Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army • Hacker News Board

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#331

Post by Ididntdothis » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:32 PM UTC

s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #317

Ididntdothis wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really believe that the billionaires are the virtuous ones and everybody else is lazy? My theory is that they have been able to focus the wealth the country generates on themselves instead of others. If all billionaires retired tomorrow I believe the country would keep working the same way and the economy would keep growing. Do you think e-commerce would be any smaller without Bezos? No way.

> Do you really believe that the billionaires are the virtuous ones and everybody else is lazy? I literally called them greedy in my argument, not virtuous. I don't believe they are all virtuous, some might be. Some are seeking their passions. All are greedy in some capacity. > If all billionaires retired tomorrow I believe the country would keep working the same way and the economy would keep growing. I don't unders…

What I am saying is that billionaires get rewarded disproportionately more than their actual contribution. They also get listened to way more than they deserve.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#332

Post by ColanR » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:34 PM UTC

brightstep wrote: post #316

takeda wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's really sad, Bloomberg essentially is Democratic version of Trump.

In some ways he's far more dangerous. He implemented a truly scary authoritarian police state during his term as mayor of New York City.

This is the allure of libertarianism - since a free democracy can't predict the quality of its leaders, representatives, and lobbyists, the government should be given as short a leash as possible to prevent things like a "truly scary authoritarian police state".

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#333

Post by 12xo » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:34 PM UTC

12xo wrote: post #306

I wonder if the entire race could be won by offering an incentive of sorts. Say a $50 Amazon gift card for every (new) voter who sends a pic of their vote receipt or something... Granted its a lot of money, but so is gifting billions to the media conglomerates for more (useless) ads...

I am not even thinking it should be clandestine. You could literally set up kiosks outside of voting areas and as people come out, and they show you their ballet stub, you give them a gift card.

The volume of young people,minorities and poor who would vote for a little cash is enough to push the ballot towards the Democrat. Its not prejudice, just a fact that there are more people who lean left than right, but most of them do not vote.If they did, the entire landscape of Washington would change and in states like Kentucky it would shift the entire balance of power.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#334

Post by eej71 » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:35 PM UTC

iron0013 wrote: post #311

eej71 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why dwell on an irrelevant number? It's not material to the presidential election. At all. There is no reason the mass media should even report it. It's not germane to the outcome. It only serves to confuse everyone. The rules for winning a presidential election are well known and well established. You have to win a majority of the electors spread over many states. This means composing a message that broadly resonate…

You said Clinton’s message “...just didn't click with a lot of people. Trump's did.” That’s a numerical comparison. Are you saying that X > X+3000000? It’s an incoherent claim, so find another argument.

Can we agree that the popular vote is irrelevant to the presidential election? And if so - why impute my words with that interpretation?

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#335

Post by dahfizz » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:35 PM UTC

mrguyorama wrote: post #307

dahfizz wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The far right is obviously very obsessed with "owning the libs". There is a massive, silent, and barely political segment of the population between far left and far right. For that silent majority, the only real impact they will have noticed from the Trump presidency is that they paid slightly less in tax. Most people genuinely don't care about politics. Everyone cares about their money. I think the tax cuts are more…

If they honestly cared about the tax cuts then they would have noticed how transparent they were and how after a couple years they wouldn't benefit the average American at all.

It is nearly impossible to overestimate the stupidity of the average person.

They don't know or care about tax policy, what deductions apply when, how rates are calculated, none of it. They will only notice that they paid less this year than normal, and that will make them happy.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#336

Post by cmcd » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:37 PM UTC

zelly wrote: post #322

tomjakubowski wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Secret ballots prevent that kind of attack. Everywhere I have voted in the US, at least, doesn't include ballot selections on the receipt.

I saw someone recording a video of themselves selecting the choices on the voting kiosk. No one is going to stop you from doing that, nor would it be practical to try.

Pretty sure that is illegal, wouldn't be a major complication to add a metal detector outside voting booths.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#337

Post by polly5 » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:37 PM UTC

jdkee wrote: post #216

Why is it healthy for American democracy to have an oligarch purchase the U.S. Presidency like a shiny, new yacht?

Cause after the oligarch looses then Zuckerberg, Kushner and other sundry mindlessly ambitious people might rethink their future plans to run. At least for a few years.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#338

Post by dorkinspace » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:39 PM UTC

oarabbus_ wrote: post #244

grumple wrote: post #75

So he's hiring a bunch of barely-over minimum wage workers to spread his message... and? What do you think the other politicians are doing with the millions they raise? This isn't a story.

What qualifies as a story for you? This is unprecedented in the history of US politics.

Is it unprecedented? HRC did the exact same thing.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#339

Post by zelias » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:39 PM UTC

omegaworks wrote: post #313

zelias wrote: post #301

I'd respect the hell out of Bloomberg if he came out and said "damn right I'm buying this election...because the rules are that messed up" followed by a comprehensive plan to forever get money out of our elections.

I respect the guy that's said that very thing since he started running. Bernie is proving that we can win without corporate PAC money and he has a plan to get dark money out of politics.

I'm with you there, no doubt, but lately I've wondered how effectively Bernie could accomplish this.

Only Nixon could go to China, as the saying goes.

EDIT: I don't mean this in terms of electability -- I think Bernie can beat Trump hands down. What I mean is accomplishing what he sets out to do in terms of policy implementation -- which, as the Obama years have shown us, is not as easy as it sounds.

Re: Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army

#340

Post by empath75 » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 9:40 PM UTC

12xo wrote: post #306

I wonder if the entire race could be won by offering an incentive of sorts. Say a $50 Amazon gift card for every (new) voter who sends a pic of their vote receipt or something... Granted its a lot of money, but so is gifting billions to the media conglomerates for more (useless) ads...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_money