bunch.

I read the linked article beyond your cherry-picked quote. It stated some of his reasoning
""It's really sad because they say they've insured or provided coverage for another 45 million people," Bloomberg added in the speech. "Except there's no doctors for 45 million more people and unless they fix immigration and let people who come here for medical education stay here, those people are just going to do the same thing. They're going to have to go to the emergency rooms where they've been except that now it's going to cost a lot more money."

then,
"The campaign noted Bloomberg's support of efforts to reform health care in early 2009 and a press release in support of the House version of the Affordable Care Act the day before it was passed. The campaign also pointed to an op-ed Bloomberg wrote in 2009 where he appears to be supportive of the House bill that was being crafted around that time"

So he supported the House version, you know the one with the public option! So, he did not like the final version because of the compromises-- a lot of us feel the same way.

And I dont support Bloomberg at all- I like Warren, who has quite a different policiy take-- but this kind of political assassination by editing of history is ugly.

Would probably rather see anyone else running win the nomination except Bloomberg (ok Tulsi too) but we are supposed to care about facts and truth. Plenty of things to criticize Bloomberg for, no need to twist the truth.

Drive by smears without context.

It really bothers me when there are attempts to flat out manipulate folks. As you say there are plenty of actual things to criticize Bloomberg about. I am always glad to see people seeking out the truth.

Me or the authors of the CNN article?

outside of its attention-grabbing focus.
The OP doesn't bother with the exculpatory material, except to say there is "much more" at the link.
I figured it was even worse than what was posted--imagine my surprise to find Bloomberg had supported the House version of the ACA.

I can add more in other posts

Like this from 2011


And this from 2014

direct quotation as much as you like! AND everyone should try to communicate as accurately and fairly as possible. My recommendation is to update your OP to include the whole picture.

That Bloomberg did not like the final version of the ACA is clear: it's the context that he DID actually like the idea of the ACA in some form, and in fact he did support the House version which was more liberal as well as better constructed financially really changes how I and many others here would characterize his criticism.

As for Bloomberg himself, I don't like his warmed-over policies, nor his supporting Republicans, and the tinge of racism/sexism that surrounds him (though how much of problem this is awaits further elucidation), so I would have been quite sympathetic to the article's POV had it been justified. Now I give him more credit thanks to your OP--though I am FAR from supporting him. In fact Amy, your preferred candidate is my number 2, for her pragmatic approach.

we wanna beat Trump. Amy is done. Move on to a Democratic socialist if you like but enough with the Bloomberg slander.

It is a very long report. Read it all at the link.

The copyright policy is no excuse.

But feel free to pick through and snip the parts that you like and post them.

Given all of Bloomberg's views expressed for years, compared to what he now is saying after he decided to seek the Democratic nomination, where will he come down on issues when it is time to "run to the center" if he does secure the nomination? We don't get a do over if he changes course.

The original plan was much better. He's right about it - what ended up passing does nothing to fix the big health problems in this country.

"The President, in all fairness, started out by pointing out what the big problems were, but then turned it over to Congress, which didn't pay any attention to any of those big problems and just created another program that's going to cost a lot of money."

That quote is right on the money. There are good parts to it but it is not at all what it should be.