Idiots Are Thumbs-Downing Bloomberg On "Woke" Grounds
Welcome to waking up to another Donald Trump term, Democrats!
John McWhorter in The Atlantic on Bloomberg flunking the "woke"ness test:
The truly enlightened response to any pious insistences that Bloomberg be sent home over stop-and-frisk is to ask: Even if it means letting Trump have a second term? People who say yes will reveal themselves as fringe extremists, while the harrumphing of those less forthright will illuminate the difference between striking a pose for posterity and working for the better in an imperfect world.
McWhorter explains "stop-and-frisk":
When Bloomberg was mayor of New York City, the police department dramatically expanded a policy under which officers stopped people on the streets to question them and pat them down for weapons. This draconian practice unforgivably stifled black and Latino life in New York City for years.
Some Democrats are demanding the perfectly woke candidate. This is like pining for spaghetti and eating a shit sandwich because they only have tuna salad.
McWhorter:
Bloomberg's first apology came late and sounded forced. For years, he maintained that the policy was justifiable in serving the needs of the communities' brown residents--as if such extreme measures were the only possible strategy--and in the face of falling crime rates year after year, even after the extinction of the policy. Then, his apology before a black church just when he decided to throw his hat into the ring as a presidential candidate seemed unabashedly self-serving--almost like something that Mayor Quimby from The Simpsons would pull. Bloomberg's epiphany under political pressure was also reminiscent of the sudden realization by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1978 that black people should be allowed to be officials in the church hierarchy.A white man minted in the 1950s, Bloomberg clearly doesn't pass our modern wokeness test on race. He is hardly the first white man of his age and milieu who cannot seem to understand the nuances of race and racism in America, beyond knowing that one is not supposed to be prejudiced. A man who could watch what the stop-and-frisk regime did to black New Yorkers and not recognize the sociological damage it involved is someone who perhaps does not always see black people as fully as we would like to be seen.
Not that he sees us as animals, or even as inferior humans. But for some white Americans, we look how a photo looks on your phone when you have weak coverage--recognizable and then some, but not fully filled in.
The question is: Does Bloomberg's lack of understanding disqualify him from the presidency? Here is someone who as mayor, taking no pay, accomplished a great deal that people on the left salute. He has supported gun control and climate change. He even made a serious try at learning Spanish. His controversial attempt to ban large soda portions was intended as a strategy to improve the health of, primarily, poor people of color.
For some, stop-and-frisk is a deal-breaker. Note how modern--up-to-the minute, even--it seems to disqualify Bloomberg for one mistake on race, even if he would govern better than Trump has in all ways. It's straight from the woke playbook. Freezing out the former mayor would also be a kind of atonement for the left's having let pass Hillary Clinton's "superpredator" comment in the 1990s. Atonement is the operative word here. To shout down Bloomberg because of that one policy would constitute a strain of anti-racism that has all the characteristics of religion rather than rationality. By denouncing a candidate as formidable as Bloomberg, people will show one another that they understand the evil of racism and go in grace--even on the pain of an impeached, amoral Trump being reelected.
The out of touch nutty gun control views will lose Bloomberg the election. If he happens to be the nominee. Just like they did Hillary.
Blacks don’t like him either, for a number of very good reasons.
I can understand not liking Trump as a person, but what policies of his do you think are bad, and you would prefer the Bloomberg approach? I think a few specifics are in order here because I have seen nothing but net positives in my priorities, save one area.
Either Bernie is going to be the nominee, and go down in flames, or it will be a brokered convention, the dems will hand the nomination to someone like Bloomberg, thinking that Americans want a Billionaire businessman President, with better manners and a less bombastic personality than Trump, and they would be horribly wrong again.
What Americans want, is heat and light in their homes, federal judges who support the constitution, a border wall with strict immigration policies, and the federal government to back off out of heath care, education and other things they do badly. I could go on, but I think most understand how bad the Obama years really were for individual freedoms, the economy and the rule of law.
Isab at February 16, 2020 4:58 AM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/cokehead-womanizing-fag-michael-bloombergs-book-of-wisdom-resurfaces
I guess Bloomberg is more genteel than Trump after all. :-)
Isab at February 16, 2020 5:21 AM
Idiots prefer one lying political thug over another lying political thug.
I don't like Trump for all sorts of reasons, including his anti-gun and anti-liberty bigotry. I HATE anti-gun, anti-liberty bigot Bloomypants because he has a much longer legacy of doing harm. Good thing I don't need a president.
Politics makes people stupid.
Kent McManigal at February 16, 2020 7:42 AM
This morning Yang said it was a waste.
I can't believe America wants to elect another detached NYC billionaire.
...Ahem.
I can't believe American voters, even those who might re-elect Trump, want to elect another detached & oblivious NYC billionaire.
Especially one who's presently considering HRC as a running mate. (She presumably still has some machinery in place, and he needs to buy it.)
Crid at February 16, 2020 8:59 AM
Pic #1 Yeah…
Pic #2 …right.
Crid at February 16, 2020 9:11 AM
People are down-thumbing Bloomberg because he appears ready to take the "moderate Democrat" vote from Biden. Biden supporters are knocking him to save Biden's floundering campaign, while Bernie supporters are knocking him to show that only Bernie is a viable candidate with support from the base and no skeletons in the closet.
With Bloomberg, the party that spent the first half of the election season bashing billionaires, claiming that the rich don't pay their "fair share," and promising it would corral renegade rich folks is now changing its debate rules to enable a late-comer billionaire to buy his way onto the ticket - that's how desperate the DNC is with Biden's implosion.
My biggest issue with Bloomberg is that as a mayor of a five-county metropolis of over 8 million people, his signature issue was regulating jumbo-sized sodas. What kind of nanny state will he implement as president?
And what about foreign affairs? Bloomberg's lack of experience and campaign focus on foreign affairs tells me that a savvy foreign leader (Putin? Khameini? Merkel?) will eat his lunch - and wash it down with a sugary Big Gulp. That lack of foreign affairs experience and focus may be why he floated the idea of HRC as his VP (the same reason Obama picked Biden) to add foreign affairs experience to the ticket.
Bloomie's also annoying me with the endless commercials he's showing here in NC that feature clips of Obama singing his praises. Please stop; Obama has not endorsed Bloomberg, but Mike wants all the black voters to think he has Obama's endorsement to counter Biden's strength with that bloc.
Conan the Grammarian at February 16, 2020 9:30 AM
Reminds me of what Richard J. Daley, mayor of Chicago, is alleged to have told John Lindsay, mayor of New York: "John, ... you were elected to sweep the streets."
Daley was as corrupt as any politician can be, but he kept the streets swept and made Chicago "the city that works." So, he got re-elected and stayed out of prison.
Lindsay, on the other hand, is primarily remembered for being bullied by the unions and for New York being called an "ungovernable city" during his term.
Politicians too often get caught up in big ideas and forget the bread and butter issues. Reagan's "are you better off?" should serve as a reminder.
Conan the Grammarian at February 16, 2020 9:50 AM
"Except for Raddy!"
And once again, you offer your own views as if they belong to others.
You soil yourself in this manner - not only in pretending to speak for me, but in this case, to imply that someone unsuccessful at business would be an ideal President.
Because I know you will twist this to your own ends like the squalling roommate who remains faultless, I do not consider the currect situation ideal - even though markets apparently do.
Squawk, squeal, hiss. Noise is what you're presenting.
It has not occurred to anyone to state that a successful person has everything to gain from making the nation more successful. We idiots would then seek to arrest whoever did that for profiteering, however slight.
It has been many years since you were credited by iMDB. Perhaps you should fix that, in the process returning to a medium more would enjoy.
Meanwhile, let me remind you of this so that you may gnash teeth in Biblical fashion: it remains that those with assets to lose take extra measures to secure their communications, and it is likely that such people have equipment you do not. Further, because explaining the means of communication would expedite an attack on it, the Presidency is in fact not obliged to explain to you, a mere citizen, how he speaks to others.
Perhaps if you were more important, you could know.
Radwaste at February 16, 2020 11:42 AM
Bloomberg is perhaps the best chance the Democrats have to beat Trump. However, I don't like the idea that 2020 will set a precedent in which the Presidential election will turn into a "Battle of the Billionaires" every four years.
Fayd at February 16, 2020 12:41 PM
> You soil yourself
Raddy, billionaires don't think about things like you and do... They're billionaires!
Crid at February 16, 2020 2:15 PM
> his signature issue was regulating
> jumbo-sized sodas.
✔
It's weird that that's all that we remember of him. The sodas are an atrocity consequent to decades of federally-mismanaged ag policy, but still... It's difficult to believe he had nothing better to worry about.
> elected to sweep the streets."
A fun factoid is that when he was old and ill and penniless, Giuliani's office found Lindsay a place to live and some medical care. That's corrupt commie shit between power elites, but I nonetheless find it moving.
Crid at February 16, 2020 2:37 PM
I was very against Trump when he ran because of his stupid comments, and he had no record.
He still has stupid comments, but he now has a record, and that record is better than any possible alternative.
So, I will be voting to reelect Trump. From a policy perspective, he's been terrific.
That doesn't mean I support his tweets, but I'm not willing to turn it over to any of his opponents -- including Bloomberg -- over them.
Trust at February 16, 2020 3:50 PM
Also, I like McWhorter.
Crid at February 16, 2020 7:03 PM
Race issues aside, I don't want a candidate who stops and frisks innocent people. That's not really the state I want to live in. I'm not sure my white welltodoness will save me in the long run.
NicoleK at February 17, 2020 2:34 AM
Bloomberg strikes me as a rich asshole who wants to tell me what to do. No, thanks.
I am looking forward to the implosion of the Democratic party once they allow him to steal the nomination from Sanders, though.
ahw at February 17, 2020 11:48 AM
Bloomberg: All of Trump's character issues, plus a record of actual liberal fascism.
markm at March 1, 2020 8:46 AM
Leave a comment