Bloomberg Illustrates Electoral College Importance

1. 82

   GA Andersonposted 4 years ago

   I caught part of an interview clip with Michael Bloomberg's campaign manager. The discussion was about the rumor that Bloomberg was prepared to spend $2 Billion of his own money in his campaign
   
   His manager wouldn't confirm this and the discussion turned to why Bloomberg wasn't registered or campaigning in the 'early' states—Ohio and Iowa.
   
   His answer was that only six states were important, and then when on to name California, New York, Florida, etc.
   
   That was a "Wow!" moment for me. How else can that be taken other than that Bloomberg was planning on buying the popular vote by way of the most populated big states and to hell with the rest of America?
   
   I sure hope the Electoral College spanks him. But a second question arises. Will the Democrat Party support such a candidate—one that says only the big states matter?
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      The Democratic Party will support whatever they think will put a liberal candidate in the White House.  As will the Republican party, for a conservative candidate.
      
      IMHO.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this

         I am a Democrat, and I neither like nor support Bloomberg. I want my liberal candidate, but Bloomberg isn't it. All the reasons GA brought forward are a few among many.

         replyreport
         1. 95

            wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Good!  Perhaps there is hope you yet, Credence! :

            replyreport
            1. 79

               Credence2posted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Let's not get carried away wilderness, but i do think on this particular thread we can enjoy truce!!

               replyreport
      2. 60

         Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         IMHO is right, Dan. You are a liberal hater, so what do we expect?

         replyreport
         1. 95

            wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            LOL  Did you not agree with me?  You know, when you agreed with Sandy's statement "But to your point, how is Bloomberg's plan to win the electoral college by winning the big states any different from another candidate's plan to win by capturing the so-called battleground states?"  https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/346 … ost4117238
            
            But I'm a "liberal hater", so must be attacked instead of agreed with even when correct, right?

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Who started the "hater" BS, Dan? You throw the word around every chance you get. Give me chance to catch up, unless you want to continue the childish game.
               
               It is sorta fun though, even if it's simply BS!

               replyreport
2. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago

   Bloomberg is my absolute last choice for the Democratic nomination.
   
   But to your point, how is Bloomberg's plan to win the electoral college by winning the big states any different from another candidate's plan to win by capturing the so-called battleground states? They both ignore some states in favor of others.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Bill Spickermanposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      That's why the best strategy is to campaign in as many states as possible which is what President Trump has been doing.  I have yet to see many candidates the can keep up the pace that he does.  It takes lots of energy and determination.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         You forgot honesty and class, but then, he doesn't care for either, Bill.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Bill Spickermanposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Would you feel better if he had the IRS scrutinize tax returns of Groups of Democrats?  Would that be an example of honesty?  Or maybe you would feel better if he was instrumental in providing a new government health care program, and marketed it by telling you that it would save the average American up to $2500 and that we would be able to keep our  doctor if we wanted?  Of course President Trump has not been able to keep any of his campaign promises, has he? Randy?

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Mostly not, Bill. Did Mexico pay for the wall? Or are we paying for it by Trump taking already earmarked funds and putting it into his stupid wall?
               
               Or do you care if Trump is cheating on his taxes, or getting money from a foreign adversary? You apparently don't.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Bill Spickermanposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Randy, please explain why a wall is stupid and open borders is smart!  I won't even respond to your idea that President Trump might be the only politician who might attempt to cheat the IRS.

                  replyreport
      2. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         I'm not sure about that, but I don't  care enough about being right to look it up. ;-)

         replyreport
   2. 60

      Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Beat me to it, Sandy. Irony...

      replyreport
   3. 82

      GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I think I get your point, but if so, it is a different thought than what I took from Bloomberg's campaign manager's statement.
      
      A "battleground" state isn't just a large state, it is a state that had a party margin of victory of 5% or less in the previous election. California would never be a battleground state. Nor would my smaller state of Maryland.
      
      For instance; Michigan and Wisconson are examples of battleground states. They weren't on the mentioned list of 'important' states. I wonder if Bloomberg knows those states exist? (sarcasm)
      
      I think it would be very difficult to win the EC with just the "big states" when such an obvious strategy would most likely alienate all of the not-big states.
      
      I didn't go back to find out how many "big states" there were, (relative to election results), and I don't think that is important to my point. It is the perspective that that would be a winning strategy that would guarantee I would not vote for such a candidate.
      
      So I do see a difference from other candidates, they may focus on specific states, but they don't ignore all but the big states.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         You know, many states are either ignored or barely acknowledged by candidates during the primaries and the general election.  I live in Oregon and it is common for candidates to not visit at all.
         
         And, I wonder if those media buys in big states actually translate to coverage in smaller nearby states? I'm ignorant of how the large media markets work, but could it be that  a massive market like Los Angeles reaches into nearby states?
         
         Just speculating....

         replyreport
         1. 82

            GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            I would also guess that some big-market media buys do reach neighboring markets. Maybe that is what Bloomberg is counting on. $2 Billion dollars can reach a lot of people.
            
            GA

            replyreport
3. 60

   Randy Godwinposted 4 years ago

   A wall is stupid if it can't cover the entire border and you can simply cut a hole in it with a cutting torch in a short time. And I didn't expect a concise response from you on why Trump is hiding his taxes. There isn't one unless he's cheating on them as Cohen already testified to.

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      "There isn't one unless he's cheating on them as Cohen already testified to."
      
      Making more statements you can't back up without simply assuming it true without any proof, Randy?

      replyreport