rid of the competition? Biden, Warren, Pete, Amy? Bernie will be fine, we got his back. The others are the ones who will be harmed. But hey as long as you think B is gonna knock out Sanders amirite?

A call from Mr. Wall Street on speed dial? No so much.

Are you fine with him fucking over the Democratic candidates like Biden and Pete? It's been rumored he's short on cash. This may be why the guy in your avatar is struggling but hey... Bernie.

…therefore I pointed out to you that Sanders regularly attacks Biden and Buttigieg for their """billionaire donors""" in an effort to try to shame both them and their donors and thus dry up those contributions, even though said """billionaire donors""" can only donate the maximum $2,800 to their campaigns, which I'm sure Sanders has received from many donors as well, although in much purer 280 increments of $10, I'm sure!

Bye.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287547795#post4

but they CAN and DO give huge amounts to Super PACS.

So, isn't it kind of disingenuous to suggest that billionaires only give 2800 bucks each?

If all that was on the line was that 2800, they wouldn't be having closed door fundraisers for the really rich folk.

Because Super PACs do not donate to candidates and therefore any money a billionaire gives to a Super PAC will never end up in the coffers of a candidate to begin with.

And the whole """wine cave""" scandal of a few debates ago, yes, actually the people that went there were able to get in just by donating that much. A regular person posted their experience about it:

but it goes to a fund (Super PAC) dedicated to getting that candidate elected, a fund that can have unlimited donations AND has virtually no rules or oversight in terms of what they say and do.

So, that 2800 bucks from a billionaire is often followed by millions in unregulated campaign advertising.

...but if you are going to lodge those complaints, Sanders himself created his own dark money organization (Our Revolution) and high level campaign staffers have gone back and forth between it and his campaign (e.g., Nina Turner).

Can you name similarly sinister ties between Biden or Buttigieg and dark money organizations? If so, please list them specifically.

for use the next time he runs for a political office.

Obviously Bloomberg does not want a fair competition.

I think they will all do exactly what they want to do anyway

A level playing field.

I don't care what they say about "it's his money". Advertising is effective and having many more ads than any other opponent is a huge advantage and not fair to the American people.

we don't need a puppet master pulling strings on our side.

That's no way to spin this, Bloomberg is acting in bad faith tell donors not to give to ANY DEMOCRAT in the primary.

cash shortages but though it was just donors giving to others.

telling donors not to give to ANY DEMOCRAT in the primary!

Bloomberg is a disgrace.

His flock daily presents us with the narrative of his oppression, and load it up with prophecy and bumper stickers.

tell him thanks for helping Bernie because he's perverting this whole Democracy thing. I'm smart enough to know that a bad thing. If you're good with it fine. Your choice. B won't win I don't care how much he spends. It's chump change for chumps.

Oh wait....

That not only do we NEED these peoples' money but that it's a good thing to get it. People are going to have to start thinking about more ways to compete with these oligarchs bevause they are NOT on our side.

I didn't think that being a self-made billionaire was disqualifying--in fact, I thought it was impressive. And it was all the more reason it would have been psychologically incredibly intimidating to someone as insecure as Trump.

But telling his 0.01% friends to starve other candidates is filthy.

I was wrong--maybe not about self-made billionaires in general, but about this one.

Would we take that on face value if it was about any other candidate?

THAT Andrew Yang.

Yang did not specify how his donor knew about Bloomberg's calls:

Lord only knows how long Bloomberg has been making calls telling people not to donate to ANY Democrat in the primary.

He's a POS for doing this.

So he is taking aim at the moderates. They are his competition after all. Just like was fine for Biden to kneecap Buttigieg on the cusp of the NH primary.

Since they get their money from us few bucks at a time.

I donated again to Liz last night.

I think he is trying for what he said to be him against Bernie then in convention DNC gives superdelegates to him.

But he didn’t count on looking that bad with Warren last night. I am sure he is spending millions already to spin it. I saw the one business ad he did that made everyone look stupid which is total lie compared to how he really looked all night. He is counting on most people not watching.

To me this is just more evidence of his blind arrogance, as demonstrated on the debate stage last night. He doesn't have enough awareness to pay someone to tell him how to avoid major giveaways of his asleepness.

I am sure his calls had impact.

Bloomberg is simply a disgrace for telling donors not to give to any Democrat in the primary.

This explains why Biden has seen his fundraising tail off.

How many other candidates have been forced to quit because of Bloomberg calling in favors like this?

some candidate. He hurts all in a way by pulling in this favor ,distorted support

Also, I don't see even CNN covering this.

Perhaps a polite "shut it down" request to CNN from Bloomberg? Or perhaps broken link for the non-conspiratorial minded.

Link to tweet

And it looks like mediate.com is the only site carrying the story. Not even CNN.

He didn't get it second hand. He said A DONOR of his told him. That's firsthand, from the donor. If you want to defend a guy with a history of funding repubs, denigrating women and minorities go right ahead. But don't make things up trying to defend him. Yang said it (I heard him say it live) and said it came from a big donor. No reason not to believe him.

He is saying what one of his donors told him. You either believe him or you don't. I do.

But why would someone tell Yang that? And what about Bloomberg makes you think he wouldn't do such a thing? Bloomberg is more responsible than anyone else for Republican Toomey still being in the Senate instead of a Democrat.
Just about everything in life requires you to take someone's word for something.

Apparently, none of the active campaigns are aware of this either and one would think they'd go public fast if true. I haven't seen a news release from any campaign adrressing what Yang claimed.

And those billions have a lot of influence?
No i'm sure it couldn't be that...

To defend the indefensible. Once again. Doesn't it get tiring, and say a lot about your candidate.

So if they don't say anything that lets Bloomberg off the hook? I guess one can check their ethics at the door when they support Bloomberg. Glad you are in a distinct minority here.

No major news network is covering this. No other campaign is bringing this up. Yet you trust the word of a single, unnamed source?

For some better info on this, I suggest reading the below article at the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/us/politics/bloomberg-donors-democrats.html

Bloomberg is trying to control and bottleneck Democratic donor sources to enforce deference to his campaign/funding org. I trust in this being true if Yang is saying this.

I don’t think we are quite there yet but the Frank Zappa quote comes to mind:

The other half is contribute to the Senate races.

Why?

From the OP:

"“Yang: Bloomberg is telling donors not to give to Democrats in the Primary"

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287547795

from the CCN article:

The posture isn't overtly "please don't donate to other candidates" but that's clearly the strategy, said three wealthy donors familiar with the Bloomberg effort."

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/08/politics/bloomberg-wealthy-donors/index.html

Bloomberg’s a dick.

yessss!

There's a whole lot of BS going around and obviously a very concerted effort to take out Bloomberg... warranted or not..

So now people are attacking Bloomberg over what Sanders has been saying for years?

( Not that I agree with the idea, mind you. But I do find it pretty hypocritical. Remember how Warren (wealth about 60 million) was bashing Pete (wealth about $100,000) for holding a fund raiser in a wine cave? )

about another candidate. That tends to give this statement some credibility in my opinion.

I think he went all the way until he dropped out without saying ANYTHING bad about another contender (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Hisss 🐍

its makes no sense he is willing to dump whatever it takes in the election he has said that.

They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft, where we are hard, cynical where we are trustful, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is very difficult to understand.” -- F. Scott Fitzgerald from "The Rich Boy" (1926)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2019/05/08/new-psychological-studies-how-the-wealthy-really-are-different-from-everyone-else/#6b643c206a74

survive the next debate and probably lose his ass on 3/3.

.... when they ask them to give to them.

Since Bloomberg is self funded, what he is asking is the the effective equivalent of asking them to give to him.

And all candidates, besides Bloomberg apparently, are fine with that.


If you think otherwise, please share a link where any of the current candidates BESIDES Bloomberg is saying "don't give money to any other Democrat in the Primary", thanks.

Not a fan of Bloomberg, but even if he's the only one doing this, so what?

.... in any case, to the extent that they give to one candidate, they have less - or nothing - to give to others. So when a candidate asks for a donation, they are in effect asking the doner to give less - or nothing - to the others.

I don't see anything wrong with this, for any candidate, but particularly for a self funded candidate. He is asking doners to support him and that's the only way they can.

donations, so I didn't give. They didn't tell me anything else, just that they weren't taking any donations. It's been about two weeks when I did this. It may have changed since...to what Yang is asserting...

Yang trying to impress his new employer.

The myth that a candidate can run a campaign on the small contributions of average people has been destroyed.

in my candidate preference. I was not aware of a lot of Bloomberg’s baggage. We can’t run this guy with all this crap. I am going with the one who took him down. Warren. If after seeing the way she kicked his ass and switched a Bloomberg supporter like me to be on her side doesn’t convince you she will kick Trump’s ass up and down the sidewalk, I don’t know what will. I just donated big time to her campaign. She is the unity candidate. I would not worry too much about Bloomberg. After the way she took him down he will perform very poorly when actual votes are cast. He will drop out when he sees the writing on the wall and realizes he will do more harm than good. Bloomberg is interested in two things. Blocking Bernie from being the nominee and taking down Trump. Bloomberg recognizes as do I Sanders will be a disaster.

They are on their own side. Leave everything as is, so they can continue to abuse the general population of America.

So, they are going to give to whoever they think will give them more of our nation's stolen loot.

But the majority of America is Not filthy rich and as long as we don't buy the propaganda and keep a clear head, we can overwhelm their carefully crafted, Russian supported, cheat machine.

Wealth, power, status, even being white or male in America are all privileges that people want to hold on to.

Our Democratic party is about equality and treating marginalized communities with respect. Let's train our fury on those who wish to divide us. Like the Russians. Like Trump.

But if Bloomberg (or anyone else) is our Democratic nominee, I will crawl over broken glass to support and vote for them.

Beating Trump is a must to save our democracy.

Bernie Sanders harshly criticized the wealth of US senators during his first campaign for office in 1971, calling it "immoral" that half the members of the Senate were millionaires.

https://imgur.com/a/dtT8iGm

If they got their wealth from selling wares on Amazon and at Walmart, does it mean that it's not "filthy rich?"