Brokered Convention Or Bernie Sanders: Which Is Worse For The Democrats?

Despite all the talk about how Bloomberg and his money are going to come riding in on his white stallion to save the Democrats from their voters, they seem to be left with two equally unappealing choices. There is another debate next week, and if Mikey has the same type of showing he had in the last debate, all the slick Madison Avenue advertising and creatively edited tweets may not be able to rescue his campaign. He might be better prepares for the next debate in terms of oppo research, and he might even be able to respond to some of the challenges he had to know were coming in the first debate. But he comes off as a condescending, egotistical, self-important, elitist jerk. That’s going to be a lot harder to fix in a week. 

For better or worse, people pick their favorites based on some very superficial criteria. That’s why we have a political discourse in this country that is ninety percent about the negative qualities of the opposition candidate and precious little about the free and open exchange of ideas. Bloomberg is woefully unappealing in many of those areas that would be necessary to have a broad appeal in a party where the rank and file voters range from very liberal to socialist. The fact that he is a billionaire does not bother me, nor does the fact that he is self-funding his campaign. But when the rest of the Party pounds a constant drumbeat against the one percent, being a member of that group cannot help.

At the moment, there seem to be three choices here, each of which is sure to cause upheaval among Democrats. One is that Bloomberg somehow becomes a viable candidate and can buy the nomination after sitting out most of the campaign. How will all those volunteers and campaign staff workers, and supporters who have slogged through the last year and a half feel about this New York Huckster? There was an obvious distaste for him from the first time he opened his mouth the other night. Worse, the MSM, usually a strong propaganda arm of the DNC, excoriated his debate performance. Result: Democrats lose in November.

The second scenario: Bernie Sanders wins and gets the nomination on the first ballot at the Convention. There is a robust Socialist base in the Party, but convincing a populace that is center-right and center-left, for the most part, to vote for the type of garbage he is peddling is not going to happen. Result: Democrats Lose.

The third scenario: No one wins enough delegates to win the nomination, and they head into a brokered convention. Nothing worse could happen to the Democratic chances than this. Party elites and insiders would then pick the party nominee. Then all the campaigning, all the primaries and caucuses, all the debates would be meaningless. 
No one disputes that the Democrats need a large turnout to beat Donald Trump. A simple hatred of Trump will not be enough. If the democrats are going to get people out to the polls this election day, they will have to put forward someone who can convince voters to vote FOR them and not merely against Trump.

Bloomberg and Deadpan Alley

Who as it that thought Michael Bloomberg would be the antidote to the Bernie Sanders problem? Yes, he has virtually unlimited cash, and the DNC is practically broke, but he has the personality of a dead fish. The expression on his face said, “Nobody talks to me like that!” He was woefully unprepared, and he was reeling from attacks coming from people who do not work for him. 

A lot of his support is coming from his advertizing blitz, but almost all of his support comes from people who do not know him. Unfortunately for Mikey, the more you get to know him, the less you like him. He tried to land a punch on Bernie with a legitimate challenge to his status as the leading Socialist in the country and a millionaire with three houses. But he couldn’t follow it up. 

When asked about his taxes, he couldn’t resist reminding us how complicated and voluminous his tax returns would be, because he is so successful. It wasn’t what he said but the tone we perceive emanating from him when he says it. Then he goes and confirms that perception by his incredibly stupid and unnecessary statement, “I can’t just go to Turbotax.” What we hear then is, “I can’t just go to Turbotax like the rest of you, peasants.”  

Here’s some advice, Mikey. Beating billionaire hating Democrats over the head with your wealth is probably not a good idea. They are not impressed. Especially when Elizabeth Warren challenges you with statements attributed to you about women, and your response was to look like you just ate a lemon and washed it down with castor oil. Your response to a challenge to release numerous former employees from non-disclosure agreements was a weak and pathetic, “They were entered into consensually and will remain confidential.” Really? On the same day that a story broke about a family that feels their signing of that agreement was coerced? Do you want to reconsider that answer?

Here is one more piece of advice just because I’m in a generous mood. You might want to read some things that are not written by journalists who work for you. You know, like people who you can’t order to report only positive things about your campaign. But you see that’s the problem with being a narcissistic, self-aggrandizing, arrogant, elitist blowhard. You can’t hear opinions you can’t buy, and that’s a lousy way to prepare for a debate or a campaign. 

I will give you one thing, though. You are living proof, Mikey, that making money is no indicator of how much “grey matter” you have. Because next to the farmers, factory workers, blue-collar and whitecollar workers who continue to build this country every day, you, sir, are an imbecile. 

Diamond And Silk And An Unusual Sight These Days On The Streets Of San Francisco

He's On The Stage. Will Mikey Like It?

One of the first news stories I heard this morning was that little Mikey Bloomberg had met the modified criteria to be on the debate stage for the Nevada debate. For a while that even DNC scheming and changing the rules wouldn’t be enough to get him there, but Mikey managed to buy enough support through his non-stop ad blitz to cross the threshold. It will be interesting to see the questions that will be asked of him tonight. I’m sure the moderators have already received their instructions from the Central Committee and will be limited in what they will be able to bring up. But I hold on to a thin thread of hope that one moderator still has enough integrity and intestinal fortitude to ask real questions. Here are some I would like to see asked:

Mr. Bloomberg, everyone on this stage has been working very hard to get here. They’ve had to raise money hold rallies, answer questions at town halls, and news conferences. Many have even had town halls on Fox News Channel, of all places. All you’ve done so far is spend money. How does that qualify you to be on this stage?

Mr. Bloomberg, many of the candidates, have attacked President Trump as a racist because of certain statements he made. However, just in the past few days, we have been reminded of your racism in action and your defense of it. Not only your defense of stop and Frisk but your statements like how African American and Latino males “don’t know how to behave in the workplace,” among other things. You have apologized and said you have changed your mind. Why should we believe you?

Mr. Bloomberg, you have boasted in your commercials of how you have created so many jobs. But we are reminded of the numerous reports of your verbal abuse and harassment of women in your workplace. You have settled lawsuits in this regard. Given your obvious disdain for women in the workforce, why should any woman vote for you?

Mr. Bloomberg, in a now widely circulated video, you have made demeaning and ignorant remarks about farmers. Given how you expressed your utter contempt for some of the hardest working people in our country, why should anyone who has to get up and go to a job that you would classify as not needing much grey matter, vote for you?

That’s just a few of the questions I would like to see asked. But perhaps if none of the moderators have the guts to ask them, maybe one or more of the candidates on stage will. If they do, you can be sure of one thing. Mikey will most assuredly NOT like it. 

Some of My Retweets With Comments

Bloomberg needs an expert on narcissism like George Soros needs a buck for a cup of coffee.

Margaret Sanger should be required reading for anyone who considers abortion “empowering.”

You can spend two billion dollars on phony adds Mikey, but the people who know you are not fooled.

This is especially startling when you remember it is only Feb 16.

The Liberal Argument Part II

Health Insurance has never been more important to have than it is today. The days of going to your local GP for a few bucks are over. Growing up in the ’50s and early ’60s I do not remember my Mother ever paying more than ten to twenty bucks for any doctor visit. Health insurance was routinely paid for by employers as a benefit because it was relatively cheap. But times have certainly changed. 

Medical science has taken great strides in treating and curing diseases. Lives have been greatly enriched thanks to advances in the treatments of disabilities whether physical or mental. But these advances and their allocation have resulted in ever-increasing financial costs. We can cure more diseases, mend more broken bodies and minds, extend life expectancy into the eighth, ninth and even tenth decade. But the financial realities of paying for these miracles of science have placed those wonders beyond the reach of some who need them most. 

I don’t think anyone disagrees that we need to get more people insured but where we disagree is just how to achieve this goal. Putting it entirely into the hands of the government would be a mistake. The taxation necessary to fund such an endeavor would be ruinous to the economy. But that’s just a part of it. Relying on the government to run something as complicated as the health care needs of three hundred million people should give you pause. 

Consider the government’s history in programs it already runs. For that matter look at what it does with the vast amounts of money it already collects from US taxpayers. The budget deficit is now measured in trillions of dollars. If we stop adding to it today Our grandchildren’s great-grandchildren will still be paying for it. Government-funded healthcare as currently proposed has no workable self-funding system other than the rather silly tax the rich mantra. 

There is much that can be done within the current framework of health care to reduce costs, cover more people with insurance and assist those who cannot afford to purchase it on their own. I truly believe w can do this without blowing up the existing system and taking the lazy, unimaginative, and simplistic course of dumping in the government’s lap. It’s been done before in other countries and before we become too enamored of these systems we should be willing to assess the very real problems with these systems both fiscally and in the delivery and quality of the care provided.