2020 Presidential Election

[Reddevil]

Question to those of you who follow trends more closely than I. Do the debate performances generally sway the polls much? I am guessing that most voters do not even watch the debates or pay much attention to what is going on. Bloomberg's debate performance may not resonate with them, but the barrage of commercials he has out are being seen. Could he fail and yet still succeed?

[duke79]

Edited to add: You're right on Trump. Here's his take on the debate: "Mini Mike Bloomberg’s debate performance tonight was perhaps the worst in the history of debates, and there have been some really bad ones. He was stumbling, bumbling and grossly incompetent. If this doesn’t knock him out of the race, nothing will. Not so easy to do what I did!"

LOL, I believe DT predicted a few weeks ago on his Twitter feed that Bloomberg would do terribly at the debates (saying something like "Mini-Mike is a terrible debater and has no stage presence. He will bomb" (or words to that effect).

In retrospect, I think this was a tremendous mistake by Bloomberg to join the debates at this stage. He is not even on the ballot in Nevada or South Carolina and he was rising quite dramatically in the polls, from (mostly) his huge spending on ads all around the country. He had almost nothing to gain and virtually everything to lose by debating. Many Dems (even the ones who don't like Mike) were coming to the conclusion that he was their best hope to beat Trump.

Totally agree - the key to success in these types of debating is pivoting, and he did not do it at all. Make a very quick, vague reference/response to the question then go on to speak about something that reflects more positively on you. Bloomberg has spent millions on polling and research but none of that showed up last night. For example, when they go off on him for being rich, the easy retort is "yes, I started my own business and got very rich. And I paid taxes on my wealth and donate billions to charity, unlike Trump. And I made a lot of other people very rich also and helped them to live the American dream. Mary Jones the minority woman came from nothing, joined Bloomberg and owns her own home and has put several kids through college. I pay my employees very well and give them top notch benefits. Which is why I support Medicare for all who want it rather than Medicare for all - employees at companies like mine are very happy with what they have so are hesitant to give that up for Senator Sanders' vague plans. And there are a lot of others like them who will vote for Trump for just this reason. And getting Trump out of office is the reason we are all standing on this stage."

I think you're exactly right here! Relatively simple and straightforward answer to the question about his wealth.

Am I the only one cynical about politics? Bloomberg's #1 desire is to become President :-). And his constant attacks of Trump is his (probably wise) tactic to raise his standing with Democrats. This isn't to say Bloomy likes Trump, of course -- although I wouldn't be shocked if privately he would rather have Trump be President than Bernie -- but he's just a practical businessman, is all. He was a registered D in NY, but when he discovered he had a better chance at mayor running as an R, that's what he became.

Now, there is conventional wisdom that there are lots and lots of voters who don't want to be stuck with a choice between Trump and Sanders. A guy like Bloomberg with unlimited resources might very well try to see if that's true. I certainly wouldn't give it "zero chance."

You may be right here. Bloomberg may be enough of an ego maniac (and certainly has the financial resources) to try to run as a third-party. Allegedly, he has rented all of his campaign office space and paid his campaign workers through November 2020. It makes me wonder if he has a "plan B", if he doesn't get the Dem nomination?

[Troublemaker]

Question to those of you who follow trends more closely than I. Do the debate performances generally sway the polls much? I am guessing that most voters do not even watch the debates or pay much attention to what is going on. Bloomberg's debate performance may not resonate with them, but the barrage of commercials he has out are being seen. Could he fail and yet still succeed?

The conventional wisdom is that it's not the number of eyeballs watching the 2-3 hour debate itself that matters but the barrage of post-debate negative news cycles that amplify the poor debate performance to a wider audience. Rubio probably was hurt by a poor pre-NH debate in 2016, for example.

It's true, though, that Bloomberg's spending is unprecedented and therefore we might have little idea how much he can blunt any consequences from last night with his financial might.

BTW, underrated funniest (unintentional) moment of last night was when Bloomberg stated that all his non-disclosure agreements with women were consensual. C'mon now. That's "The Onion"-tier ironic humor.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Question to those of you who follow trends more closely than I. Do the debate performances generally sway the polls much? I am guessing that most voters do not even watch the debates or pay much attention to what is going on. Bloomberg's debate performance may not resonate with them, but the barrage of commercials he has out are being seen. Could he fail and yet still succeed?

The conventional wisdom is that it's not the number of eyeballs watching the 2-3 hour debate itself that matters but the barrage of post-debate negative news cycles that amplify the poor debate performance to a wider audience. Rubio probably was hurt by a poor pre-NH debate in 2016, for example.

It's true, though, that Bloomberg's spending is unprecedented and therefore we might have little idea how much he can blunt any consequences from last night with his financial might.

Yep. I've been listening to NPR this morning, and Bloomberg is being hammered by the radio commentators, not just for his performance, but for his stance on issues that were brought up during the debate. That is a double whammy. And you know if NPR is raising it, then outlets such as MSNBC, CNN, and Fox are all absolutely hammering him. I think it will have an effect on his numbers, regardless of how much he is spending to sweep it under the proverbial rug.

[ncexnyc]

To borrow a line from the late great Oliver Hardy, "That's another fine mess you've gotten me into." The Democrats have given America the Iowa fiasco and last night gave America a debate that was uglier than last night's Duke game. The DNC let Bloomberg buy his way onto the stage yesterday in an effort to derail Bernie Sanders and instead they unleashed a bloodthirsty pack of resentful politicians who turned on the party's so-called savior and tore him to shreds.

This morning reminds me of one of those monster movies where the good guys throw their superduper weapon at the beast, yet when all the smoke and fire disappears the monster is still standing and in some cases is even stronger than before, because he's managed to absorb some of the weapon's energy. That's what the DNC is looking at, as Bernie came out of last night's debate without a scratch.

I'd suggest that Mayor Bloomberg take a lesson from the media and learn how to pivot for the next debate. For a group that was championing Bloomberg as their savior from both Trump and that rascally socialist Bernie, they sure did a huge 180 turn. I'm not sure why anyone who has followed Bloomberg's political career thought he'd be able to hold his own under the bright lights and intense scrutiny of a Presidential Election. If you look at how he became mayor, you'll see Rudy and 9/11 had a lot to do with him winning his first term and from their his money carried him forward.

There's still a lot of time left before the convention, but you have to ask yourself at what point in time does the DNC concede the election to Trump and instead focuses on a strategy to handcuff Trump by ensuring they take the House and Senate. I'd say Super Tuesday should let the DNC know where they stand. If nobody steps forward to take the front runners position from Bernie by then, it will be obvious that they are headed for a bloody convention, one that will make what happened last night look like a party.

[PackMan97]

This morning reminds me of one of those monster movies where the good guys throw their superduper weapon at the beast, yet when all the smoke and fire disappears the monster is still standing and in some cases is even stronger than before, because he's managed to absorb some of the weapon's energy. That's what the DNC is looking at, as Bernie came out of last night's debate without a scratch.

That's because no one has actually taken a hard shot at Bernie. Can you tell me any of the attacks launched at him? They are all handling him with kids gloves because they don't want to anger his supporters.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

That's because no one has actually taken a hard shot at Bernie. Can you tell me any of the attacks launched at him? They are all handling him with kids gloves because they don't want to anger his supporters.

Well, Bloomberg called him a Communist...

[JasonEvans]

Bad news for Mike... we are still waiting on final numbers, but it looks like last night may have been the most watched Democratic debate in history. The early numbers are running about 15% ahead of the very first Demcratic debate of last year which is the current debate record-holder.

[Troublemaker]

That's because no one has actually taken a hard shot at Bernie. Can you tell me any of the attacks launched at him? They are all handling him with kids gloves because they don't want to anger his supporters.

Warren went after him for allegedly saying that a woman can't win. That was huge for a news cycle or two. From the beginning, everyone has attacked his electability, healthcare plan, and generally how unrealistic (from their POV) he is about fiscal matters.

What would you have his opponents do? Unfortunately for his opponents, some of the more effective attacks against a politician -- inconsistency, flip-floppiness, inauthenticity -- are more difficult to pin on him. And, in a D primary, major transgressions against racial minorities or women would also be good attacks, but again, it's going to be difficult to pin those on him. Bernie's like the embodiment of the perfect progressive.

What attacks within the context of a D primary would you recommend? Consider the possibility that this is a democratic socialist moment for the Ds (at least among the voters), that they're ready for a candidate like Bernie.

Bad news for Mike... we are still waiting on final numbers, but it looks like last night may have been the most watched Democratic debate in history. The early numbers are running about 15% ahead of the very first Demcratic debate of last year which is the current debate record-holder.

Well, yeah, everyone was tuning in to watch him. I skipped the Duke game (a good choice, from what I hear).

[Troublemaker]

Re: electability, interesting graph from yesterday's WaPo/ABC national poll. Basically, based on these numbers, it seems most people think their preferred candidate is also the most electable (and since Bernie is the most preferred, he's also the most electable according to D voters). There's no strong consensus anymore on electability if there ever was.

[ncexnyc]

That's because no one has actually taken a hard shot at Bernie. Can you tell me any of the attacks launched at him? They are all handling him with kids gloves because they don't want to anger his supporters.

I was under the impression all of Bernie's rivals were supposed to be smart, career politicians who had numerous paid consultants working for them. Are you telling me all of his rivals are content to let Bernie pile up delegates left and right, because they fear his base. If that's the case then maybe they need to look for a new line of work.

I'll be willing to bet, that if last night's debate has a serious negative effect on Bloomberg's polling numbers you'll see the pack turn their attention towards Bernie. Anything less would be foolishness on their part. However let's understand, the longer this goes circus sideshow continues the narrower the chances for victory in November become.

[sagegrouse]

Question to those of you who follow trends more closely than I. Do the debate performances generally sway the polls much? I am guessing that most voters do not even watch the debates or pay much attention to what is going on. Bloomberg's debate performance may not resonate with them, but the barrage of commercials he has out are being seen. Could he fail and yet still succeed?

They did in 1960. Kennedy outshone Nixon in the first debate and went from behind to ahead and never trailed, eking out a close victory.

They did in 1976. Reagan looked "reasonable" and was feared to be an extremist.

They did in 1988 (Dukakis refusing to say he would pysically attack someone who attacked his wife).

They did in 2000 Gore, thought to be master debater based on his previous debates against Kemp in 1996 and Perot on immigration, lost all three debates to W. And Lieberman didn't do especially well against Cheney in the VP slot.

[Tripping William]

They did in 1960. Kennedy outshone Nixon in the first debate and went from behind to ahead and never trailed, eking out a close victory.

They did in 1976. Reagan looked "reasonable" and was feared to be an extremist.

They did in 1988 (Dukakis refusing to say he would pysically attack someone who attacked his wife).

They did in 2000 Gore, thought to be master debater based on his previous debates against Kemp in 1996 and Perot on immigration, lost all three debates to W. And Lieberman didn't do especially well against Cheney in the VP slot.

Just a couple of nits:

(1) I don't think 1976 is right, unless you're talking about a Reagan/Ford debate (although Ford became the nominee). Maybe you're meaning 1980?

(2) These are all examples of general election debates, not the debates in the party primary. I think general election debates are apples, while party primary debates are oranges.

(3) I have become persuaded that Trump will not participate in any general election debates.

[JasonEvans]

Reagan's "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" was the nail in Jimmy Carter's coffin in the 1980 general election debate. Easily among the single most significant debate moments in history.

That said, general election debates are waaaay different from primary debates. Although it should be noted that most folks think Amy Klobuchar surged in New Hampshire directly as a result of a strong performance in the NH debate a couple days before the vote there. Primary debates can have a significant impact... we just need to see how much the latest one moves the needle on Bloomberg and Warren (who seem to be the folks getting the most attention from last night's broo-ha-ha).

[sagegrouse]

Just a couple of nits:

(1) I don't think 1976 is right, unless you're talking about a Reagan/Ford debate (although Ford became the nominee). Maybe you're meaning 1980?

(2) These are all examples of general election debates, not the debates in the party primary. I think general election debates are apples, while party primary debates are oranges.

(3) I have become persuaded that Trump will not participate in any general election debates.

Absolutely. 1980 vs. 1976. (Hey, I also had the 2000 race in 1980, until I noticed the error.)

[sagegrouse]

Just a couple of nits:

(1) I don't think 1976 is right, unless you're talking about a Reagan/Ford debate (although Ford became the nominee). Maybe you're meaning 1980?

(2) These are all examples of general election debates, not the debates in the party primary. I think general election debates are apples, while party primary debates are oranges.

(3) I have become persuaded that Trump will not participate in any general election debates.

Primary debates that mattered: 1980, Reagan: "I paid for this microphone, Mr. Green." In NH, following a Bush upset win in Iowa (I think). The New Hampshire chairman's name was actually Mr. Breen. RR has my sympathy.

1976: I thought Carter did exceptionally well in the debates -- and he was an unknown -- although his first steps to the presidency were in organizing like crazy in Iowa.

[bundabergdevil]

If the theory that Trump’s act is one epic troll, Bloomberg may be just the guy to troll back.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...-and-las-vegas

[Troublemaker]

Buttigieg's inability to bounce at all in the polls following his strong IA and NH performances pretty much means the end is near for his campaign. I sort of think he'll overperform his polls again in NV because his organization skills appear to be great, but that might just mean a 3rd finish. He'll go through Super Tuesday but maybe not much further than that.

Meanwhile, in today's release of the NBC/WSJ national poll, Bernie is up to 29 percent polling among African Americans compared to Biden's 31 percent. I'm officially nervous about my Biden-wins-SC bet as the last two polls there show Bernie within the margin of error of Biden. I'll probably sell off a few shares.

It's somewhat interesting to think about whether Bernie should even want to win SC. Under the less popular "consolidation is good for Bernie" theory (which has support in the form of head-to-head polling against the other D candidates), then obviously he should just go ahead and win SC, become the popular vote winner of the first 4 states, and roll to the nomination from there. However, under the more popular "consolidation is bad for Bernie" theory, he should want Biden to win SC to stall Bloomberg's eventual rise. It's looking like it'll be a two-horse race between Bernie and Bloomberg since they're the only two with resources long-term, so Bernie might want Biden to get the win in SC, experience some Joe-mentum to limit Bloomberg's delegate collection on Super Tuesday.

[Troublemaker]

Politico article about how Bloomberg's campaign is reaching out to Biden's and Buttigieg's delegates and also the superdelegates. The plan appears to be winning the nomination on the second ballot.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Politico article about how Bloomberg's campaign is reaching out to Biden's and Buttigieg's delegates and also the superdelegates. The plan appears to be winning the nomination on the second ballot.

What an excellent way to earn the trust and support of the constituency!