listen to them. Change the channel.

    Our only goal right now as Democrats and progressives is to defeat the existential threat to our democracy that is Donald Trump, and to not beat each other up in the process.

    Sen. Sanders is not my first choice either, nor is Joe Biden. But if one or the other (or another candidate) prevails and gets our party's nomination, so what? I'm still going to work damned hard to make sure Trump gets sent packing and our party's nominee moves into the White House.

    You know, it's far easier to create an adverse self-fulfilling prophecy than most people realize. All it takes is our innate capacity for self-discouragement, by which we convince ourselves of the inevitability of something that hasn't yet happened and we paralyze ourselves into inaction. We've a long way to go yet, and we need everyone's head in the game.



    Agreed (none / 0) (#146)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:34:40 PM EST
    Bernie is the front runner and the current Vegas odds on betting favorite.
    It appears it will go to a contested convention, I can't see The Bern getting enough delegates to win in the 1st round.
    At that point, the DNC, decision makers of the Dem Party will have to make their choice.
    Too early yet, too much can happen

    The vegas (none / 0) (#155)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:33:08 PM EST
    odds probably did not factor in Russian assistance I bet. And those betting markets have been wrong so many times it is funny.

    Disarmed no longer (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:01:23 PM EST
    Warren is taking PAC money

    Not criticizing her for doing it.  I think it was stupid to not do it, preach against it and THEN do it.

    It's one of those dumb things she does I have commented on before.  A walking unforced error.


    Yeah (none / 0) (#81)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:25:28 PM EST
    live by purity politics and then die by purity politics. The smart ones never made such a promise. Bernie also promised to unilaterally disarm against Trump.

    If Bernie is the nominee (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:28:06 PM EST
    He will take it too.  

    Warren (none / 0) (#84)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:33:54 PM EST
    was always going to tack to the center if she won the nomination, out of necessity she is doing it now.

    Ok (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:49:48 PM EST
    So, if she knew she was going to take PAC money what kind of sense does it make to preach against the evils of PAC money for months with all the gusto she brought to Bloomberg last night.

    That seems plainly amateur to me.  It make her look like a typical phony  pol.


    And just so our cards are showing (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:52:07 PM EST
    I think Sanders has a better chance of winning the General than her.

    Probably a much better chance.


    Well, (none / 0) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:59:37 PM EST
    polling backs you up. She does worse than Sanders. Both do horribly in the rural areas and the suburbs. The only place candidates like Sanders and Warren do well is cities and that's not enough to win.

    I (none / 0) (#91)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:19:18 PM EST
    disagree. Bernie's "socialism" will be a 1%-2% drag on him by the time the general rolls around and he will never be able to tack to the center, his talk of revolution and his rabid online horde(domestic or foreign) are bound to scare centrists.

    Warren does not have that baggage and there is much more opportunity for her support to grow. She probably needs to boot M4A, but most of the rest of her proposals poll very well.


    Oh well (none / 0) (#92)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:23:31 PM EST
    Diffent strokes.

    IMO she has all Sanders baggage and misogyny to boot.


    Any reliable polling or academic research (none / 0) (#93)
    by Peter G on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:33:33 PM EST
    on how much of a "drag" antisemitism is on electability? How many more would vote for Sanders if he were not Jewish? How about Bloomberg?

    I think (none / 0) (#94)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:38:34 PM EST
    the vast majority have said they would vote for someone who is Jewish for president.

    This poll says 93%.

    The biggest drag of all the polling attributes is a socialist.


    You did not ask me (none / 0) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:39:05 PM EST
    Good cause I have no idea.  I honestly don't think it would matter much.  Some, maybe.  Not win or lose.  
    I don't believe it.

    But here's a thought
    Whatever you think about Sanders he is undeniably a shrewd and extremely skillful politician.  

    Warren is anything but.  That business with PACs is a perfect example but there are many others


    I didn't address my question to anyone (none / 0) (#96)
    by Peter G on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 08:11:21 PM EST
    in particular (or not). Anyway, the question I posed is kind of the opposite (or is that, the contrapositive?) of the question GA6's poll addressed. Not "how many would be willing" but rather how many just wouldn't. Because I am concerned that any such number, even a small one, could in fact be significant in the outcome of the election. That poll was pretty interesting, though, in suggesting that many fewer said they would be open to voting for an otherwise qualified candidate who was an evangelical Christian than said they were open to voting for a Jew. But fewer would vote for a Jewish candidate than would vote for an African-American. A hypothetical Jewish candidate did about the same as a woman. And way fewer than any of those categories is the percentage would were open to voting for a qualified candidate who is gay, although "gay" does better than "Muslim." All of those do better than "atheist," but, perhaps alarmingly, even "atheist" does significantly better than "socialist."

    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 08:18:56 PM EST
    I know this from anecdotal experience.  Particularly with those of a certain age.  That being old.  Like me.  

    I thought one of the mostly overlooked interesting moments from last nights debate was when Bloomberg equated socialism with communism and everyone gasped and then booed.

    This is what the republicans will do with socialism.  It was like, duh.

     Like it never occurred to them this would happen.

    Yeah.  It will.


    Capt. Howdy you are not old. (5.00 / 3) (#130)
    by fishcamp on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 02:59:45 PM EST
    I am old and may be the oldest person on this blog at 81 and 3/12ths.  I was born before WWll and tin foil and lots more.  When I used to walk my grandmother into church on Sundays she used to tell me, every time,  to take long steps so I wouldn't wear out the soles of my shoes on the way to save my soul.   Took me a few years to understand that one.

    Oldie (none / 0) (#132)
    by jmacWA on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 03:34:16 PM EST
    but Goodie

    That being said (none / 0) (#98)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 08:23:05 PM EST
    I still take Sanders over Warren.

    Just because Warren doesn't call herself a socialist doesn't mean they won't.  Socialism is now the tip of the Republican spear

    They will use it no matter who.  Warren would IMO be a gift, a woman socialist.

    Bloomberg is a bit of a problem for that game plan.

    Jus sayin.


    Carville (none / 0) (#99)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 08:39:48 PM EST
    says the party has gone stupid and I think he's right.

    Bloomberg hit a nerve. They can boo but it's the truth. Just like they can boo Hillary it doesn't change the facts. He put a tape out today making fun of his debate performance and talked about issues like nobody is going to vote for a boutique socialist in a general election and that people want common sense solutions. He really has hit a nerve with a lot of voters because he is saying what we have been saying or thinking for quite a while.


    In a country (none / 0) (#100)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 08:51:35 PM EST
    Where the party that would, probably successfully, skewer a democrat for being a socialist is the same party that is in direct cooperation with Russia to steal the election and will probably get away with both the stupidity gets hard to localize.

    Carvill should go someplace nice and be quiet.  IMO


    What an election (none / 0) (#101)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 10:18:23 PM EST
    it would be with a Russian asset for Putin and a useful idiot for Putin. Just go ahead and let Putin run the country if those two are your choices.

    Biden (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:14:16 PM EST
    Looks like he has started wearing Cheetos orange makeup.

    Complete with white eye holes.

    Bloomberg is not that much shorter than everyone else.  Maybe he has elevator shoes.  

    Sanders looks bad.  He looks like he should be in assisted living.

    Pete is going after (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:16:05 PM EST

    Bernie is blaming the Russians for the bros.


    Bernie (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:17:33 PM EST
    who said NOTHING about the Russians helping him in 2016. Yeah, that's the ticket.

    He looked (none / 0) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:17:04 PM EST
    bad last night in the town hall. Cripes he's a 78 year old cardiac patient.

    Bloomberg really looked short in that picture of him playing golf with Bubba shopped around by the bros. But then again it was shopped around by the bros. So who knows if they "fixed" it.


    Bernie looks good (none / 0) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:18:37 PM EST
    and healthy. Bloomberg and Biden are 77 -- what's the difference between them and Sanders at 78? They are all too old for this. We should make them reveal their planned VP nominees before deciding who to support.

    They are all too old (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:24:37 PM EST
    But I would not say Sanders looks good.

    I gotta say.  As far as ignoring Bloomberg.  He's just standing there with a bemused look while they all squawk and flap their arms and pelt each other with nerf bats and screech at each other.

    He's probably happy to be left out of this so far.


    Also (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:49:05 PM EST
    It's not about how he looks really.

    It's about him releasing his medical records.  Because he is 78.


    I agree (none / 0) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:32:14 PM EST
    they are all too old for this however Bernie is the only one that had a heart attack a couple of months ago. If I were Queen of the Dem Debates I would wave my wand and make all the old guys go away but of course I'm not and so here we are.

    Biden has whiter teeth (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:17:10 PM EST
    than usual, maybe he is using Trump's cosmetic dentist.

    First time I have watched the debates. (none / 0) (#28)
    by vml68 on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 10:38:43 PM EST
    Caught the second half. Is it just me or has Biden done something to his face?
    Bernie looks old but Biden looks old and creepy!
    After watching all of them, I have decided that I really miss Hillary Clinton. And, no, I don't want her to run again.

    Bernie is getting most of the incoming (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:25:45 PM EST
    So far.  

    Pete is slaying (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:30:06 PM EST
    Bernie. I'm here for it.

    The two mayors (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:41:08 PM EST
    Are winnIng this so far.

    All kinds of Democratic unity tonight. (none / 0) (#14)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:51:13 PM EST

    I recorded Frontline last night. Also there's (none / 0) (#16)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 08:54:01 PM EST
    another episode of McMillions to watch. This is starting have all the feel and depth of a high school debate for student body president.

    This is the first one I have watched (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:07:54 PM EST
    I am remembering why that is.

    I have to say this for the two mayors, they seem able to speak without sounding angry and agitated.

    The others are sounding like different versions of my sisters chihuahua.  It's just annoying and exhausting


    Bloomberg looks and acts out of it. (none / 0) (#18)
    by fishcamp on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:15:51 PM EST
    I thought he would be much better and I'm rapidly changing my mind about supporting him.  Elizabeth is certainly picking on him, but he's not able to defend himself well at all.

    An all white... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 11:09:21 PM EST
    debate stage was clearly not good for Bloomberg...a little stop and frisk action before reaching the podiums might have prevented multiple murders by words from occuring.

    Liz especially...she was like Beatrix Kiddo out there with a Hattori Hanzo slicin' and dicin'.

    The only cut they all missed was failing to remind Bloomberg that where the minorities live is not where all the crime in NY lived during his extended terms...it lived and still lives in the financial district with his good time grifter buddies. Other than that swing and a miss of a meatball, great job everybody else. Dare I say, even you Joe Biden, you rascally racoon you!


    I really disagree (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:23:52 PM EST
    He is not interrupting people.  He has not done that.  I think he has done pretty much exactly what I expected him to do

    This is my take away (none / 0) (#148)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 11:20:55 AM EST
    From listening to Sheekey.  Who just mentioned in passing the morning lie about the Bloomberg heart attack.
    Bloomberg will not attack tonight.  They have been hinting as I think you noted they have all this stuff.  I think he is expected to attack

    I think he will let others attack.  Defended himself as necessary.  

    IMO he and Pete arecwalking away with this.  


    I am channel surfing (none / 0) (#30)
    by ragebot on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 10:51:46 PM EST
    and all the talking heads are saying Bloomberg did not live up to expectations.

    His campaign just released a statement that this debate was only a warmup and he will be better in the SC debate.  I really think his prep team screwed the pooch not getting him ready with a better answer to the non disclosure question; something he was sure to get grilled on.

    Trump had non disclosure agreements and they came out; it is only a matter of time before some of Bloomberg's do.


    The bobble heads (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 10:07:56 PM EST
    Seem to think Bloomberg had a terrible night.

    I didn't see that

    I guess we will see.


    Mayor Pete (none / 0) (#20)
    by MKS on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:39:01 PM EST
    is really staking out a moderate position here.  I had not realized how conventional his politics are.

    Bernie is sounding way too much like the head of a pitchfork mob.  

    I, for one, really did not appreciate ... (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 04:10:48 PM EST
    ... Pete Buttigieg's oblique but nevertheless disparaging reference to former Vice President Walter Mondale, offered during an attempt to get in a dig at Sen. Amy Klobuchar's expense.

    Alongside his one-time boss, former President Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale is a decent, honest and honorable man of integrity in a country where such personal qualities have been increasingly devalued and demeaned in its politics.

    IMHO, Mondale wasn't at all diminished last night by Buttigieg's snark -- but the rest of us of a certain age sure were. And for the very first time, I found myself looking at the former South Bend mayor and thinking, "How immature!"

    Boo. Hiss.


    For the first seconds (none / 0) (#21)
    by MKS on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:40:40 PM EST
    listening to Mayor Pete, I really like him, but then he just starts to sound too glib.

    He is trying to take (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:44:00 PM EST
    The moderate lane.  I think he is having a very good night.  

    Amy has completely blown it (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:44:50 PM EST

    Regrettably, I think I agree (none / 0) (#25)
    by Peter G on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:51:54 PM EST
    with you on Amy having a fatally bad night.

    Bloomberg (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:57:44 PM EST
    made him go off on a socialist rant that now is probably going to appear in a Trump campaign ad if he's the nominee.

    Chuck asks a good question (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 09:50:06 PM EST
    Sanders is alone in not "letting the convention it's will"

    This might be the most important question of the night

    So far (none / 0) (#31)
    by ragebot on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 11:00:41 PM EST
    Klobuchar seems to be first out of the blocks in the post debates interviews.  She is her usual glib quick to answer question

    Warren keeps pounding on the Bloomberg non disclosure issue.  So far I have not seen anything from Bloomberg or Biden.

    Again Bloomberg needs a better prep staff to get him ready to get in front of the cameras and take the heat.

    MSNBC just reported in 2016 there were 84,000 votes in NV and so far this year there were 74,000 early voting votes; so the debate may not have any real impact.

    A very lively (none / 0) (#33)
    by KeysDan on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 11:14:08 PM EST
    debate., made all the better by the absence of Steyer and Yang.  Since most will be looking for winners and losers, my vote for winner is a tie:  Pete and Elizabeth Warren.  Bernie was the same as always, probably a meh.  Although his best lines were socialism for the top, rugged individualism for the bottom.  But, still Bernie came across as too extreme, more so than I believe he is.  Biden was OK, but not enough.  Amy was a loser.  Bloomberg was a loser in that he disappointed..for many not the smoothie depicted in his professional ads.  Surprised he was not prepared for very predictable challenges. Needs to set aside some money for debate coaches.

    I don't know... (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 19, 2020 at 11:30:24 PM EST
    if the best debate coaches in the world can delizardify the man in 6 days. The Bloombucks might just be better spent on ever more commercials and memes..more voters watch commercials and memes than debates anyway.

    A lot of ads (none / 0) (#35)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 12:42:56 AM EST
    will contain snips from the debates.  Not saying a lot will not be taken out of context but Warren really hit Bloomberg hard about the non disclosure agreements and then Biden piled on; bet that winds up as an ad.

    And (none / 0) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:38:04 AM EST
    I'm sure Bernie's socialist rant will be cut into an ad by Bloomberg.

    This is (none / 0) (#36)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:37:08 AM EST
    what I see most of the pundits saying. Pete and Liz were the winners.

    Major Pete (none / 0) (#38)
    by NoSides on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:39:04 AM EST
    says that Sanders is a "polarizing figure".

    People are passionate about him. That is true.
    It is also true that he actually stands for something.

    That rattles Pete.

    When I see our Democratic candidates turning on each other, they seem like petulant children. Infantile. (No disrespect to actual children intended.)

    Warren made a big mistake when she, in essence, turned on Sanders and inferred that he was a sexist. Idiotic. She hasn't recovered from that one.

    I maintain that Sanders could beat the incumbent.
    My personal opinion is that it would not even be close, but Sanders would win handily.

    Sanders comes across as real, consistent, and genuinely on the side of the people. His candidacy is not fueled by personal ambition, but, in my opinion, driven by a desire to help citizens in distress. A novelty in politics.

    This is a quality that I think will motivate people across the political spectrum to vote for him.

    It would such a breathe of fresh air if he won the nomination and the presidency.

    Sanders is consistent I'll give him that (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:26:48 AM EST
    The most universal reaction this morning from all quarters except Sanders boosters is holy shi+ if Sanders is not stopped he will get the nomination and then we are truly f'cked because he can not win.

    This morning the threat of Sanders is changing strategy and thinking from coast to coast.

    I will repeat, IMO Sanders will not be the nominee.  
    I hope I am correct.


    I said last night (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 08:05:20 AM EST
    That question about a possible contested convention was the most interesting question and the most interesting answers of the night.

    To a person everyone on the stage, except Sanders, effectively said they would be totally fine with NOT giving Sanders the nomination if he comes to the convention with a plurality but without a majority of delegates.

    Every one.  I suggest considering the implications of that.  

    For example, several of them are likely to have delegates.  Who do they back in a nomination fight?  It was pretty clear, not Sanders.


    Politico (none / 0) (#129)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 02:51:10 PM EST
    LAS VEGAS -- Mike Bloomberg is privately lobbying Democratic Party officials and donors allied with his moderate opponents to flip their allegiance to him -- and block Bernie Sanders -- in the event of a brokered national convention.

    The effort, largely executed by Bloomberg's senior state-level advisers in recent weeks, attempts to prime Bloomberg for a second-ballot contest at the Democratic National Convention in July by poaching supporters of Joe Biden and other moderate Democrats, according to two Democratic strategists familiar with the talks and unaffiliated with Bloomberg.



    That is not (none / 0) (#131)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 03:27:45 PM EST
    surprising and also there's a poll that just came out that has Bernie taking down 95 congressional districts with him.

    That is the DNC plan (none / 0) (#148)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:41:45 PM EST
    To a person everyone on the stage, except Sanders, effectively said they would be totally fine with NOT giving Sanders the nomination if he comes to the convention with a plurality but without a majority of delegates.

    The Bern has said he will support the nominee of the party...but this is something else
    Yikes, the plan is to vote in a moderate at a contested convention. but this says The Bern will not accept losing the convention with a plurality of the delegates. That would be awkward


    The funny thing is (none / 0) (#150)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:49:31 PM EST
    You and your ilk want Sanders to win the primary because your feeders say he can't win the general.

    The thing is he can.  He really can.  So a word of advise, be careful what you wish for.

    Sanders will make you guy fall asleep in a fetal position dreaming about how much better for you a Bloomberg presidency might have been.


    Just hoping (none / 0) (#153)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:56:08 PM EST
    For a long drawn out primary, with a contested election.

    Bloomie will lose so much turnout among the left wing, the AA community.

    All he has is money, and Madame Sec had that as well

    The Bern has a passionate following


    You don't know (none / 0) (#157)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:40:46 PM EST
    anything if you think Bloomie is going to lose support among the AA community. Many AA community leaders have endorsed him due to his support of gun safety laws. My rep Lucy McBath just endorsed him last week. He's getting very good support in polling from the AA community. As far as the left wing who knows but most of them hate Trump enough that they would vote for Bloomberg. We won 2018 without the bros and we can do it again. The bro candidates all went down in flames in 2018.

    The Bern (none / 0) (#156)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:38:07 PM EST
    is probably not going to last much longer considering now he has not only socialist, 78 years old, cardiac care patient he has Russia again. We all knew you Russian trolls were pushing his candidacy so it was no surprise to me. The Bern "hid" Russian assistance for 1 month. If I lived in IA or NH I would want my vote back. I don't think the party is going to have any problem not nominating someone who received Russian assistance. As far as his stupid bros go, they can burn their own houses down and set themselves on fire in protest because they aren't going to do it at the convention. Bernie may not even be invited to the convention after this last stunt. He should go spend time at one of his three houses.

    I'm not supporting Sanders right now. (none / 0) (#65)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:12:25 PM EST
    But if he's our party's nominee, I'm all in with both feet without any hesitation on my part. As the former 8-year mayor of Burlington, VT (1981-89) before he ever ran for Congress, Bernie Sanders actually compiled a rather impressive record of accomplishments as his hometown's chief executive, which I don't think he talks about nearly enough.

    I've been to Burlington recently, and I can attest personally that Bernie's constituents really do like him a lot. Judging in part on how he governed the city as its mayor, I'd offer that he's not the wild-eyed socialist that many of his erstwhile detractors like to portray him as being, and I'd suggest that he'd be a far more pragmatic president than most of his rabid supporters can even possibly imagine.



    Ragebot and Trevor (none / 0) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:05:21 AM EST
    Have captured the most important aspect of this.

    What the bobble heads say.  

    Clearly they have spoken.  I was sure Mica and Donnie Doousch were going to need medical attention this morning.  Joe said one thing I agreed with, Bloomberg should taken charge more.

    I would just remind us that they, the bobble heads, have been know to be entirely clueless about any part of this primary so far.
    I do not agree Bloomberg did so terribly.   He might have done better but afaiac he did way better than Biden in this debate or any of the others and Biden has been "leading" for months.  

    I expected Bloomberg to do more or less what he did which was to let them squeal and try to appear calm and above it all.  I think the tried a bit to hard in that respect.

    But back the the bobble head pronouncements,
    Sanders won.  Really?  I thought Sanders was at his most frightening.  
    Warren won, really?  I thought she was a cross between a chihuahua and Sanders.  She made many viewers like Bloomberg more.
    I thought Pete was very good all night.  If there was a debate winner it was him.
    Amy will probably not be around much longer IMO.
    Bloomberg had some very good answers.  Something none of the others did.  And his excessive reserve ended up making him look like the designated driver because the rest other that Pete acted like escaped mental patients.

    The bottom line is the debates have not mattered much and I doubt this one will.

    The way they seem to be most useful is by using clips in ads.
    Every person on the stage provided plenty of crazy for commercials.

    One other thought (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:09:54 AM EST
    One thing I've heard multiple times is Bloomberg looked bored.

    Which is something I think many people will relate to.  It was boring.


    My opinion (none / 0) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:41:05 AM EST
    is that Bloomberg doesn't care about the debate. He called Sanders a communist and Sanders went off into a red faced rant saying he's not a communist and so the tapes are gonna roll with that statement and the oppo dump of him being an elector for the communist party.

    Yeah, Liz went after Bloomberg but who does that help? Biden? She sure didn't help herself with 70% of the party that want someone anyone to stand up to bully Sanders.

    I agree Pete is probably the winner of that debate but does it make a difference?


    Pete (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:46:48 AM EST
    Probably not.  I expect the "winner" will be as impactful as the "loser" whoever you think fits either description.

    I think Bloomberg does care.  It will be very interesting to see what happens next time.  Speculation would be guys like him do not take direction from advisors well.  Seeing the results of not taking their advise might get the message through.
    Just speculation.
    But the certainly not as important to him as others.



    CNN posited (none / 0) (#51)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 10:05:19 AM EST
    the biggest concern of Bloomberg's prep team was not having him blow up and as a result told him to tone down everything.

    There have been claims that Bloomberg does have a temper and that was their biggest worry.  This may just be a smoke screen.

    But the bigger problem for Bloomberg is he seems to be the invisible man in real time.  Sure he has tons of slick ads but he never seems to be available for live interviews or for questions after his events.

    Like he posted earlier Clinton outspent Trump three to one; but Trump still got more air time by showing up on every show on every channel every chance he got.  If Trump gets a five minute interview while Bloomberg spends billions to air 30 second ads it is still advantage Trump.


    False equivalency (none / 0) (#52)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 01:08:53 PM EST
    Nobody is carrying the Nuremberg rallies much anymore. In 2016 Trump went on CNN and MSNBC. Do you think he's going to go on now? Trump has basically shrunk his audience to only some shows on Fox News basically Hannity. So he'll be preaching to the choir.

    Every time (none / 0) (#54)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 02:30:12 PM EST
    Trump walks to the Marine One there is a gaggle of press screaming questions at him and all the networks are there.

    Same goes for tons of other similar situations where Trump holds an impromptu presser with all the network cameras around.  Not to mention Trump most likely will call in to Morning Joe and maybe other shows.

    But you still miss the bigger point that Bloomberg ducks chances to get his face on TV while Trump almost forces the networks to carry him.

    After watching the last debate it is painfully clear why Bloomberg ducks press coverage; he simply is not good at it.  Trump is one of the better retail pols around while Bloomberg is just the opposite.


    orange jesus (none / 0) (#55)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 02:50:00 PM EST
    will NOT be calling Morning Joe. It is NOT 2016.

    Most of the time (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 03:28:07 PM EST
    he runs and won't answer questions. He doesn't do press conferences because his mental abilities have deteriorated apparently. Any time he does anything outside of Fox News he can't handle the questions. Outside of rallies and Fox News he's pretty much been hiding from the press for almost 2 years now.

    You've completely lost it if you think Trump is going to call into Morning Joe again. The most contact he's going to have with any news organization outside of Fox is to attack them on twitter.


    I get it that you are a Bloomberg fanboy (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:07:02 PM EST
    but you seem to need a reality check about how big a disaster last night was.

    As has been widely noted Bloomberg is simply not available for questions; period full stop.  Warren beat Bloomberg like a rented mule and he simply evaded any of her questions.

    As I posted below tons of legit dem media sources bashed Bloomberg for his performance, his failure to be available for pressers after the debate, and for his ham handed attempt to edit debate footage to slant things his way.

    There is gonna be a lot more bashing Bloomberg till he comes out from behind the curtain and faces the press.  My bet is the bashing will continue based on his lack of skills as a retail pol.


    Goodness (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:14:46 PM EST
    You seem very excited.  I guess I see why just noticing the librul media is Bashing Bloomberg.

    Fer gods sake.  Even if you don't read anything but WND I have personally been talking about the attacks on Bloomberg on liberal sites for months.

    I could find some of my comments but they should not be hard to find.

    Here's 10 days ago

    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.  

    So curbing your enthusiasm might be in order.

    Also that person is neither a boy or AFAIK a particular fan of Bloomberg.


    So what? (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:19:15 PM EST
    Like Howdy says those of us who have actually been watching the primary have been seeing the anti-Bloomberg hysteria for weeks. Mostly it has been coming from Bernie's campaign because Bloomberg has them crapping in their pants. I have yet to figure out why Bernie's campaign is having a meltdown over him but they are.

    Heck, not only (5.00 / 3) (#106)
    by Zorba on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:22:32 AM EST
    Does he not do press conferences, his Press Secretary doesn't do press conferences.

    One more thing (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:34:13 AM EST
    In that entire embarrassing thing not one word was uttered about the state of our Foreign Policy or the state of the DOJ or the pardon paluzza or hardly a word about the real problem


    I though that was stunning and mystifying  

    I guess I should be glad the whole thing was not about MFA.

    A couple of times (none / 0) (#50)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 09:57:43 AM EST
    Klobuchar hit Trump in passing; but foreign policy was absent.

    I wonder if (none / 0) (#53)
    by KeysDan on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 01:31:56 PM EST
    there was a tacit agreement for this debate to avoid the DoJ/pardon issue so as not to be entangle the Democratic candidates in the sentencing of Stone and become foils for a Trump tweet rage---reducing his executive time to "whataboutism",  McCabe, Comey, and from his greatest hits, crooked Hillary.

    Minority Report: Bloomberg Did OK (none / 0) (#46)
    by RickyJim on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 08:54:02 AM EST
    I only watched for half an hour or so during the second half. I thought he hit a home run when he asked the others if any of them had ever started a business and got silence (Too bad Yang was not there.)  The political incorrectness, which his opponents pointed out, can only help him coax 2016 Trump voters to switch to him.  

    Show your work (none / 0) (#49)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 09:56:38 AM EST
    Trump supporters vote for him in spite of his obvious uncalled for jibes; not because of them.

    No way anyone voted for Trump because he had a non disclosure agreement with Stormy; they voted for him in spite of it.

    What ever anyone thinks about Trump he has an agenda that attracts those who vote for him.  Things like appointing conservative judges, reducing regulations that entangle business, enforcing current immigration laws, and 2A rights to name a few.

    Every dem candidate has positions 180 degrees from Trumps and Bloomberg's are no different than any other candidate.  Truth be told every other dem candidate seemed to have a better stage presence than Bloomberg last night.  For what ever reason Bloomberg seemed like a Prozac guy compared to everyone else.  Aside from his money there is not a lot to think he is a better option; and to many folks his massive fortune is a con not a pro.


    The Overwhelming Majority of 2020 Trump Voters (none / 0) (#61)
    by RickyJim on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 04:17:22 PM EST
    cite the economy as the reason to vote for him.  Who would be better than somebody much richer than Trump to continue it?  I don't think that Bloomberg's stance on climate change and guns are going to lose him that many votes.  And the fact that during the impeachment trial 55% wanted Trump thrown out of office indicates to me that most of the country would consider Bloomberg the lesser of two evils. How many people do you know would sit out the election if Bloomberg were the nominee?

    I Found One! (none / 0) (#85)
    by RickyJim on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:46:21 PM EST

    I never heard of Ryan Cooper before.  I found it hard to believe that Trump is less likely to get us into a war than Bloomberg.  Bloomberg is clearly much smarter.  I am sure will find out more about his foreign policy platform soon.


    Back when I was in high school (none / 0) (#47)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 09:45:37 AM EST
    and on the debate team I lost a throwaway debate both my partner and I thought we won going away.  After the tourney we got the debate scoring sheets and the judge of the debate was the mother of one of the debaters on the other team.

    Point is that a lot of comments I see are along the lines of my guy did well and the other guys did not do well.

    My impression is the talking heads are defining winning as changing or not changing things.  For Sanders who is the presumed leader according to all the polls nothing changed; he is still the presumed leader.  Everyone paying attention already knew he is a socialists, or as he prefers a democratic socialist.  He has been saying it at his rallies for as long as I can remember.  He is not a member of the dem party and I don't think he has ever been.  I am sure there is plenty of video of Sanders confirming that so him saying it on the debate stage changes nothing.

    For Bloomberg the bloom is off the rose.  He got bashed about his non disclosure agreements and the other candidates made it clear we have not seen the last of this issue.  He was also bashed about his tax returns, another topic the candidates made clear we have not seen the last of.  I was watching a Bloomberg flack today on CNN getting grilled about 'stop and frisk'.  The talking head on CNN pointed out that while 'stop and frisk' did reduce crime in NYC the majority of the gains were in the last year of Bloomberg's term; at the start it was not all that effective.  The thing is the Bloomberg flack got blind sided by that and was clearly not prepped.  And the same is true for Bloomberg in the debate; he simply was not prepped.  On the other hand CNN is offering the theory that Bloomberg was prepped to simply avoid conflict and not answer questions; on the theory that Bloomberg is prone to 'blowing up' and it was important for him to not 'blow up'.

    CNN also pointed that Bloomberg was invited to their Town Hall show and declined.  In 2016 Trump was on every channel all the time.  Clinton probably spent over three times what Trump did; but Trump got more air time by simply showing up every time he was given the chance.  No matter how much Bloomberg spends on ads it won't come close to matching the total air time Trump will likely get.

    Maybe the biggest take away I got from debating in high school was when the coach told me the person who wins is the person who makes the judge like them.  I was impressed by Klobuchar a couple of times.  Before the debate she said she was the only candidate who had a legit claim of being 5'4" tall; something both true and funny.  During the debate she was accused of having a plan you could put on a Post It note and replied she took that personally since Post It notes were invented in her home state; again effective use of humor and a clear sign she was able to think on her feet.

    Bloomberg seemed to have some canned points but again I am not sure they were all that effective.  Whatever one thinks about Trump no one accuses him of using canned talking points; in fact most folks think Trump's problem is he does not used canned points and instead goes off script; and sometimes goes off the deep end of the script.

    Bottom line for me is not a lot changed as a result of the debate.  The biggest take away is something I have posted before.  Bloomberg has not really been vetted to the extent of the other candidates and there are some blemishes on his record yet to be disclosed; something the other candidates, talking heads, and the pubs made clear they will talk about every chance they get.  Next take away was how poorly prepared Bloomberg seemed.  Maybe his prep was simply 'don't blow up' but if that is really a weakness for him it may be disqualifying in and of itself.

    Back when Obama was running there was something called the 'have a beer with him test'.  None of the candidates last night impressed me as someone I would like to have a beer with.  But I have to say if Bloomberg has an event close to me I will attend; just for the free beer.

    And now (none / 0) (#56)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 03:09:57 PM EST
    the spaghetti  hits the fan.

    More left wing sites than I can count dis Bloomberg.

    Maybe even worse is Bloomberg's ham handed attempt to grossly edit an ad to show him in a good light gets called out.

    This is not simply Sanders and Warren bashing Bloomberg; rather a wide spread uprising once it becomes clear the emperor has no clothes.

    We can only hope... (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 03:31:12 PM EST
    Democrats revolt and refuse to accept this bullsh:t candidacy...early signs are good.

    And I will not comment differently for 25 hundred a month. 10 grand a month, maybe lol.


    Bernie (none / 0) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:12:34 PM EST
    is propping him up. Bloomberg is going to be there as long as Bernie is in the primary. If Bernie ends his campaign it's the end of Bloomberg. Nobody else seems to have the guts to take on Bernie. So there we are.

    I don't think that is necessarily true (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:27:07 PM EST
    Also if you read this breaking NYTimes story they, intelligence agencies, are saying the Russians are already in the election.  They are in the primary process.

    So when Sanders said last night, that we both laughed at, that his online attack dogs might be Russians I expect it was because he knew this story was coming out and it turns out he is probably completely correct.

    If the Russians were going to prop up a candidate who else would it be.


    Well, that's true (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 05:42:32 PM EST
    Bernie would be the ideal candidate for the Russians. It also might be why he looks so defeated. I thought it was his health but it could be this. If evidence comes out that Bernie is being helped by the Russians yet again he is toast and you are correct that it would not matter about Bloomberg.

    As my numerous comments show, I am no fan (none / 0) (#76)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:17:54 PM EST
    of Bernie Sanders but there is no way I would say that he looks defeated. Far from it, in fact.
    As recently as a couple of weeks ago, I did not think he could win the nomination, now, I believe this is his to lose.

    I'm talking about (none / 0) (#78)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:22:45 PM EST
    his looks. He's losing weight and his face looks gaunt. This is a sign of heart failure which maybe he does or does not have. We are not going to know what is wrong with him since he refuses to release his medical records.

    If I did not know (none / 0) (#80)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:24:44 PM EST
    What a nice person you are I would accuse you of wishful thinking.😔

    It is (none / 0) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 06:23:24 PM EST
    He is nowhere close to done.

    Sorry to disappoint (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 04:38:25 PM EST
    They have all been doing it since the day he announced but until they last few weeks it was more like snickering.  Only recently panicked attacks.  As some smart guy once said

    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

    Muriel Bowser (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 04:42:56 PM EST
    Who is a campaign surrogate was just on MSNBC.  

    Expect a lot more like her.



    Donald I have seen your posts for quite a while (none / 0) (#103)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:55:17 AM EST
    I have no doubt you would vote D.

    The question is how many of the Bernie Bros will jump ship if it is not Bernie.  I also think some of Warren supporters would not fall in lockstep and vote for Bloomberg.


    You're (none / 0) (#111)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:52:00 AM EST
    apparently fine with murder and mayhem as long as it is not directed at you. Don't be too sure the bros won't be hunting out people like you. Remember one of them shot up the congressional baseball game.

    Murder & Mayhem... (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by kdog on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:59:59 AM EST
    Yeah I was just at a "Bernie Bro" training camp a couple weeks ago learning the latest torture techniques and political re-education camp protocols for the day we seize the government.  I requested an assignment at the public executions in Central Park working the cannabis concessions counter.  Gonna be a gas!                                                                                                                                                                          

    Funny (none / 0) (#116)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 10:12:54 AM EST
    you mention that as some of his supporters are advocating mass executions on twitter.

    Wouldn't know... (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by kdog on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 10:21:45 AM EST
    I'm in the blog regiment and report to a different commandant.  

    do you know if (none / 0) (#117)
    by leap on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 10:13:51 AM EST
    the "Bernie Bros" are not bots? Russian hackers? I suspect a lot of that stuff is planted to rile up--and keep riling up.

    Entirely (none / 0) (#118)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 10:18:46 AM EST
    possible but why is Bernie the only candidate with a Russian bot problem? Usually I check them out on bot sentinel and some are bots but far from all.

    We do not know he is (none / 0) (#120)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 10:22:28 AM EST
    Not at all.  We don't even know he has a bot problem.

    As far as what we KNOW


    That percentage (none / 0) (#149)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:45:11 PM EST
    May increase dramatically depending on how Bloomie received the nomination

    San Diego Union Tribune (none / 0) (#90)
    by KeysDan on Thu Feb 20, 2020 at 07:07:48 PM EST
    has endorsed Pete Buttieg.

    What is Bloombergs biggest weakness (none / 0) (#102)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:52:33 AM EST
    Lots of talking heads are pointing to his lack of access.  He seems to be ignoring any questions related to his negatives.

    When Warren bashed him about the non disclosure agreements his answers were just silly and his minions on TV are now taking the position that issue has been addressed.  Same thing with "stop and frisk"; he and his minions have taken the position that this issue is resolved.

    Last night both Biden and Warren were on the CNN Town Hall shows; at least getting their mugs on TV.  CNN made it clear Bloomberg was invited to do one and refused.  I have made this point before but it bears repeating; seeing both Warren and Biden each spend an hour bashing Bloomberg and explaining their positions while Bloomberg airs a few expensive ads during the show is advantage Warren and Sanders.  The time advantage is huge and there is no way Bloomberg can spend enough money to over come it.  All the other candidates except Bloomberg will get their mugs on TV and roll up the same time advantage.  

    Maybe more importantly Bloomberg's closing statement in the debate was very different than closing statements from the other candidates.  With the exception of Bloomberg the closing statements were a vision of what they wanted to achieve.  Bloomberg said I am a manager; not really selling an idea but selling himself.

    As we get closer to the convention there will be more coverage of the candidates.  I am not sure how long Bloomberg can dodge facing questions from the press but doubt it can go on forever.  Given the almost universal opinion he was disappointing in the debates he clearly needs to improve before he goes out in public.  The question is does Bloomberg have the ability to function as a retail pol.

    You seem rather focused (none / 0) (#104)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:56:54 AM EST
    On Bloomberg.

    It is not like he is not news (none / 0) (#105)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:22:27 AM EST
    Every talking head on TV seems focused on Bloomberg and how his debate performance did not live up to expectations.

    This thread is suppose to be about the debate and most would agree Bloomberg's being there was huge.


    I see (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:58:51 AM EST
    Funny, I thought it was because you are terrified he might pull it off.

    Silly me

    On the chances of him pulling it off or not, the last few days with the flagrant interference in the courts and work to muzzle any intel agency trying to report on or stop Russian meddling to help Trump win and on and on a thought occurred to me about Sanders.  It's helping me with the idea of getting solidly behind him (if necessary).

    We can be fairly certain if Trump loses he will bring court challenges to the results and refuse to leave.  I said before I would rather have Bloomberg and his army fighting that.  And I still would all things being equal.

    But here's the thing, if Sanders manages to win and Trump tries to keep him from taking office the lawyers will not be the tip of the spear

    A spear will be the tip of the spear  along with torches and pitchforks and Molotov Cocktails

    There would literally be blood in the streets of DC.

    And you know what, Mayberry there should be.   Maybe that is what it's going to take.  I said Sanders controlling an angry mob might not be a bad thing.  It's looking less bad by the day.

    And here's a note to Trump and the Republicans.  You might THINK the Russians are the Sanders attack dogs.  And I don't doubt some are.  But there are lots of other Sanders attack dogs who are not Russians.

    Trump might learn that.

    All that said, it's a political lifetime till Super Tuesday so for now I will hold off preparations for actual on the ground resistance.


    What I mean is (none / 0) (#122)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 11:11:34 AM EST
    People are pi$$ed.  And they should be IMO.

    It's why Trump won and it's why Sanders could win.  Sanders is everyone's inner angry old man screaming to get off their lawn.

    More than any time in my life, even the 60s, people are pi$$ed.

    I don't think people are interested in reaching across the aisle with anything but a mace.

    This is why Sanders could win.

    You know what they say, with big risks come big rewards.
    WTF I'm 67.  I can let the kids decide.

    If I really have to


    A worry for (none / 0) (#110)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:48:32 AM EST
    Michael  Bloomberg's  candidacy, for me, relates to presenting himself , and seeing himself, as a "manager".  Managers have people who work for them and good managers are critical to a successful business---which Bloomberg is among the  most successful.

    However, the presidency calls foremost for leadership, an ability to inspire and unite the nation toward achievement. And, the intended accomplishments are organized  on the basis of a shared vision.  Management abilities are necessary, but insufficient.

    While it appeared that Bloomberg was un-coached for the debate, reporting now indicates, curiously, that he was primed, including for likely questions.  I wonder if his lackluster performance owed, at least in part, to a seething umbrage to being subject to questioning.   The boss does not have to justify.

    Many voters were duped by Trump's facade of being great because he was a billionaire, and by the tired mantra that the country needs to be run like a business.  Trump is a manager---top down business experience, not even having to deal with a board of directors.  Although Trump has shown that the government is not a business, at least not one that can weather a $ trillion deficit added to $ trillions of debt. He has preferred to "manage" the country by authoritarianism and followers, entranced by tax cuts and understandings that he hates the same people they hate.


    Trump is a master showman (none / 0) (#126)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 01:09:29 PM EST
    Bloomberg is more like a nerd.  He has no stage presence and as I have posted many times before he is a failure as a retail pol.

    I have never seen a complete Trump rally, way too same old, same old to me.  But I have watched several clips of them all over TV.  What ever one thinks of the message Trump clearly enjoys being in front of a crowd; and he clearly connects with the crowd he is in front of.

    I will point out the same is true for Sanders, he loves being in front of an adoring crowd, and he derives energy from the crowd.  This is called being a retail pol.  Same was true for Bill Clinton (and obviously not true for Hillary Clinton) and Reagan.

    This is an innate skill in the people who have it.  It can be improved somewhat with practice and good coaching.  But as has been endlessly pointed out Bloomberg avoids questions after his pressers; something all the other candidates have been subject to and benefit from handling it numerous times.  What is amusing about this is none of the other candidates have to pay to answer questions after pressers or to do things like going on the CNN Town Halls; something Bloomberg seems to be paying a pretty penny for.

    The thing is Trump does delegate things and is something of a manager.  But he also has a message his voters like; appoint judges, reduce regulations, enforce immigration laws, to name a few.  Bloomberg's message is basically I have more money than any other candidate with the implication it is enough to beat Trump.

    We have never seen a candidate like Bloomberg in terms of spending money.  So far it has put him on the radar but he is still not the favorite.  Thing is the way the dems primaries work with proportional representation nobody is catching Sanders before the convention; but even Sanders will probably not have 50%.  I keep hearing after SC or Super Tuesday some of the candidates will be dropping out.  I am not convinced; some of the also rans will get enough delegates to stay in the race.


    Right about one thing (none / 0) (#143)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:11:16 PM EST
    You have "posted it many times"

    Do you agree or disagree (none / 0) (#144)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:18:42 PM EST
    that Bloomberg is a failure as a retail pol?

    A failure as a retail pol (none / 0) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:23:55 PM EST
    Well, I really think that it yet to be seen isn't it.  Since he has not yet been on a single ballot.  But as I just told Trevor it's really fun watching you guys squirm.

    Let's revisit in a month, hum?


    Agree in a month (none / 0) (#147)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:38:13 PM EST
    things will be a lot clearer.  But it may not take that long.  By most accounts Sanders will have a clear lead after NV and probably increase it after SC.  All the polls I am seeing have Sanders way ahead in CA.  Super Tuesday is probably when we will know how successful Bloomberg's efforts have been.

    O'Rourke, Warren, and Buttigieg have all been seen as the knight on a white horse who would jump to the top of the heap.  I don't see Bloomberg doing what they could not do.

    Bloomberg's debate performance was disappointing at best.  So far I have seen nothing to indicate he has done anything to improve.  While all the other candidates have had multiple pressers and faced questions from the press Bloomberg is still hiding behind the curtain.  Until he starts taking questions from the press on a regular basis I doubt my opinion will change.


    Bloomberg (none / 0) (#151)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:51:00 PM EST
    Has been a lousy politician. He entered the Republican primary for mayor because they handed him the nomination. And he barely beat Mark Green (another stellar candidate) in the mayors race.
    Then he had the power of incumbancy for his 2nd term, and then that pesky 3rd term
    ...he bought out everyone to change the laws to enable him to get a 3rd term. That is not a good look as well

    Socialism.. (none / 0) (#108)
    by NoSides on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:41:26 AM EST
    Every time somebody posts something about Sanders and mentions "socialism" - with the same kind of creepy-crawly feeling that people used to refer to "communism" in the roaring '50s - I think of the wonderful benefits of capitalism.

    The examples that spring to mind for me are two:

    The first is the remarkable phenomenon of people looking for masks to protect themselves from the virus - and finding that the price has been quadrupled.

    Another is more personal: A dear friend in need of medication for which the price is prohibitively expensive. She has found a way to get it - but for others it is a choice of just accepting death because some entrepreneur has raised the price into the stratosphere.

    So - no. Socialism doesn't scare me.
    And, I imagine, those getting Social Security checks and Medicare don't find it so scary either.

    That actually funny (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:46:49 AM EST
    Do you actually know any of these people?

    I imagine, those getting Social Security checks and Medicare don't find it so scary either.

    Cause here's a clue free of charge.
    Those are exactly the people who would have you thrown out of their house if you suggested SS or Medicare had any similarity with or relationship to Socialism.


    I know (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:57:26 AM EST
    those people too and yes, they would throw you out of their house if you attempted to call anything they like "socialism".

    This is where I think Bernie is idiotic. There's no such thing as "democratic socialism". You have socialism or not. In Europe they call themselves Social Democrats which mean democracy with a safety net. That's what Bernie is basically advocating but using the word "socialism" evokes breadlines and poverty.


    Bernie is not a socialist. (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 11:28:41 AM EST
    Certainly, not to a much greater extent than any Democrat subscribing to the FDR legacy that it's government's obligation to help Americans.

    Bernie has called himself a Democratic Socialist, which he has never clearly defined. Likely, because he wants to keep it undefined. Just wants to be different. A political position that has worked for him as a Congressman and Senator from the liberal state of Vermont for his entire political career. Probably, too, a Democratic Party protestant, wanting to be seen as setting himself apart from certain positions of the past.

    Bernie does not advocate taking central control of economic planning, production or other socialistic governmental tenets. My assessment is that he wants a different mix in our present economic blend of public and private, primarily through governmental regulation. A mix that will provide a better safety net and offer better economic equity.

    In many ways, our evolution has bypassed his revolution. For example, his "health care is right not a privilege" is no longer a novel idea. We are at the point of determining the most feasible manner to achieve that widely accepted goal---a Medicare model, a Veterans Affairs tact, Obamacare plus. Easy to compare and contrast with the Trump Party's plan of Medicare for None and social insecurity.

    In any event, I do not believe Bernie is as extreme as his opponents, and, really, as his supporters believe. For many of his young followers, Bernie's ideas are hot off the griddle. They are not. And, too, no matter which Democrat may be elected, a Medicare for All is not going to happen anytime soon.

    The problem with Bernie's candidacy, in my view, is that while "democratic socialist"  worked so long and so well for him so far, it may not work in a general presidential election. There is, in essence, differences with distinction among Democratic candidates, but a scary gulf will be seen in the general election. Russian sugar plums dance in right wingers heads, their apparent love for the former communist and KGB guy, Putin---whose oligarchy and kleptocracy they seem to adore.

     In reality, however, the argument, in reality,  for American voters is not between socialism and capitalism, but rather, between democracy and fascism.


    I agree with (none / 0) (#124)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 11:52:30 AM EST
    everything you said. Universal healthcare has been an issue the party has promoted for at least 30 years and you could say back to the days of Truman. A 30 year voting record is going to have a lot of bad votes to throw out there during a general election too.

    As a side point (none / 0) (#114)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 10:03:23 AM EST
    Those people are by far Trumos most favorable voting block.  They were not going to vote for any democrat.

    And yes, I realize the person typing this is one who will vote for any democrat so among other things I know how rare we are.


    ummmm, (5.00 / 2) (#115)
    by leap on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 10:10:43 AM EST
    I am one of those people who has SS and Medicare, and I love this kind of "socialism." I would not throw them out of my house, but explain how this stupid country needs more socialistic programs if we are going survive as a cohesive nation. You know, care for all of us, not just some of us.

    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 10:24:17 AM EST
    Me too

    We do not represent the 65+% political demo.

    Wouldn't you agree?


    Welp (none / 0) (#133)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 04:09:22 PM EST
    here we go again: Bernie Sanders was briefed on the Russians trying to help his campaign just now reported in the Washington Post.

    I (none / 0) (#134)
    by FlJoe on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 04:17:10 PM EST
    have suspected this but now it's official
    Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) was briefed by U.S. intelligence officials this week that Russia is interfering in the 2020 elections to help his presidential campaign, The Washington Post reported on Friday.
    No I am not blaming Bernie.

    The story (none / 0) (#135)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 04:38:09 PM EST
    gets worse. This happened a month ago and yet again Sanders said nothing, let the toxicity brew and whined about Bloomberg pointing it out. This is actually disqualifying and he should suspend his campaign.

    How are (none / 0) (#136)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 04:46:21 PM EST
    the Russians attempting to help Bernie?   Wonder if the same tactics as for Trump.  

    Political Wire (none / 0) (#137)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 04:47:40 PM EST
    "It is not clear what form that Russian assistance has taken."

    One of the transparency (none / 0) (#138)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 04:59:51 PM EST
    groups has sued him for fishy FEC filings on his campaign. It could be related to money.

    The (none / 0) (#139)
    by FlJoe on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 06:30:49 PM EST
    Mueller report concluded that the Russians also meddled on behalf of Sanders. I believe it was mostly done thru social media attacks on Clinton and
    general rabble rousing of the Bernistas.

    I wonder about the "Kamala is a cop" meme that popped up when she began to gain serious traction. That's exactly the type of ratfkng that the Russians would use.


    The Bern (none / 0) (#154)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:11:53 PM EST
    Has been officially pissed off
    May not play nice with the DNC this year like he did in 2016

    Bernie is Tweeting

    Bernie Sanders
     · 1h
    I've got news for the Republican establishment. I've got news for the Democratic establishment. They can't stop us.

    Dem candidates tell each other to drop out (none / 0) (#140)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 06:47:11 PM EST
    Blanks (none / 0) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:08:22 PM EST
    They (none / 0) (#152)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 07:52:51 PM EST
    Have little to no advertising time set sor Super Tuesday

    Did not (none / 0) (#141)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 06:50:30 PM EST
    see this coming.

    Clint Eastwood likes Bloomberg.

    A lot of Republicans support him (none / 0) (#168)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 09:45:42 AM EST
    They're trying to get Trump re-elected.

    That or.... (5.00 / 3) (#170)
    by kdog on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 09:50:49 AM EST
    would like to vote for a Republican who keeps his racism and sexism closer to the vest so they can feel a little less guilt and shame.

    Maybe some of them (none / 0) (#180)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 01:21:21 PM EST
    But not Eastwood, who's defended Trump's racism.  Or the Republican SC party, urging its members to vote for Bernie in their open primary.

    New Quinnipiac Poll In Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn. (none / 0) (#158)
    by RickyJim on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:48:26 PM EST
    According to 2/12-2/18 polling, Dems are beating Trump in Michigan and Pennsylvania but losing in Wisconsin. I wonder why Wisconsin is different.  I believe this is the first such poll.

    This is (none / 0) (#159)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 08:50:06 PM EST
    why a lot of people are against Bernie being nominated. If he can't carry WI and then loses VA he has nowhere to make it up.

    All the Dem's (none / 0) (#160)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:03:35 PM EST
    Are losing big to The Donald in Wisconsin,

    Not just The Bern.

    Pennsylvania  , you campaign on banning fracking , that will lose you at lot of votes


    Well, that's (none / 0) (#161)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:16:37 PM EST
    Bernie. So you're making the case that Bernie would lose PA too? LOL.

    Why not try letting (5.00 / 3) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 12:43:07 AM EST
    The stupid troll have the last word and stop feeding it?

    Yes, the Russians (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by KeysDan on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 10:06:03 AM EST
    no longer need the St. Petersburg troll factory model: Igor becomes Seth from Sioux Falls, Svetlana becomes Madysen -Anne from Appleton, and Olga becomes Gladys from Youngstown.  They have the deplorables and their czar, Trump, to do the work--- just seed that fertile ground and observe the instant garden.  I do worry about all those poor unemployed Russians, though.

    Any (none / 0) (#162)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Feb 21, 2020 at 09:23:04 PM EST
    Candidate campaigning on banning fracking

    The Bern

    Whomever wants to ban fracking will lose PA.


    So strange (5.00 / 3) (#167)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 09:40:23 AM EST
    Looks like someone forgot to tell PA voters, since they actually support a ban on fracking 48% to 39%.



    I don't know... (none / 0) (#164)
    by kdog on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 07:51:44 AM EST
    about that. There might be more people in PA that care about their drinking water than those that work in the fracking industry.

    They havent had (none / 0) (#173)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 10:08:34 AM EST
    Issues with their drinking water,
    That Gasland fakeumentary was debunked.

    I have friends who have relatives in that region, they receive checks for the companies to access their land. That additional income is spent throughout the community, so it does benefit more than just those working in it.

    The biggest complaint people have is the large truck traffic that has increased


    I believe you are mistaken... (none / 0) (#176)
    by kdog on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 10:15:47 AM EST
    but I aint drinking that sh't to find out!

    I'll take redidents and local university scientists word for it over the fracking company and a corrupt EPA.


    NY Times (none / 0) (#177)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 10:25:34 AM EST
    PITTSBURGH -- Though they are both Democrats, John Fetterman, Pennsylvania's lieutenant governor, and Bill Peduto, this city's mayor, have their differences on the environment.

    Mr. Fetterman, who toppled an incumbent Democrat in 2018 from the left, nevertheless calls Pennsylvania "the Saudi Arabia of natural gas" and sees extracting and taxing gas as critical to the state's economy and the "union way of life." Mr. Peduto lobbied unsuccessfully against a local petrochemical plant and is steering his once-struggling steel town to be independent of fossil fuels within 15 years.

    But they agree on one thing: a pledge to ban all hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking, could jeopardize any presidential candidate's chances of winning this most critical of battleground states -- and thus the presidency itself. So as Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren woo young environmental voters with a national fracking ban, these two Democrats are uneasy.

    "In Pennsylvania, you're talking hundreds of thousands of related jobs that would be -- they would be unemployed overnight," said Mr. Fetterman, who endorsed Mr. Sanders in 2016 before Donald J. Trump won his state, pop. 12.8 million, by just over 44,000 votes. "Pennsylvania is a margin play," he added. "And an outright ban on fracking isn't a margin play.

    Bloomberg's money (none / 0) (#165)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 09:24:54 AM EST
    does not seem to be being spent very well.

    I really have to question his staff after seeing this.

    Been watching MSNBC (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 04:36:25 PM EST
    For about an hour.

    And it's been interesting.  It started with Carville ranting that the big news is Sanders is officially leading in this race.  And we are dead if he wins.  
    THEN there has been a parade of others, some liberal firebrands like a Joy Reid, agreeing.

    Talking about the effect of Sanders on down ticket races about he has had no real vetting by the media or opponents and on and on.  

    I watch a lot of this stuff and I have not seen this before.  It looks like there may be a change in the coverage.

    If so I thank the Old Gods and the New.
    There might still be hope.

    FTR (none / 0) (#182)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 05:12:08 PM EST
    This really is continuing unabated

    Al Sharpton just said "Carville is right"



    Not really news to me (none / 0) (#183)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 05:59:45 PM EST
    Carville has been spouting the same line for awhile; that the dems have gone crazy and if Sanders is the nominee it is the disaster.

    I have seen several other MSNBC and CNN talking heads with the same position.  I know this link is not everyone's favorite but it does illustrate this is not a new Sanders position.


    Not new from Carville (none / 0) (#184)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 06:08:38 PM EST
    Or the Daily Caller

    It is new for pretty much the entire MSNBC lineup.

    Trust me.  I watch more MSNBC than you do.


    The truth will set you free (none / 0) (#185)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 07:14:46 PM EST
    MSNBC was harshly criticized on Saturday for their coverage of the 2020 Nevada Caucuses.

    In one segment, James Carville blasted Nevada voters who backed Bernie Sanders.

    Anchor Nicolle Wallace said it sounds like "political suicide" and anchor Chris Matthews compared it to France falling to the Nazis in World War II.

    Here's some of what people were saying about the network's 2020 coverage:

    `I am disgusted and sickened': MSNBC blasted for the network's coverage of Nevada Caucuses

    The snow flakes are melting


    Interesting that hair on fire link (none / 0) (#186)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 07:25:35 PM EST
    Doesn't mention the party included Joy Reid, Al Sharpton, Jason Johnson and other black journalists.

    They find that inconvenient to discuss.


    My bad (none / 0) (#188)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 07:31:07 PM EST
    Not enough scrolling

    People criticizing this tweet must not watch @msnbc. Their "analysis" is non-stop anti-Bernie. Listen to Claire McCaskill, James Carville, Jason Johnson, Chris Matthews, Nicolle Wallace, Joy Reid et al.

    Ok I'm done.  But this is very interesting.  The clash was inevitable between internet left and the rest of the left.

    It appears to have arrived.  Not a moment to soon.


    Thank (none / 0) (#187)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 07:29:38 PM EST
    ye gods is right. Perhaps the oppo dump is going to happen big time.

    Pete dumped all over Sanders (none / 0) (#189)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 22, 2020 at 07:32:34 PM EST
    When he spoke.  Pretty sure he won't be the last.

    Yes (none / 0) (#190)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Feb 23, 2020 at 10:45:31 AM EST
    I hear people are talking about the billion dollar oppo dump that Trump would unload on Bernie.

    Trump (none / 0) (#192)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 25, 2020 at 02:05:50 PM EST
    spent about half a billion on the General in 2016; I doubt he will spend a billion on the General in 2020.

    Also think Trump is relying on issues; he will hammer court appointments, immigration enforcement, and the economy.  Not saying he does not dis opponents, just that he seems to hammer them on what I will call known things.

    Sanders has plenty of things like MFA and associated costs, easing immigration, and more govt intervention; all things Trump and his supporters are against.  I am also not so sure 2A issues will be that important.  A lot of places where gun control plays well are urban areas the dems will win anyway.


    Trump (none / 0) (#193)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 25, 2020 at 02:28:35 PM EST
    is not going to run on issues other than claiming the economy is great because his issues are unpopular. The GOP has tried running on issues like tax cuts and they lost.

    Trump wants your children to be shot in school because he is unwilling to do anything about guns.

    Sanders first week as "front runner" has been nothing short of a disaster. I think I would wait a few more weeks before

    There is a reason the GOP has been freaking out about women voters. Trump is toxic in the suburbs and the GOP cannot win without them. Judicial appointments only play to evangelicals. The rest of the country thinks his appointments are abysmal. His immigration stances like putting children in cages play to exactly who? He's been nothing short of a disaster when it comes to immigration. The only people that like his immigration policies are white supremacists.


    From various sites (none / 0) (#191)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 25, 2020 at 01:57:54 PM EST
    If Sanders is attacked for his comments about the Cuban educational system he can counter with his position is the same one Obama spouted on his trip to Cuba.

    Cuba has an extraordinary resource -- a system of education which values every boy and every girl.

    If Sanders is attacked for his supposed easy on gun control position he can easily counter with his grades from the NRA; the best he ever got was a D, but the huge majority were Fs.

    Bloomberg is currently at Disney World prepping for the debate after bailing out of a Town Hall.  He is betting a lot on no live fire experience.

    Thing is he supposedly had a similar prepping for the last debate and fell flat on his face.

    I am still shocked at the wall to wall ads on every channel Bloomberg is running.  Total so far is close to what Trump spend in 2016 on the general and may well come close to what Clinton spent on the race.  What ever happens I predict lots of books about the wisdom of spending like Bloomberg is spending.

    Nope (none / 0) (#194)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 25, 2020 at 02:34:31 PM EST
    they have tried that already with Obama
    and it is not working. He's already tried the gun control angle and it doesn't work for him because a D these days means working for the NRA just not as much as those with higher grades.

    I really don't think Bloomberg cares about how much money he is spending.

    Here's more oppo from Bloomberg: link

    So far Bernie has no answer and you're forgetting about him praising communist China last night in his town hall.