161–170 of 553 posts
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.
It's a rather disgusting story, actually.
Many here seem upset at the idea that Bloomberg is spending a lot of his own money to run for president. Running for president is very expensive. All other candidates are also spending a lot of money -- but they're spending a lot of _other people's money_, to whom they are now beholden. What do those other people expect to get in return for their financial support? Surely they don't just give away millions of hard ea…
It's worse because it's self-serving. It's unprecedented because he's outspent every candidate (I believe in the history of the US) and it's all his own money. He can buy anyone at this point...I'd rather have a politician pulled in several directions than one that just does whatever he pleases because he can buy influence and influencers
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.
He'll be on the debate stage tonight as a legitimized candidate -- having not participated in the competitive process at all, and without a single donor (doesn't need 'em), and levering his billions to flood media. It's a rather disgusting story, actually.
A populist President can be mitigated by Congress if they choose to act and also take back some of the executive powers they gave the President.
Congress doesn't give the President anything except money. Executive powers come from the Constitution, not Congress. To put it simply: the President does not serve at the pleasure of Congress.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/preside...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For what it is worth, I got text asking for donation to Bloomberg's campaign. So I would not expect Bloomberg not taking money from large donors.
Bloomberg doesn't need money. He solicits donations because the act of donating money causes the donator to feel personally invested in the campaign. They will be more likely to take steps to influence their friends and family to vote for Bloomberg, and more likely to actually bother to vote themselves, than someone who hasn't. This is the same reason governments sell war bonds -- they don't actually need the $100. I…
Many here seem upset at the idea that Bloomberg is spending a lot of his own money to run for president. Running for president is very expensive. All other candidates are also spending a lot of money -- but they're spending a lot of _other people's money_, to whom they are now beholden. What do those other people expect to get in return for their financial support? Surely they don't just give away millions of hard ea…
Surely this was said of the current occupant... never quite as clean as that, it would seem.
Many here seem upset at the idea that Bloomberg is spending a lot of his own money to run for president. Running for president is very expensive. All other candidates are also spending a lot of money -- but they're spending a lot of _other people's money_, to whom they are now beholden. What do those other people expect to get in return for their financial support? Surely they don't just give away millions of hard ea…
What a laughable statement. Of course he is, he's beholden to his own interests as a billionaire. Bloomberg is special interests personified. How is it possibly a good thing that any single person in our country can elect themselves via sheer wealth?
Also incredible that you phrase being beholden to many people's interests as a bad thing. Of course there is corruption by another name when candidates take money from Super PACs (Buttigieg/Biden), but isn't it a good thing that, for example, Sanders is now beholden to the interests of his over 2 million donors? Almost like he's beholden to the interest of his constituents, as an elected representative...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I believe people are not idiots and are capable of judging their own interest. He's buying up media and politicians. People can't decide from themselves when he's spending a billion dollars to shape the narrative. If Bloomberg gets elected the US is done. It's not longer anything resembling democracy and the only thing that will save us from the new order will be revolution.
> If Bloomberg gets elected the US is done. It's not longer anything resembling democracy and the only thing that will save us from the new order will be revolution. So being extremely wealthy and successful now disqualifies you from being a good President? Unlike our current super wealthy President, Bloomberg has more experience in government (mayor of NYC) and has a more successful track record in business. Money s…
Many here seem upset at the idea that Bloomberg is spending a lot of his own money to run for president. Running for president is very expensive. All other candidates are also spending a lot of money -- but they're spending a lot of _other people's money_, to whom they are now beholden. What do those other people expect to get in return for their financial support? Surely they don't just give away millions of hard ea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many here seem upset at the idea that Bloomberg is spending a lot of his own money to run for president. No - it's not that he's spending his own money. But rather, how he's spending it. And they're not "upset". They're calmly pointing out the obvious: that this kind of attempted influence buying is profoundly dystopian and antidemocratic.
All of the other candidates are also doing that; there's nothing special about how Bloomberg is spending his money. The others are doing the same, but with other people's money -- people who will now expect to wield influence behind the scenes. Is that not worse?
If we allow the extremely wealthy to have an extreme advantage in campaigns, we'll end up with a government that only serves their interests. Why would we expect anything else?
The solution to this is public funding of elections that puts all candidates on an equal playing field, or at least overturning Citizens United and only allowing direct donations under the maximum including from yourself.