Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
timschochet

Michael Bloomberg is going to spend a billion dollars this fall to defeat Donald Trump- no matter who the Democratic candidate is.

Recommended Posts

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1ZB08S

Bloomberg says it doesn’t matter if he loses the nomination; and it doesn’t matter if it’s Sanders or Warren, Biden or whoever: he will spend whatever it takes to help that candidate win because he regards Donald Trump as a true threat to American democracy. 

This is a new wrinkle, certainly. This morning, Joe Scarborough called it a “game-changer”. Is it? It seems to me that TV commercials, which is the main avenue of spending, has less impact these days than ever before. And yet...it IS impactful. Thoughts? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I’m sure another old rich white guy spending money will do it. :lmao:

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1ZB08S

Bloomberg says it doesn’t matter if he loses the nomination; and it doesn’t matter if it’s Sanders or Warren, Biden or whoever: he will spend whatever it takes to help that candidate win because he regards Donald Trump as a true threat to American democracy. 

This is a new wrinkle, certainly. This morning, Joe Scarborough called it a “game-changer”. Is it? It seems to me that TV commercials, which is the main avenue of spending, has less impact these days than ever before. And yet...it IS impactful. Thoughts? 

Can’t hurt - also, with a Billion dollars you can do a lot of grass roots work - would be money well spent to have people In Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania going door to door to get out the vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He isnt going to give the DNC a billion dollars.  He isnt gonna set up a PAC to fund ads to support anyone but him. As soon as his campaign ends so does this promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, quick-hands said:

How much more did hillary spend than trump?

Other people’s money. She’s no billionaire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, quick-hands said:

He isnt going to give the DNC a billion dollars.  He isnt gonna set up a PAC to fund ads to support anyone but him. As soon as his campaign ends so does this promise.

Why do you think he’s lying about this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Other people’s money. She’s no billionaire. 

My point is she spent about 1b.  I think i remember  trump spending about 250mm.   Yet a few trolls in russia flipped the election.   Plus trump gets more free coverage  than anyone in history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm skeptical that spending really matters that much in presidential elections, assuming you're over a basic threshold that allows the campaign to operate.  Both major-party candidates get saturation media coverage for free, and that's more true today than at any other time in history thanks to social media.  Trump didn't spend a lot and ran an incompetent campaign and still won.  (Granted, he had a very weak opponent, but whoever wins the Democratic nomination is also going to get to run against a very weak opponent).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

Yeah, I’m sure another old rich white guy spending money will do it. :lmao:

Who are the other old rich guys who have spent a billion dollars?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, quick-hands said:

My point is she spent about 1b.  I think i remember  trump spending about 250mm.   Yet a few trolls in russia flipped the election.   Plus trump gets more free coverage  than anyone in history.

Looks like it was 1.2 billion for Clinton and .6 billion for Trump

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, quick-hands said:

How much more did hillary spend than trump?

Dems spent $1.4B all-in.  Reps spent around $1.0B.

For $1B Bloomberg could basically blanket the US with anti-Trump messages for a sustained period on his own.

Edited by Dinsy Ejotuz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

How much is Russia going to spend?

We don’t need to discuss that until after the election as an excuse. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

How much is Russia going to spend?

Foreign spending is illegal; I'm sure Trump (or any true patriot, really) would put a stop to that if he heard about it.

  • Laughing 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep hope alive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Philo Beddoe said:

The left is OK with that whole citizens united thing now? Interesting.

A rich guy spending a billion dollars of his own money has been legal since the 1970s.

I don’t think it’s a good thing but it’s not new.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

A rich guy spending a billion dollars of his own money has been legal since the 1970s.

I don’t think it’s a good thing but it’s not new.

I don’t think it’s a good thing either but it will be interesting to see if any on the left denounce this. Especially the vocal critics of the citizens united decision. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

A rich guy spending a billion dollars of his own money has been legal since the 1970s.

I don’t think it’s a good thing but it’s not new.

And as you alluded to, it has nothing to do with Citizens United, which deals with corporations, not individuals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I'm skeptical that spending really matters that much in presidential elections, assuming you're over a basic threshold that allows the campaign to operate.  Both major-party candidates get saturation media coverage for free, and that's more true today than at any other time in history thanks to social media.  Trump didn't spend a lot and ran an incompetent campaign and still won.  (Granted, he had a very weak opponent, but whoever wins the Democratic nomination is also going to get to run against a very weak opponent).

:goodposting:

I believe Romney outspent Obama in 2012 as well (if you include SuperPACs), so that would be two elections in a row where the candidate with less money won. Spending can have a huge impact on, say, state legislative races where a billionaire swoops in and drops a mil on their favored candidate. But it has decreasing marginal utility in a race where everyone is paying attention.

One thing that encourages me about Bloomberg: He's not one of those dumb rich guys lighting his cigars with $100 bills just because he can. If he's going to spend $1B, I'm confident he's going to put the money where it can do the most good, not where some consultants are telling him to spend it so they can fatten their commissions. My guess is he ends up spending a lot on digital campaigns.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Philo Beddoe said:
1 hour ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

A rich guy spending a billion dollars of his own money has been legal since the 1970s.

I don’t think it’s a good thing but it’s not new.

I don’t think it’s a good thing either but it will be interesting to see if any on the left denounce this. Especially the vocal critics of the citizens united decision. 

FG is one of those :mellow:

But I'm struggling to see how this is being tied to CU though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

Foreign spending is illegal; I'm sure Trump (or any true patriot, really) would put a stop to that if he heard about it.

Exactly, domestic misinformation is fair game lets rally behind it! Spend away rich old guy!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Commish said:

FG is one of those :mellow:

But I'm struggling to see how this is being tied to CU though.

Sorry I know FGs opinion carries a lot of weight but someone outside the FBG strata-sphere. 

“We do not believe that billionaires have the right to buy elections, and that is why we are going to overturn Citizens United, that is why multibillionaires like Mr. Bloomberg are not going to get very far in this election.” Sanders

“If Michael Bloomberg’s version of democracy wins, then democracy changes,” the senior senator from Massachusetts thundered. “And it’s going to be about which billionaire you can stomach going forward.” Warren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Philo Beddoe said:

Sorry I know FGs opinion carries a lot of weight but someone outside the FBG strata-sphere. 

“We do not believe that billionaires have the right to buy elections, and that is why we are going to overturn Citizens United, that is why multibillionaires like Mr. Bloomberg are not going to get very far in this election.” Sanders

“If Michael Bloomberg’s version of democracy wins, then democracy changes,” the senior senator from Massachusetts thundered. “And it’s going to be about which billionaire you can stomach going forward.” Warren

If these are actual quotes (I don't know if they are or not) then isn't that what you're asking for?  :oldunsure: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Philo Beddoe said:

Bloomberg article just came out. I implied since the article. Sorry that wasn't clear. 

Sanders Nov 2019

Vice 2019

Will Sanders turn down his donations? I'm betting he won't.  

 

Based on what?  I don't know one way or the other, but the evidence points towards him NOT taking the donations even the measly $2800 Bloomberg could give his campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He doesn't have to give the candidates money to help defeat Trump. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mile High said:

He doesn't have to give the candidates money to help defeat Trump. 

agreed...he's bombarding us in Florida with ads right now.

Edited by The Commish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Philo Beddoe said:

 

Will Sanders turn down his donations? I'm betting he won't.  

 

Donations?  That’s not how this works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to admit, I'm kinda confused with respect to the "concern" here  :confused: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Do you mean @Philo Beddoe’s concern?  Or just why anyone might be concerned?

Philo's concern...started with the Citizen's United comment, then his responses to my posts.  I don't really understand what he's talking about now.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AAABatteries said:

Can’t hurt - also, with a Billion dollars you can do a lot of grass roots work - would be money well spent to have people In Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania going door to door to get out the vote.

I agree but you only want people to get out and vote if they are voting for the side you want to win.   If not then stay home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, The Commish said:

agreed...he's bombarding us in Florida with ads right now.

Also here in Colorado. My opinion is getting out the vote is what will defeat Trump. Target the swing states get out the votets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mile High said:

Also here in Colorado. My opinion is getting out the vote is what will defeat Trump. Target the swing states get out the votets.

That seems to be how it works most of the time.  The higher the voter participation rate the better for the Dems.  The lower the voter participation rate the better for the GOP.  So far here he's hitting hard with Trump's words against Obamacare.  That's mainly what I've seen so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Have to admit, I'm kinda confused with respect to the "concern" here  :confused: 

I want to see Trump lose and I’m in favor of any legal way to make that happen. 

That being said, in a purely theoretical way, it does bother me. Sheldon Adelson strongly influenced a recent Israeli election in favor of Netanyahu’s candidates with his own cash. The Koch’s have had similar influence here (though I think they use corporate means.) I’m not in love with the idea of rich powerful people having such a huge influence on public elections, even if I agree with their ideas a lot of the time. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

I want to see Trump lose and I’m in favor of any legal way to make that happen. 

That being said, in a purely theoretical way, it does bother me. Sheldon Adelson strongly influenced a recent Israeli election in favor of Netanyahu’s candidates with his own cash. The Koch’s have had similar influence here (though I think they use corporate means.) I’m not in love with the idea of rich powerful people having such a huge influence on public elections, even if I agree with their ideas a lot of the time. 

the whole concept sucks to me...always has, always will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL.  Glad he's going to pump money into the economy.  Surprised he made it to billionaire status...usually they are smarter than this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I want to see Trump lose and I’m in favor of any legal way to make that happen. 

That being said, in a purely theoretical way, it does bother me. Sheldon Adelson strongly influenced a recent Israeli election in favor of Netanyahu’s candidates with his own cash. The Koch’s have had similar influence here (though I think they use corporate means.) I’m not in love with the idea of rich powerful people having such a huge influence on public elections, even if I agree with their ideas a lot of the time. 


Same as day 1.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Philo Beddoe said:

The left is OK with that whole citizens united thing now? Interesting.

I'm certainly not.

In this case we know where the money is coming from.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Da Guru said:


Same as day 1.

I realize that. 

And I’m also not in love with populism either. Trump is a good sign of what can go wrong when the elites DON’T win. 

Ideally speaking I’d love a fair election where an educated populace listened to opposing ideas and made smart, unselfish choices. But I get that’s never happened and probably never will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, boots11234 said:

LOL.  Glad he's going to pump money into the economy.  Surprised he made it to billionaire status...usually they are smarter than this.  

Eh, some Billionaires aren't smart they just inherited a ton of money. Like our President for example.

  • Like 3
  • Love 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Commish said:

That seems to be how it works most of the time.  The higher the voter participation rate the better for the Dems.  The lower the voter participation rate the better for the GOP.  So far here he's hitting hard with Trump's words against Obamacare.  That's mainly what I've seen so far.

Probably why Trump tweeted this. 

Mini Mike Bloomberg is spending a lot of money on False Advertising. I was the person who saved Pre-Existing Conditions in your Healthcare, you have it now, while at the same time winning the fight to rid you of the expensive, unfair and very unpopular Individual Mandate.....

and, if Republicans win in court and take back the House of Represenatives, your healthcare, that I have now brought to the best place in many years, will become the best ever, by far. I will always protect your Pre-Existing Conditions, the Dems will not!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Eh, some Billionaires aren't smart they just inherited a ton of money. Like our President for example.

You might want to put "claimed" in front of that Billionaire...

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mile High said:

Probably why Trump tweeted this. 

Mini Mike Bloomberg is spending a lot of money on False Advertising. I was the person who saved Pre-Existing Conditions in your Healthcare, you have it now, while at the same time winning the fight to rid you of the expensive, unfair and very unpopular Individual Mandate.....

and, if Republicans win in court and take back the House of Represenatives, your healthcare, that I have now brought to the best place in many years, will become the best ever, by far. I will always protect your Pre-Existing Conditions, the Dems will not!

:lmao:

I don't do twitter all that much, but I probably should.  The ad here is actual video of him talking about letting Obamacare "implode".  If that happens, pre-existing conditions go with it.  He really has no clue with respect to policy.  I'm not actually sure he knows that preexisting conditions is part of Obamacare :lol: 

I really wish people would stop the back and forths with him and force him to talk policy.  That'd be comedy gold.

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I want to see Trump lose and I’m in favor of any legal way to make that happen. 

That being said, in a purely theoretical way, it does bother me. Sheldon Adelson strongly influenced a recent Israeli election in favor of Netanyahu’s candidates with his own cash. The Koch’s have had similar influence here (though I think they use corporate means.) I’m not in love with the idea of rich powerful people having such a huge influence on public elections, even if I agree with their ideas a lot of the time. 

Thank you Tim. This article clearly does a better job articulating a point than I do :-).CU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Philo Beddoe said:

Thank you Tim. This article clearly does a better job articulating a point than I do :-).CU

Follow now....above was very confusing so thanks for the clarification.  I'd be SHOCKED if Bernie decides to embrace Citizens United.  I am absolutely confident he will continue to move towards removing it.  I'm not much of a gambler, so we can do a gentlemen's bet on his if interested :hifive: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.