Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Guardian OP-ED: Mike Bloomberg's election spending spree tells an ugly story [View all]
Mike Bloomberg’s election spending spree tells an ugly story
The former mayor of New York is the first billionaire to try to buy his way to being president – but he won’t be the last
It looks as if Michael Bloomberg is trying to find out. Since entering the race in November, he has spent an unprecedented amount of money trying to win the Democratic nomination. In less than three months, Bloomberg, who is worth about $60bn (£46bn), has spent about $320m on TV advertising alone – more than double the amount Tom Steyer, the other billionaire running and the second-biggest spender, has shelled out on ads. Since January, Bloomberg has spent more on Facebook ads than Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren combined.
His strategy (spend, spend, spend and see what sticks) seems to be paying off. He has surged to third place in some opinion polls, despite skipping Iowa and New Hampshire, and has been racking up endorsements from people including the mayor of Washington DC and the former ABC News anchor Sam Donaldson. It is still early, but he may be the candidate who faces Donald Trump in the general election.
If these two billionaires end up battling it out for the presidency, I am not sure it matters who wins in November. Democracy will have lost. We will have entered a new age of American oligarchy. A dangerous precedent will have been set. Money and politics will become even more intertwined. We might not see a non-billionaire become president again for a very long time.
snip...
Yes. I don’t think you can underestimate the optics of Bloomberg’s unapologetic spending spree. It lifts the veil on money in politics. It sends a dispiriting message to an already disillusioned electorate that politics is a swamp where ordinary people are not represented and where influence is bought. Even if Bloomberg doesn’t win the nomination, it seems inevitable that his success so far will pave the way for more billionaires. Bezos 2024? Zuckerberg 2028? It looks increasingly likely.
The former mayor of New York is the first billionaire to try to buy his way to being president – but he won’t be the last
It looks as if Michael Bloomberg is trying to find out. Since entering the race in November, he has spent an unprecedented amount of money trying to win the Democratic nomination. In less than three months, Bloomberg, who is worth about $60bn (£46bn), has spent about $320m on TV advertising alone – more than double the amount Tom Steyer, the other billionaire running and the second-biggest spender, has shelled out on ads. Since January, Bloomberg has spent more on Facebook ads than Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren combined.
His strategy (spend, spend, spend and see what sticks) seems to be paying off. He has surged to third place in some opinion polls, despite skipping Iowa and New Hampshire, and has been racking up endorsements from people including the mayor of Washington DC and the former ABC News anchor Sam Donaldson. It is still early, but he may be the candidate who faces Donald Trump in the general election.
If these two billionaires end up battling it out for the presidency, I am not sure it matters who wins in November. Democracy will have lost. We will have entered a new age of American oligarchy. A dangerous precedent will have been set. Money and politics will become even more intertwined. We might not see a non-billionaire become president again for a very long time.
snip...
Yes. I don’t think you can underestimate the optics of Bloomberg’s unapologetic spending spree. It lifts the veil on money in politics. It sends a dispiriting message to an already disillusioned electorate that politics is a swamp where ordinary people are not represented and where influence is bought. Even if Bloomberg doesn’t win the nomination, it seems inevitable that his success so far will pave the way for more billionaires. Bezos 2024? Zuckerberg 2028? It looks increasingly likely.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/18/michael-bloomberg-election-spending-spree-tells-an-ugly-story-billionaire-president
As the author notes, our democracy is threatened by the the wealthiest of individuals with their unprecedented purchasing power and lack of campaign finance reform.
If I were to vote in a presidentialprimary today, I would vote for: Undecided
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
