The leading Democratic presidential candidates, Sanders, Buttigieg and Klobuchar, are drawing fire from each other and the other candidates. They are also attacking Bloomberg, who while not on the ballot until March, has risen in the polls and have qualified for tomorrow's debate. Will this in-fighting only help Trump, or is it just business as usually?
Our next meeting will cover the state of the presidential campaign. In particular, we will have a chance to evaluate Bloomberg's first live on stage performance since he has entered the race. We will also discuss how recent developments, like climate change and the coronavirus, will impact the election.
--------------------------------------- Updated 2/20/20 ------------------------------------
Here are the videos shown at the meeting:
- Nevada debate a disaster for Bloomberg, CNN political experts say
- SE Cupp offers a word of caution for Democrats
- Fareed Zakaria: Bernie Sanders' magical thinking on climate
- Biden shares vulnerable story on how he overcame stuttering
- Amy Klobuchar Launches 2020 Presidential Bid
Here are a few useless thoughts on Bloomberg and money in politics:
ReplyDeleteWhen hearing Democratic candidates railing against the corrupting power of money in politics, an image comes to mind: it is that of a lone individual gazing out to sea at an approaching tidal wave shouting into a megaphone with passionate conviction that tidal waves are corrupting and should not be tolerated.
I have no idea what Bloomberg may say to fellow Democrats in his first debate, but he could argue that money is already corrupting politics and that it’s debatable (though probably not tonight) whether it’s more corrupting to spend your own or someone else’s. He could also argue that at least he doesn’t have to spend so much of his time raising money, like the others do, and can thus spend more time, if not on real issues, at least on beating Trump (which seems uppermost in the minds of many Democrats).
Bloomberg could also argue that he is no more buying the election than every other candidate. He is after all not buying votes, he’s buying attention, i.e., media coverage, which is the same thing that every other candidate is doing. (And which Trump by the way gets for free both because he’s President and because he makes for good entertainment.) Indeed, is it not the case that those candidates left standing are there because they have enough money and those who are no longer on stage are missing precisely because of lack of money?
The fact that Bloomberg has an unfair advantage in running for office is a function of the way the economy works and is not an advantage restricted to a particular election cycle, but that fact is not likely to be a topic for debate, not tonight or any other night. Indeed, Sanders seems reluctant even to address the meaning of his lifelong identification as a Social Democrat precisely because any real discussion of the fundamentals of economics is off limits in American politics. The networks don’t want it; the debate sponsors don’t want it; and probably most of the electorate doesn’t want it. And for those who do (pardon the cynicism), well perhaps they could go “occupy Wall Street.”
Finally, who knows what the outcome of such a debate might be, but it’s hard to see how any significant change in the role of money in politics is likely to be had if honest discussion of the subject is off limits.