Media mogul Bloomberg enters U.S. presidential race, takes aim at Trump

[webfact]

Media mogul Bloomberg enters U.S. presidential race, takes aim at Trump

By Linda So and John Whitesides

 

FILE PHOTO: Former New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg speaks during the Presidential Gun Sense Forum in Des Moines, Iowa, U.S., August 10, 2019. REUTERS/Scott Morgan

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Billionaire media mogul Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of America's largest city, jumped into the race for the Democratic U.S. presidential nomination on Sunday as a moderate with deep pockets unabashedly aiming to beat fellow New Yorker Donald Trump in the November 2020 election.

 

Bloomberg's belated entry into the race - just three months before the first of the state-by-state party nominating contests - reflects his scepticism that any of the other 17 Democratic candidates can unseat the Republican president.

 

"I'm running for president to defeat Donald Trump and rebuild America," Bloomberg, a 77-year-old former Republican, said in a statement launching his campaign.

 

"We cannot afford four more years of President Trump's reckless and unethical actions," he said.

 

The move represents an about-face for Bloomberg, who had said in March he would not run for president. He will compete with former Vice President Joe Biden and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana to become the moderate alternative to liberal U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

 

Bloomberg, founder and CEO of prominent media company Bloomberg LP and a leading philanthropist, has a financial advantage over his Democratic rivals. It already is on display as he has spent at least $31 million in television ads that will run in states across the country over the next two weeks, a campaign spokesman said.

 

He has won allies in the party with his advocacy and philanthropy on climate change and in fighting gun violence, pouring millions of dollars into groups pushing for more restrictive gun laws.

 

Bloomberg will face significant disadvantages because of his late start, which means he will be playing catch-up with rivals who have been putting together campaign staffs for months.

 

Ranked by Forbes as the eighth-richest American with an estimated worth of $53.4 billion, Bloomberg joins activist Tom Steyer as the second billionaire to enter the Democratic race and will have the advantage of being able to self-finance his campaign and pour millions of dollars into advertising and hiring staff.

 

He announced earlier in November a $100 million online ad campaign targeting Trump in four battleground states.

 

"We do not believe that billionaires have the right to buy elections," Sanders said in a Twitter post on Sunday. "That is why multi-billionaires like Michael Bloomberg are not going to get very far in this election."

 

'I KNOW WHAT IT TAKES'

While some Democratic candidates had warned against making the election all about Trump, Bloomberg kept the focus squarely on the president, with whom he has been well acquainted for decades. Trump was a notable New York real estate developer during Bloomberg's three terms as mayor from 2002 to 2013.

 

"I know what it takes to beat Trump, because I already have. And I will do it again," Bloomberg said, stressing his success as a self-made businessman who came from humble roots.

 

Bloomberg called himself a "doer and a problem solver - not a talker."

 

Bloomberg, who filed paperwork on Thursday with the U.S. Federal Election Commission to run for president, previously had filed paperwork to be eligible for the Democratic primaries in Alabama and four other states with early deadlines for ballot qualification.

 

To counter his late campaign start, he plans to pursue the unorthodox strategy of skipping the four states with early nominating contests in February, beginning on Feb. 3 in Iowa, and focus primarily on states that hold primaries and caucuses starting on so-called Super Tuesday on March 3.

 

Bloomberg already has come under fire from liberal critics who say he would be the wrong choice for a Democratic Party turning against corporate money in politics and dedicated to ending income inequality in America.

 

He apologised this month for New York's "stop and frisk" policy that allowed police to stop and search people on the street, which was decried by critics as racist for overwhelmingly targeting black men. Black voters are a critical Democratic voting bloc.

 

Bloomberg also has been mocked by some critics for attempting to ban sodas sold in cups larger than 16 ounces (473 millilitres) in an effort to reduce sugar consumption at a time of high rates of obesity in the United States. The proposal was struck down by New York courts.

 

Bloomberg will face questions about his decision to run for New York mayor in 2001 as a Republican. He switched to independent before a run for a third term in 2009. In 2018, while weighing whether to run for president, he switched his party registration again and became a Democrat.

 

He will be the second-oldest candidate among the Democrats in the race, as the party debates whether it is time for a new generation of leadership. Sanders, who took time off from the campaign trail after a heart attack in October, is the oldest at 78, followed by Biden (76) and Warren (70). Trump is 73.

 

Bloomberg News said on Sunday it will not investigate its founder, continuing a policy of limiting coverage of him.

 

(Reporting by John Whitesides; Additional reporting by Linda So and Doina Chiacu; Editing by Daniel Wallis and Will Dunham)

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-11-25

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

[bkk6060]

Another old man 77?

The Democratic party seems is in a very sad state.

 

[sunnyboy2018]

The younger ones are all extremist nutters!

[stevenl]

He is one of the people able to beat Trump, and the good thing for democrats is that he is not running as an independent.

[Tug]

29 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

Another old man 77?

The Democratic party seems is in a very sad state.

 

You are aware of what’s occupying the white House rite?and at least mike is the real deal

[Samui Bodoh]

43 minutes ago, webfact said:

To counter his late campaign start, he plans to pursue the unorthodox strategy of skipping the four states with early nominating contests in February, beginning on Feb. 3 in Iowa, and focus primarily on states that hold primaries and caucuses starting on so-called Super Tuesday on March 3.

This paragraph explains the possibility (I don't think he will win, but...) of him doing well; it is a strategy that only a billionaire could follow.

 

The way that the Democrat primary is structured is the key; there will be the four contests in February next year, then 'Super Tuesday'. On 'Super Tuesday', approximately 43% of the delegates will be chosen, so if a candidate (with extremely deep pockets) focuses on that day, floods the TV channels/Social Media in those states with advertising, and is in a situation where there isn't a clear leader, then there is a possibility of success. And, the conditions that I have just mentioned are possible. Very possible.

 

The other key here is a lack of a really serious candidate in the 'Moderate' lane. Currently there is Biden, but he is too old, has been tarnished by Trump, and represents the past (backward-facing candidates don't do well). Alternatively, Mayor Pete is doing well in that lane, but while I like him, he is too young and being Mayor of a small-ish town is not good enough experience for being President. The other possibility in that lane in Klobuchar, whom I like, but she hasn't broken through with ideas or money yet, and her opportunity to do so is fading.

 

So, Bloomberg is possible.

 

I am not terrible happy about another billionaire entering the race (we have seen how awful the current one is), but sometimes it takes evil to deafeat evil.

 

And a quick word about Warren. I love the idea of universal healthcare for the US; the arguments in favour of it are irrefutable. However, as someone who has worked on many elections, I would rather run against her than for her. Imagine the ads;

 

'Warren wants to take away YOUR healthcare and force you into a government plan'

 

'We all know that governments can't run anything'

 

'Fight to stop Warren from taking away YOUR healthcare!!!'

 

Yes, sleazy but effective.

 

 

 

Edited November 24, 2019 by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

[impulse]

14 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I am not terrible happy about another billionaire entering the race (we have seen how awful the current one is), but sometimes it takes evil to deafeat evil.

 

And a quick word about Warren. I love the idea of universal healthcare for the US; the arguments in favour of it are irrefutable. However, as someone who has worked on many elections, I would rather run against her than for her. Imagine the ads;

 
I don't think it's fair (or wise) to judge all billionaires against Trump.  It's not as if any of his quirks are a surprise to anyone who followed his antics long before the election.  I don't know enough about Bloomberg, but I am intrigued that he actually admitted he was wrong and apologized for a misguided policy.  Can't imagine The Donald doing either.  Or most politicians, for that matter.

 

Regarding universal healthcare, I agree with you.  I don't think we'll ever see it, but for a different reason.  If Americans could get universal health care (or even affordable private insurance), there would be a mass exodus of disgruntled corporate employees who have stayed at their crappy jobs only because they need the insurance for their families.  It would be a boom for self employment, small business startups and the job creation that would follow.  But a disaster for the corporate interests that control our political process.  Along with the powerful heathcare lobby, they'll never let it happen.

 

Edited November 24, 2019 by impulse

[TopDeadSenter]

I can see the merit of this diversion after the spectacular failure of the Bidengate/Burisma impeachment fiasco. With egg all over their faces the dems did need a drastic shakeup. The dem debates have been pretty much unwatchable being both boring and an overt display of "wokeness" which sends swing voters running to Trump. 

 Despite being a billionaire socialist Bloomberg, who's only success politically has been to ride on Giuliani's coat tails as NYC mayor and reap the benefits of Giuliani's policies, is possibly the most electable candidate the dems have. Unless madame president herself throws her hat into the ring again.

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

I can see the merit of this diversion after the spectacular failure of the Bidengate/Burisma impeachment fiasco. With egg all over their faces the dems did need a drastic shakeup. The dem debates have been pretty much unwatchable being both boring and an overt display of "wokeness" which sends swing voters running to Trump. 

 Despite being a billionaire socialist Bloomberg, who's only success politically has been to ride on Giuliani's coat tails as NYC mayor and reap the benefits of Giuliani's policies, is possibly the most electable candidate the dems have. Unless madame president herself throws her hat into the ring again.

You're correct on one point, he is electable.

[TooBigToFit]

Bloomberg is probably just running to do the attacks that Dems can't do. Biden seems to have come out to be the target of Trump with all his baggage. Together they will do damage but neither will run in the end. it will end up being some pair like Bernie/Warren or Buttigeig/Klobuchar or Warren/Harris running against Trump or his replacement. If Weld were the Republican candidate, he would absolutely win againsts the Dems only because he is not a rightwing extremist.  My2baht

 

Here's a good link with some election info and recent videos.

https://www.c-span.org/series/?campaign

Edited November 24, 2019 by TooBigToFit

[neeray]

This will be very refreshing.

A candidate who really is a billionaire (53.4 times over) as opposed to a president who claims to be one.

A candidate who truly is a philanthropist as opposed to a president who stole from his own charity.

A candidate who can very intelligently string a sentence together in top notch literary form as opposed to the current dotard president's incoherent ramblings.

A candidate who is a self-made billionaire and came from humble roots as compared to a 4x bankrupt president who squandered daddy's fortune.

A candidate who truly is in the race for the good of his country as compared to a president who historically has always put himself first.

[metisdead]

A post using a trolling representation of Trump's name has been removed. 

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, bkk6060 said:

Another old man 77?

The Democratic party seems is in a very sad state.

 

So old. Unlike the 73 year old Trump.

[neeray]

16 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

So old. Unlike the 73 year old Trump.

Similar age to all us virile, healthy young bucks on TV.

[Jingthing]

I like Mike.

I think this is his time. 

[bristolboy]

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I like Mike.

I think this is his time. 

Bloomberg has been an ardent defender of Wall Street against laws and regulations designed to stop another crash from happening. That's enough to disqualify him.

[metisdead]

A post in violation of fair use policy has been removed as well as a reply:

 

14) You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Please only post a link, the headline and the first three sentences.

 

 

A post containing a Twitter message has been removed.  This is a forum, not an SMS or Twitter message.
 

[IAMHERE]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

He is one of the people able to beat Trump, and the good thing for democrats is that he is not running as an independent.

Yet  ????

 

Trump can only be beaten by a 3rd party candidate siphoning off votes that would otherwise go to Trump.  We'll see big democratic dollars supporting a right winger.

Edited November 25, 2019 by IAMHERE
spelling

[blazes]

I look forward to the reaction of OAC to this little insight into the mind of Bloomberg from NYMagazine:

http://nymag.com/news/features/christine-quinn-2013-2/index5.html

 

The writer was at a party when Bloomberg, then NY mayor, turned up.

 

 My friend and I followed the host over, shook Bloomberg’s hand, and my friend thanked him for his position on gun control. Without even acknowledging the comment, Bloomberg gestured toward a woman in a very tight floor-length gown standing nearby and said, “Look at the ass on her.”

[stevenl]

38 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Bloomberg has been an ardent defender of Wall Street against laws and regulations designed to stop another crash from happening. That's enough to disqualify him.

In principle I agree with you, but if he is the one with the best shot at winning against a sitting president, so be it.

At the moment I think his age is more of an issue. On the other hand, with a healtydiet as opposed to burgers and comes his body and mind are probably in a better condition than Trump's. He had already proved his mind is.

Edited November 25, 2019 by stevenl

[alex8912]

2 hours ago, Tug said:

You are aware of what’s occupying the white House rite?and at least mike is the real deal

Please he will be a month shy of his 83rd birthday after just one term if he wins. If that isn’t grabbing at desperate straws I don’t know what is. The democrats have had four years to prepare for this and keep putting out people who are just simply too old to be President. Imagine if he went two terms, almost 87!! Are you kidding me!? So many things can go wrong at those ages. It’s just getting ridiculous now. 

[kamahele]

3 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

Another old man 77?

The Democratic party seems is in a very sad state.

 

Not much older than Trump

[alex8912]

2 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

This paragraph explains the possibility (I don't think he will win, but...) of him doing well; it is a strategy that only a billionaire could follow.

 

The way that the Democrat primary is structured is the key; there will be the four contests in February next year, then 'Super Tuesday'. On 'Super Tuesday', approximately 43% of the delegates will be chosen, so if a candidate (with extremely deep pockets) focuses on that day, floods the TV channels/Social Media in those states with advertising, and is in a situation where there isn't a clear leader, then there is a possibility of success. And, the conditions that I have just mentioned are possible. Very possible.

 

The other key here is a lack of a really serious candidate in the 'Moderate' lane. Currently there is Biden, but he is too old, has been tarnished by Trump, and represents the past (backward-facing candidates don't do well). Alternatively, Mayor Pete is doing well in that lane, but while I like him, he is too young and being Mayor of a small-ish town is not good enough experience for being President. The other possibility in that lane in Klobuchar, whom I like, but she hasn't broken through with ideas or money yet, and her opportunity to do so is fading.

 

So, Bloomberg is possible.

 

I am not terrible happy about another billionaire entering the race (we have seen how awful the current one is), but sometimes it takes evil to deafeat evil.

 

And a quick word about Warren. I love the idea of universal healthcare for the US; the arguments in favour of it are irrefutable. However, as someone who has worked on many elections, I would rather run against her than for her. Imagine the ads;

 

'Warren wants to take away YOUR healthcare and force you into a government plan'

 

'We all know that governments can't run anything'

 

'Fight to stop Warren from taking away YOUR healthcare!!!'

 

Yes, sleazy but effective.

 

 

 

“ She thinks she is native Indian” 

[kamahele]

6 minutes ago, alex8912 said:

Please he will be a month shy of his 83rd birthday after just one term if he wins. If that isn’t grabbing at desperate straws I don’t know what is. The democrats have had four years to prepare for this and keep putting out people who are just simply too old to be President. Imagine if he went two terms, almost 87!! Are you kidding me!? So many things can go wrong at those ages. It’s just getting ridiculous now. 

First off, the Democrats are putting anyone out. People are running all on their own. Second of all, If party members do not like them for any reason, they get a vote. Currently there is a wide range of ages of the 18 or so participants and the one with the highest poll numbers so happens to be Biden who is in his early 70;w.

 

[neeray]

13 minutes ago, blazes said:

I look forward to the reaction of OAC to this little insight into the mind of Bloomberg from NYMagazine:

http://nymag.com/news/features/christine-quinn-2013-2/index5.html

 

The writer was at a party when Bloomberg, then NY mayor, turned up.

 

 My friend and I followed the host over, shook Bloomberg’s hand, and my friend thanked him for his position on gun control. Without even acknowledging the comment, Bloomberg gestured toward a woman in a very tight floor-length gown standing nearby and said, “Look at the ass on her.”

That's good. Nothing wrong with admiring. At least he didn't go over to her and grab a handful.

(or maybe he did. I haven't read your link yet)

[alex8912]

7 minutes ago, kamahele said:

First off, the Democrats are putting anyone out. People are running all on their own. Second of all, If party members do not like them for any reason, they get a vote. Currently there is a wide range of ages of the 18 or so participants and the one with the highest poll numbers so happens to be Biden who is in his early 70;w.

 

First of all they ARE putting ANYONE out it seems, so I agree with you ( read your first sentence lol) second of all your Biden remark is WRONG! He will be two weeks short of his 79 th birthday on Election Day. If god forbid he goes two terms ( and shouldn’t we be voting for someone who is so good that they should go two terms?) He will be 87 years and 2 months old then!!! That is absolutely insane. No normal clear thinking person can think a president at that age is healthy in all ways. So we have Biden , Trump, Sanders , Warren and now Bloomberg who will ALL be 80++ after two terms ( Trump will be about 80 after one more). Where is you wide range Of age? You know about 13 of those 18 are not contenders unless you are pretty darn simple. 

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, alex8912 said:

3 minutes ago, alex8912 said:

First of all they ARE putting ANYONE out it seems, so I agree with you ( read your first sentence lol) second of all your Biden remark is WRONG! He will be two weeks short of his 79 th birthday on Election Day. 

 

WRONG! He will be 78.

Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. (born November 20, 1942) 

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

 

[alex8912]

6 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

WRONG! He will be 78.

Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. (born November 20, 1942) 

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

 

Listen wikiboy if you think one year makes a difference and you must post a link for it good for you!! You are the smartest of us all! Gold star. Now go tattletale on the next one. The post I quoted said he was in his early 70’s and you had plenty of time to correct that and we see you didn’t. ????

Edited November 25, 2019 by alex8912

[bristolboy]

8 minutes ago, alex8912 said:

Listen wikiboy if you think one year makes a difference and you must post a link for it good for you!! You are the smartest of us all! Gold star. Now go tattletale on the next one. The post I quoted said he was in his early 70’s and you had plenty of time to correct that and we see you didn’t. ????

More of a comment on the use of WRONG! If you're going to be that emphatic about errors, you should be a lot more careful in the first place.

As for me not commenting on kamahele's error, you got there first. What would be the point about commenting on it twice. But in the future, if you spot an error and want me to comment on it first, just send me a PM.

[bendejo]

1 hour ago, blazes said:

Bloomberg gestured toward a woman in a very tight floor-length gown standing nearby and said, “Look at the ass on her.”

Glen Beck was molesting her?