Robert Reich’s View On Bloomberg

Yesterday, I shared Jeff’s post about the possibility of Michael Bloomberg becoming the democratic nominee for the office of president.  While he is not my first choice, I do accept that if he manages to buy the nomination, I will certainly do everything in my power to help him beat the megalomaniacal incumbent.  Robert Reich, whose views I greatly respect and whose work I have shared here before, rings in on Michael Bloomberg as a candidate, and I think there is value in hearing a variety of opinions, so I am sharing his latest.  It’s a bit longer than my usual, but well worth the time.

Michael Bloomberg is trying to buy the presidency – that should set off alarms
Robert Reich

Robert ReichWe haven’t seen his name on any of the ballots in the first four states, but that’s about to change. I’m talking, of course, about multibillionaire presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg.

Bloomberg has a chance of winning the presidency because his net worth is more than $60bn.

The yearly return on $60bn is at least $2bn – which is what Bloomberg says he’ll pour into buying the highest office in the land. It’s hardly a sacrifice for him, but it’s a huge sacrifice for American democracy.

Encouraged by the murky outcome from the Iowa caucuses and the notable lack of enthusiasm for Joe Biden, Bloomberg has decided to double his spending on TV commercials in every market where he is currently advertising, and expand his campaign field staff to more than 2,000.

He’s not competing in the first four states with caucuses and primaries but focusing instead on 3 March. So-called Super Tuesday will be more super than ever because it now includes California, Texas, Virginia, Minnesota, North Carolina and Massachusetts – a third of all delegates to the Democratic convention.

“It’s much more efficient to go to the big states, to go to the swing states,” Bloomberg told the New York Times. “The others chose to compete in the first four. And nobody makes them do it, they wanted to do it. I think part of it is because the conventional wisdom is, ‘Oh you can’t possibly win without them.’”

Later, he added: “Those are old rules.”

Yes, and the new rules are also to spend billions of your own money, if you have it.

In January alone Bloomberg spent more than $300m on advertising for his campaign. That’s more than Hillary Clinton spent on advertising during her entire presidential run in 2016. It’s multiples of what all other Democratic candidates have spent, leaving even Tom Steyer, another billionaire, in the dust.

The heart of Bloomberg’s campaign message is that he has enough money to blow Trump out of the water. As if to demonstrate this, Bloomberg bought a $10m Super Bowl ad that slammed Trump in the middle of the big game, then bashed Trump again in a national ad just hours before the State of the Union address.

“The Real State of the Union? A nation divided by an angry, out of control president,” a narrator says. “A White House besotted by lies, chaos and corruption.”

If Trump’s tweets are any barometer, Bloomberg’s tactics are getting under the thin-skinned president’s fragile epidermis. According to one Trump adviser, the president “thinks that money goes a long way” and those who believe Bloomberg has no hope are “underestimating him”. Another says Trump “takes money seriously. He’s a businessman.”

The Democratic National Committee is ready to boost Bloomberg into the top tier. Last Friday it abandoned one of its criteria for getting on to the coveted debate stage – the individual-donor threshold, which was used for the first eight debates including this week’s event in New Hampshire – presumably because Bloomberg doesn’t take donations.

To participate in the 19 February debate in Las Vegas, candidates will need to show at least 10% support in four polls released from 15 January to 18 February. Three candidates have met that threshold: Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Bloomberg’s wall-to-wall advertising is giving him a good shot.

Last Monday he tied with Warren for third place in a Morning Consult tracking poll. He’s in the top four in many Super Tuesday states. In Texas and North Carolina, he has overtaken Pete Buttigieg for fourth. He has the third-highest polling average in Florida, ahead of Warren, and fourth-highest in Michigan, Ohio, Georgia, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, whose primaries all fall after Super Tuesday. In the past week, polls have Bloomberg tied for second in New York and trailing only Biden in Missouri. He was also fourth in a Suffolk University poll of Utah, at 13%.

Amazing what money will buy, if there’s enough of it.

Bloomberg has some attractive public policy ideas: he’s for gun control, he wants to reverse climate change and he’s unveiled a plan to raise an estimated $5tn of new tax revenue from high earners and corporations, including a repeal of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and a new 5% “surcharge” on incomes above $5m a year.

But he’s also a champion of Wall Street. He fought against the milquetoast reforms following the near-meltdown of 2008. His personal fortune is every bit as opaque as Trump’s. Through his dozen years as mayor of New York he refused to disclose his federal taxes. Even as a candidate for president, he still hasn’t given a date for their release. And, let’s not forget, he’s trying to buy the presidency.

America has had some talented and capable presidents who were enormously wealthy – Franklin D Roosevelt, Teddy Roosevelt, John F Kennedy, for example. The problem lies at the nexus of wealth and power, where those with great wealth use it to gain great power. This is how oligarchy destroys democracy.

The word “oligarchy” comes from the Greek word oligarkhes, meaning “few to rule or command”. It refers to a government of and by a few exceedingly rich people or families who control the major institutions of society. Oligarchs may try to hide their power behind those institutions, or excuse their power through philanthropy and “corporate social responsibility”. But no one should be fooled. An oligarchy is not a democracy.

Even a system that calls itself a democracy can become an oligarchy if power becomes concentrated in the hands of a corporate and financial elite. Their power and wealth increase over time as they make laws that favor themselves, manipulate financial markets to their advantage, and create or exploit economic monopolies that put even more wealth into their pockets.

Since 1980, the share of America’s wealth owned by the richest 400 Americans has quadrupled while the share owned by the entire bottom half of America has declined. The richest 130,000 families in America now own nearly as much as the bottom 90% – 117 million families – combined. The three richest Americans own as much as the entire bottom half of the population. According to Forbes, Michael Bloomberg is the eighth richest.

All this has been accompanied by a dramatic increase in the political power of the super-wealthy and an equally dramatic decline in the political influence of everyone else. Unlike income or wealth, power is a zero-sum game. The more of it at the top, the less of it anywhere else.

In the election cycle of 2016, the richest one-hundredth of 1% of Americans – 24,949 extraordinarily wealthy people – accounted for a record 40% of all campaign contributions. By contrast, in 1980 the top 0.01% accounted for only 15% of all contributions.

Make no mistake: the frustrations and insecurities that fueled Trump’s rise – and are still the basis of his support – have their origin in this power shift, which has left most Americans with a small slice of the nation’s prosperity and almost no voice in its politics.

A half-century ago, when America had a large and growing middle class, those on the left wanted stronger social safety nets and more public investment in schools, roads and research. Those on the right sought greater reliance on the free market.

But as power and wealth have moved to the top, everyone else – whether on the old right or the old left – has become disempowered and less secure. Today the great divide is not between left and right. It’s between democracy and oligarchy.

Bloomberg is indubitably part of that oligarchy. That should not automatically disqualify him but it should set off alarms. If the only way we can get rid of the sociopathic tyrant named Trump is with an oligarch named Bloomberg, we will have to choose the oligarch. Yet I hope it doesn’t come to that. Oligarchy is better than tyranny. But neither is as good as democracy.

54 thoughts on “Robert Reich’s View On Bloomberg

  1. I’ve shared my thoughts on Bloomberg before – I’m a fan of his. My two biggest concerns are gun control and the environment, and his policies line up with my beliefs. I don’t get the resentment against him simply because he is a billionaire. That seems to be just another form of discrimination. He was not handed his wealth; he earned it through hard work, being a citizen of the U.S. where such opportunities exist, and yes, luck. I don’t know why being a successful business person should exclude someone from running for office. Should we do the same to anyone who has become successful? No Academy Award winners can be President; no Hall of Famer athletes can run for President? Where do you draw the line on who and who cannot run for President?

    Is Bloomberg perfect? Of course not. Was his policy on stop and frisk a bad one? Yes. But he has apologized for it. Have we ever heard Trump apologize? The difference right there says a lot about the two men. Anyone in a position where they have to make a tough decision can be sure that those decisions will be questioned and used against them if the decision turns out to be a bad one. All leaders face the same scrutiny.

    I’ve also mentioned a possible running mate for Bloomberg – Cory Booker. It’s not because Cory is African American and would help with the African American vote. Cory was my favorite candidate before he bowed out. I think it could be a powerful ticket; I’d love to see him on a debate stage with VP Pence.

    If you want to get a sense of Bloomberg, here is a link to an old post of mine from May 2017 that includes Bloomberg’s commencement speech at my University. It may give you a perspective on him that you have not seen before. (if you want to watch it, be sure to set aside 25 minutes…)

    I will gladly support whoever the Democratic nominee turns out to be. The bottom line is finding the candidate that will defeat Trump. I just happen to think Bloomberg is one of the stronger options for doing so.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I do like Bloomberg’s views on the environment and on gun regulation, plus as I have told others, he has two qualifications that Trump certainly doesn’t: intelligence and sanity. He’s still not my first choice, but there is no doubt that if he is the nominee, I will vote for him. But, let me ask you about something that only occurred to me last night … do you think he can find a way to get the African American vote? Sure, he’s apologized, but some things stick in a person’s mind, and we both know the republicans are going to keep this issue hot, keep it in the forefront of everyone’s minds.

      Liked by 2 people

      • The opposition is right to hammer him over his racist comments as the democrats would do the same to the republicans for saying something racial which they would also have a right to do.

        If the republicans apologized for saying something racial, the democrats would say it didn’t really mean anything, once a racist, always a racist, the notion of contrition doesn’t apply to the opposition party but bloomberg should get a pass, after all, he was contrite for whatever view he held, people can change, just not those evil republicans. Isn’t that how it is?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Sigh. No, Scott … I wasn’t trying to argue … it was a serious question. I’m not asking what republicans vs democrats will do, for we already know that. Yes, the republicans will keep it hot, and probably if the tables were reversed the democrats would do the same. Now, with that out of the way … do you think he can win the nomination given his past racist policies? And … just in response to what you said about people changing … I don’t think they really do very much. People who believe black people are somehow inferior, rarely lose that belief. Bloomberg was 60 years old when he first became Mayor of NYC … I seriously doubt he has actually changed … perhaps learned to keep his mouth shut, but not changed how he feels.


      • I don’t see Trump having any advantage over Bloomberg in terms of the African-American vote – it may be that they stay away from the polls this November, which I guess is worse for Bloomberg. That’s why the choice of a running mate will be critical.

        Liked by 1 person

    • I will set aside some time this weekend to listen to his speech Jim. My overall thought on billionaires running is basically the idea that it gives someone like Bloomberg an unfair advantage over other traditional candidates. He immediately gets a bump by carpet-bombing the airwaves all over the country, Now, he WILL have to be held to account by his competitors on the stage at some point. I think he’ll be debating this Wednesday. So, we’ll see if he is able to translate his bump in the polls to something more sustaining. Ultimately the people will decide his fate. My point, though, is that we need to have a better, more fair way to finance our elections. I’m for public financing of some kind. That way, a guy like Bloomberg, or whoever, would have to play by the same rules as someone with less of a financial advantage. It’s really about fairness, for me. But, he’s playing by the rules as they now exist. That’s certainly not his fault. Like I said, the people will decide. BTW, I’d be perfectly fine with him and Booker. I think that would make for a pretty strong ticket. Not my first choice….but I will vote for the Mayor if he’s the guy.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. As usual, there’s not much to disagree with Robert Reich. He’s spot-on most of the time. His concerns are real and genuine. We are an oligarchy, for the most part. And Bloomberg would only exacerbate that fact. But, like you and I have discussed Jill, if we have to we’ll vote for him. In other words, it’s like, ‘my flawed billionaire is better than your flawed fake billionaire.’ I do hope we don’t come to it though. I do not want to HAVE to vote for him. Sigh…at times like these, I often wish for a viable third-party. We’ve discussed that Jill and it’s not going to happen anytime soon. But IF there was a progressive party that could actually win the White House, I’d gladly go in that direction if it were Bloomberg v Trump. Oh well. Not in my lifetime, unfortunately.

    Liked by 2 people

    • You’re so right. I have lately referred to the U.S. as an oligarchical plutocracy, and I don’t think I’m far off base. It damn sure isn’t a democratic republic anymore, is it? Yes, I will vote for whomever the democrats decide on (please let it not be Tulsi Gabbard, for I’d really have a problem there), but … I find it so sad that this is what it’s come to … we won’t be voting FOR our choice, but rather AGAINST the other guy. Platforms don’t matter much this time ’round, it seems, but rather the only thing that counts is party. Sigh. Welcome to the Brave New World, eh? Personally, like you, I would welcome a third, more moderate party, and I think many on both sides would, but as we’ve discussed, it ain’t gonna happen just yet. Perhaps someday … but not in our lifetimes.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I’m curious why you don’t like tulsy gabbert? She’s the only democrat talking about ending these silly wasteful regime change wars and that’s a huge deal. It’ll save the country trillions as well as thousands of lives.

        I’m disappointed that no one else, either democrat or republican are talking about this issue but maybe it’s because the lot of them love these endless wars which prop up the military industrial complex.


      • True Jill. I do worry about a third-party run by someone that might help put you know who back in office. God, how awful would that be? Wouldn’t put it past Tulsi to do something like that. I still do NOT understand her. I’ve stopped trying!

        Liked by 1 person

        • There will always be some, but so far I haven’t seen any that worry me this year, like Jill Stein in 2016. I hadn’t thought of Tulsi making a bid as an Independent. I do wish she’d drop out of the democratic race, though. I still think she’s a mole, but … who knows. I just know I’m thankful that there isn’t a snowball’s chance of her gaining the nomination. Thankfully.

          Liked by 1 person

  3. Jill, thanks for posting this. It is more than money, although that cannot be overlooked or overstated. He has led efforts by about 1,000 cities to battle climate change and co-authored a book with Sierra Club director called “Climate of Hope.” He has taken on the gun industry to address better gun governance. And, he did run a large city. So, he does have something to offer

    Yet, I fully understand the concerns and what if someone like Trump tried to buy the presidency. Trump likes using other people’s money to spend his own. Yet, what if he did?

    Will I vote for Bloomberg over Trump. In a New York minute. Yet, I do think we need to shorten this process and get the money out of politics. Keith

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yeah, I see some good in his platform, and as I told a few people, he has two things Trump doesn’t: intelligence and sanity. My biggest fear, now that I think about it, is whether he can draw the votes of the African American community. If not, he’s doomed. He is going to have to find some way to detoxify ‘stop-and-frisk’, which is going to be played up by the GOP propaganda machine this year, for sure.


  4. one earth and rawgod, you guys make great points. Having enough money to buy the presidency is just as bad as having a foreign agent influence an election in my opinion. now if a republican was going to spend billions to buy the presidency, there would be complaints about it every single day. The last sentence in the article is the most important one I’d say. Beating trump just to beat him isn’t going to work out at all, just wait and see.
    Oh, and if bloomberg gets in, I predict he’ll be worse than trump.

    Liked by 2 people

      • well as a rich billionaire, I think he’ll pretty much ignore the middle of the country. He doesn’t take public donations, but I’m sure big companies have contributed to his campaign and this would all be presented in his tax returns which he has refused to make available. This in itself is reason enough for me to be suspicious of whatever economic policies he’ll put in place.

        He’ll be beholden to his secret donors, whoever they are

        but he’ll make promises of economic prosperity for the middle class and poor to get elected but in recent times, politicians have given us more than an adequate amount of reasons not to trust a single word that comes out of the two sides of their hypocritical faces.

        Like Trump, he’ll benefit the wealthy, after all, he too is a new York billionaire and though the personalities are drastically different, the billionaires all have one thing in common, protecting themselves and their fortunes. He’ll find a way to get him and his buddies out of the tax increases he’ll bestow on the rest of us.

        I don’t see one as less evil than the other, both trump and bloomberg are just different types of very bad. It’s like having the option of being killed by a meat grinder or an industrial paper shredder.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Well, I agree that I have concerns about his unwillingness to release his tax returns, and as you know, I am no fan of the wealthy. He is certainly not my first choice for those reasons. That said, part of his platform is to impose additional taxes on the rich, largely through capital gains taxes, I believe. He has a concern for the environment. He has promised sensible gun control. And, he has two qualifications that, I believe, put him miles above Trump: sanity and intelligence. Again, he’s not my first choice, but I will vote for him if he is the democrat’s nominee, for I honestly believe Trump poses a grave danger not only to this nation and its people, but to the world.


  5. I personally neither like nor trust Bloomberg but if he;s what it takes to remove Trump……….so be it. I’m sure all his adverts will help Middle America come to understand what he offers, and to be fair it is great, but I don’t know whether his policies on the wealthy will last or how quickly his gun bill will fold, He’s too much the unknown quantity except for his well known bigotry and I can’t take that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Hello David, Mike Bloomberg is like the Emmanuel Macron of France. Macron is an agent of the state, a state actor who claims centrist values for the ppl, while beholden to his elite establishment controllers. You can see the effects of his centrist policies on the middle class and poor of France – over a year of constant protests and riots from the Yellow Vest Movement – a political movement for economic justice that began in France in October 2018. After an online petition posted in May had attracted nearly a million signatures, mass demonstrations began on 17 November. The movement was initially motivated by rising fuel prices and a high cost of living; it claims that a disproportionate burden of the government’s tax reforms were falling on the working and middle classes especially in rural and peri-urban areas.

      Under Bloomberg this will be especially pronounced, he is lying thru is teeth promising the moon to the ppl. LMAO, “he’s unveiled a plan to raise an estimated $5tn of new tax revenue from high earners and corporations, including a repeal of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and a new 5% “surcharge” on incomes above $5m a year”, sounds great on the campaign trail, but will never happen in a million years.
      Under Trump it won’t be any better, but it’s the Devil you know. He can’t squeeze the middle class and poor too hard otherwise he’ll start losing his base. His ego is massive enough to proclaim savior of the working class, so he’ll need to secure his legacy in history as “best President of all time” at least in his own mind.
      Economically at least, Trump is better. Under Bloomberg foreign relations will improve, and so will trade, but jobs will continue to be exported overseas for cheaper wages, Mike B: a true neo-liberal thru ‘n thru.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I totally agree. Regardless of what the trump haters say, the economy isn’t that bad. Go ask the average small business owner for instance on whether they feel like they’ve benefited from the tax cuts. If you don’t exclusively rely on what’s online but go out and talk to actual people, you might find a different story than that which is spun every single day by the elitists in the media. After all, any media who say anything positive about the man are all right wingers.

        Yes Trump lies about a lot of stuff, no the economy isn’t all there is but I still think bloomberg is just as corrupt, it’s just a different type but corruption is bad, even if it’s by a guy who you all want to win just so you don’t have to have a reality television star in the oval office.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Bloomberg is just as corrupt if not more IMHO. As a Democratic Corporate Elite uber rich insider, he can hide his corruption so much better. Notice Bloomberg also refuse to disclose his taxes, and never has during his tenure as major of NYC. Kennedy, Clinton, Bush dynasties have a ton of skeletons in the closet, for the Clintons… literally!
          I hate to admit it, but Trump is good for business, his tariffs on China does work, more jobs are retained instead of exported to third world countries due to massive tax breaks for corporations. How long this will last who knows? You can’t keep giving tax breaks to the rich without bankrupting the country. Short term it’s definitely a win for him and he’ll play the economy card all the up to his re-election.

          Liked by 1 person

          • isn’t it funny how democrats aren’t complaining about bloomberg not releasing his tax info but they’ll scream to the moon about it when trump doesn’t do the same thing.

            This is what drives me totally crazy about the progressives, they have one standard for their candidates and another for their opponents. The right doesn’t get a pass on this either and they drive me just as batty.

            Liked by 2 people

            • It helps that these rich bastards own the liberal media. Do as i say, not as i do! That’s the nature of becoming a “leader” in the US, you have to become a hard nose hypocrite and a good liar!


            • I’m not a democrat, but an independent, and Yes, I AM complaining about him not releasing his tax records, just as I am complaining about king donald not releasing his. I wonder why it is that I spend more time defending my own position, one that only wants fairness, honesty, integrity and equality … than Trump spends defending his which includes corruption, dishonesty, and cruelty? I’m close to losing my cool at being labeled with hate …


          • The ‘Trump’ economy is built on a house of cards and at some point, this whole thing will come tumbling down. Trump has pressured the Fed Chairman to keep interest rates low. Just where else are the rich supposed to go to make money? The Stock Market, of course. And, we’re in the 11th year of expansion, right? Longest in history. Question is not if, but when will a recession hit? The chickens will come home to roost at some point. Billions were wasted, by the way with the Trump tariffs. Did we not bailout farmers for about 30b? Much of it went to Big AG, instead of the small guy.
            That being said, many will vote for Trump if economy holds. But many will not, because he’s a clear and present danger to democracy. There’s no way Bloomberg is more corrupt. Trump’s life has been built on corruption, fraud, and just plain B.S. I’ll take my chances with him if I have to. I hope I won’t.

            Liked by 2 people

            • Well Jeff, I couldn’t refute any of the points uv brought up. What I can’t understand, how the hell is Trump controlling the courts and the Federal Reserve? These are distinct & separate institutions from other branches of gov’t, and shouldn’t be influenced by partisan politics. Trump is really that powerful? I just can’t believe it. As far as Bloomberg is concerned, we’ll see how it all unfolds in the upcoming months.
              If Bloomberg becomes the nominee, that would be quite worrisome going into the general. He has zero grassroots support. You really think the majority of Americans will give him the vote solely on empty promises from his non-stop ads? I would not underestimate our fellow countrymen, most will question that ploy.
              Damn, it’s like the Democrats want to lose. 😦


        • Sigh. Scott … I am a retired CPA. I do people’s taxes for a living. I do taxes for some small businesses, as well as a few construction companies. None of them have benefited form the 2017 tax cuts, and in fact some of the individuals I do taxes for paid more in taxes in 2018 than the years before. The economy is great … if you are a DeVos, a Bloomberg, Exxon, or Amazon. If you are John Doe, though, you are still making a minimum wage of $7.25 an hour just as you were 10 years ago, and you are still juggling to make ends meet.


    • I hope he isn’t the nominee, but if he is, I think it boils down to the lesser of two evils. Bloomberg at least cares about the environment, and somehow I don’t see him locking immigrant children in cages and throwing away the key. He has two qualifications that Trump doesn’t have: intelligence and sanity. I genuinely fear that if Trump is re-elected, this nation will be turned into an autocracy … we’re damn close as it is. Sigh. My best hope if Bloomberg is elected is that Congress will provide a great deal more oversight than they have over Trump, that Bloomberg will not be the bully that whips them all into line behind him.

      Liked by 3 people

      • You wrote: He has two qualifications that Trump doesn’t have: intelligence and sanity. And in my book, those are two VERY good reasons to vote for him! Put them alongside his support for climate change and gun control and he’s looking better all the time.

        No, he’s not perfect and he has some skeletons in his closet, but if his name is on the ballot, I won’t be at all hesitant in putting a very large “X” beside it.

        Liked by 2 people

  6. Great post, Jill! Interesting comparison and I’m afraid…. true! If it’s going to take money …. so be it! We’ve got to remove trump from office and hopefully send him to prison. Desperate times…. call for desperate measures! I too, fear the collapse of our democracy! 😢

    Liked by 3 people

    • Thanks Patty!!! I agree … much as I don’t want another uber-wealthy white male in the Oval Office, we simply must evict Trump, for otherwise I fear greatly for the future of this nation. And, at least Bloomberg is intelligent, seems to have some values, and isn’t insane … a definite improvement over the current occupant! ❤

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Why do people vote for the candidates who spend the most? Canadians are just as bad, several elections turning on expensive ads in the past 50 years. I don’t get it. But then, I don’t believe what ads tell me. They are self-serving even in their simplest forms.
    I am not saying Bloomberg is not a good candidate, I have no idea and no interest tofind out at this point in pre-election shenanigans. But it seems he is putting his own money where hismouth is, while Trump is using Other People’s Money, and probably spending it into his own companies.
    Meanwhile, who is it who makes up the electoral college? How does one get to be a member? Are they known members of the public, or are they secret balloters? How does one trust them to use the vote you give them to elect the person you want as president? Are they members for life? How easy or hard would it be to buy their vote?
    Are they trustworthy?

    Liked by 3 people

    • In part, it’s name recognition. Those who spend the most have the most ads and are “in your face” the most, so when the average Joe who isn’t politically savvy goes to the polls and sees the name “Bloomberg”, he remembers all those ads where he promised xyz, and that’s who he votes for. Another part is that some people are enamoured of wealth, though for the life of me I cannot see why. You’ve heard the expression, “He who has the most toys, wins”? In the case of Bloomberg, he isn’t my first choice, for you know how I feel about rich people anyway, but … I believe if we don’t get the madman out of office this time, we’ll not have another chance, so if Bloomberg is the nominee, then yes, I will vote for him and hope Congress does a better job of holding him accountable than they have with Trump. The answers to your questions about the electoral college are long … perhaps I will do a post about it next week, though, okay? LuL

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Reblogged this on 1EarthUnited and commented:
    Kudos to Mr Reich, a most thorough presentation. I agree with Reich’s assessment of a Bloomberg presidency until the very end. Bloomberg has zero chance of winning against Trump, mainly b/c he has no grassroot support. Middle America will never fall for his city slicker shtick of saving America from Trump. Difference being, Trump and Sanders have real, substantial, cult-like grassroot support that would carry either one to victory. I’m hoping that would be Bernie, but clearly the DNC and Corporate Dems have other plans. We must somehow make our collective voices heard – the Presidency is not for sale!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s