WARREN: I hope you heard what his defense was. "I've been nice to some women." That just doesn't cut it.... So, Mr. Mayor, are you willing to release all of those women from those nondisclosure agreements, so we can hear their side of the story?"We" will live with it? Fine. We'll live with it and your presidential campaign will die with it.
BLOOMBERG: We have a very few nondisclosure agreements.
WARREN: How many is that?
BLOOMBERG: Let me finish.
WARREN: How many is that?
BLOOMBERG: None of them accuse me of doing anything, other than maybe they didn't like a joke I told. And let me just -- and let me -- there's agreements between two parties that wanted to keep it quiet and that's up to them. They signed those agreements, and we'll live with it.
At this point in the debate, Biden calls out "Come on," and for once, I'm enjoying the Bidenism, which I would translate as: What bullshit!
How can Bloomberg live in the Democrats' America and not realize that telling a bad joke is cause for cancellation — banishment from your own well-established professional life? Here he is, expecting to make a big step up professionally, and he thinks he can shrug off a mere joke in the old male chauvinist style that would have us picture women as priggish and humor deaf. Quite aside from sexism, the old man is not up to speed with his own culture. How could he think he could get off the hook when Roseanne Barr — who ran for President in 2012 — got banished for one joke? The notion that jokes don't matter is profoundly out of touch.
WARREN: So, wait, when you say it is up to -- I just want to be clear. Some is how many? And -- and when you -- and when you say they signed them and they wanted them, if they wish now to speak out and tell their side of the story about what it is they allege, that's now OK with you? You're releasing them on television tonight? Is that right?I love the lawprof vigor Warren displayed there. She listened to what he said and she instantly spun it into questions that displayed how defective his answer was and put him on the spot:
BLOOMBERG: Senator...Ha ha. Biden popped in again with his "Come on" (AKA "What bullshit!").
WARREN: Is that right, tonight?
BLOOMBERG: Senator, the company and somebody else, in this case -- a man or a woman or it could be more than that, they decided when they made an agreement they wanted to keep it quiet for everybody's interests.
BIDEN: Come on.
BLOOMBERG: They signed the agreements and that's what we're going to live with.There's that "we" again. He just reused his prepared line. "We're going to live with"... how did his well-paid advisers come up with that idea and give him no backup? I think the idea is that the agreements are between the complainants and somebody other than him, so he doesn't have the power to end the agreements. In that light, "They signed the agreements and that's what we're going to live with" might have sounded like the perfect little packaged response. But out there on the big stage of the debate, pressured by the ace lawprof, it sounds piddling and weaselly. And anyone steeped in #MeToo will think: This is exactly the problem, this is how these horrible men have protected themselves all these years.
And Bloomberg looked so blandly smug, like he thought these people challenging him were beneath him and he could just stand there and expect everyone to recognize that facts are facts and he's the only one who could beat Donald Trump and then carry out presidential duties with competence and pragmatism. But he could not even figure out how to handle the predictable attacks at this planned event. I wonder if he even knew as he was speaking how badly he was failing. But maybe he knew and had no other option than to play out the planned script. Maybe the plan was: Don't do anything on the fly. Don't let them unsettle you. Just say "They signed the agreements and that's what we're going to live with." That's the answer. The door is closed. Do not open it. Don't fall for their tricks.
And maybe there's already a Bloomberg ad — or 2 or 3 or 10 — papering over and reframing his bad debate performance.
The transcript continues. This part of the debate is far from over, but it's not Bloomberg talking anymore. The prey is down and the pack of predators leaps upon him:
BUTTIGIEG: You could release them now.Does the bloody prey want to lift up his woeful head and mutter any last words?
WARREN: I'm sorry. No, the question is...
BLOOMBERG: I heard your question.
WARREN: ... are the women bound by being muzzled by you and you could release them from that immediately? Because, understand, this is not just a question of the mayor's character. This is also a question about electability. We are not going to beat Donald Trump with a man who has who knows how many nondisclosure agreements and the drip, drip, drip of stories of women saying they have been harassed and discriminated against.
(APPLAUSE)
That's not what we do as Democrats.
JACKSON: Mr. Vice President?
BIDEN: Look, let's get something straight here. It's easy. All the mayor has to do is say, "You are released from the nondisclosure agreement," period.
(APPLAUSE)
We talk about transparency here. This guy got himself in trouble saying that there was a non -- that he couldn't disclose what he did. He went to his company...
BUTTIGIEG: Just to be super-clear, that was about the list of clients, so nobody gets the wrong idea.
BIDEN: No, no, no. Yeah, I'm sorry.
(LAUGHTER)
BUTTIGIEG: I know what you mean. No, you're right.
BIDEN: But he said -- he went to the company and said I want to be released, I want to be able to do it. Look, this is about transparency from the very beginning, whether it's your health record, whether it's your taxes, whether it's whether you have cases against you, whether or not people have signed nondisclosure agreements.
You think the women, in fact, were ready to say I don't want anybody to know about what you did to me? That's not how it works. The way it works is they say, look, this is what you did to me and the mayor comes along and his attorneys said, I will give you this amount of money if you promise you will never say anything. That's how it works.
(APPLAUSE)
JACKSON: Mayor Bloomberg, final word to you?
BLOOMBERG: I've said we're not going to get -- to end these agreements because they were made consensually and they have every right to expect that they will stay private.Oh! No pity for the dying beast! They booed him! And the predators converge once again on the tasty flesh:
(AUDIENCE BOOS)
BIDEN: If they want to release it, they should be able to release themselves. Say yes.Oh, yeah, why not? Come on, Bernie. It's a juicy buffet. Don't hold back!
SANDERS: Can I add a word to this?
SANDERS: You know, we talk about electability, and everybody up here wants to beat Trump, and we talk about stop and frisk, and we talked about the workplace that Mayor Bloomberg has established and the problems there. But maybe we should also ask how Mayor Bloomberg in 2004 supported George W. Bush for president, put money into Republican candidates for the United States Senate when some of us -- Joe and I and others -- were fighting for Democrats to control the United States Senate.No reason to stick to the sex topic. Throw everything else at him now. It's fun! It's a feeding frenzy:
BIDEN: And didn't support Barack.Barack! The holy name is invoked!
SANDERS: Maybe we can talk -- maybe we can talk about a billionaire saying that we should not raise the minimum wage or that we should cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. If that's a way to beat Donald Trump, wow, I would be very surprised.And with that, the moderators, without going back to the bleeding carcass, move on to the next topic.
पोस्ट्स
१२४ टिप्पण्या:
... that would have us picture women as priggish and humor deaf.
He got you there, didn't he?
"We" will live with it? Fine. We'll live with it and your presidential campaign will die with it.
I'll take the under...
Bloomberg clearly did not see this one coming. (Why didn't he?) He could have said the agreements were not between him and a person with a complaint, they were between that person and Bloomberg LLP. Which would have given him the opportunity to take some air out of Warren's sails by schooling the corporate attorney on the basics of incorporation.
I guess Bloomberg needs more make-it-go-away money for Warren
the old male chauvinist style that would have us picture women as priggish and humor deaf.
Joke is the old word for vagina.
Nobody who says offensive things will become President
Discuss. Cite examples from recent history.
The NDA was, until I retired 7 years ago, a standard feature of freelance and contract employment.
I am male and I worked for a long time as a freelancer and contractor.
Every job I worked on came with an NDA. My choice was to take the jobs or be unemployed.
Yeah, it was kind of abusive, signing away all my legal rights. Not everybody gets to be a tenured high paid law professor.
Most of us had to eat shit to make a living, prof. Ever tried it?
Non-disclosure agreements? Heh. That worked real well with Stormy Daniels.
That's fine in some private corporate dispute, but any of those women that speak up now are not going to get sued by Michael Bloomberg. It doesn't matter if he releases them or not.
Except, of course, that he looks like a liar.
If they want to be released from the NDA, let them return the money they got for signing it plus interest. That's how both parties came out ahead and you got a "we."
This part of the debate was really entertaining. It was when Scar was turned on by the hyenas.
suggestions to Bloomberg go over his head.
Elizabeth Warren pretended to be a minority so she could get preferences in getting jobs. So forgive me if I don't think that's a morally superior position to making uncomfortable jokes while actually creating jobs for others.
Sometimes AA makes me want to join up with rhhardin.
"would have us picture women as priggish and humor deaf."
That would be so unfair!
How can Bloomberg live in the Democrats' America and not realize that telling a bad joke is cause for cancellation — banishment from your own well-established professional life?
Maybe he's on "the spectrum."
I don't think NDAs over employment disputes should be released any more than divorce papers. They are one and the same. I don't know what's true, but once you know let it be known people can get extra money for making an accusation, you are encouraging accusations.
I only saw the end of the debate, but I didn't think Bloomberg did that poorly. He didn't have people In the audience "Yass queening" him, though.
Lizzie Warren took an axe ...
After that performance, I’d love to see Warren debate Trump but debating Pence would be fun too.
"I love the lawprof vigor Warren displayed there"
I love Althouse taking sides here.
Push the right buttons, and pfft goes cruel neutrality.
A cartoon bubble forms above Bloomburger's head:
"Maybe this wasn't such a good idea."
Bernie doesn't understand timing, and he opened himself up to criticism that he's not an actual Democrat. Between Bernie and Bloomberg, Democrats are in trouble. Also, what's with all the male Democrats starting with a B? It's like the 90's Astros Killer B's.
No quote from Klobuchar?
"Bloomberg clearly did not see this one coming. (Why didn't he?) He could have said the agreements were not between him and a person with a complaint, they were between that person and Bloomberg LLP. Which would have given him the opportunity to take some air out of Warren's sails by schooling the corporate attorney on the basics of incorporation."
As I say in the post, I think that was his point, and he could have said that more explicitly. I think he knew that and he and his people explored that possibility. I presume the decision not to speak in those more explicit terms was based on the problem of it sounding fussily legalistic. There may be other issues, and it would have been more complicated than people would understand, especially since they'd also be resistant to legalisms.
What are the odds that one of these geezers will have a serious health issue before the election? Bloomberg is 78, Bernie is 78, Warren is 71, Biden is 77 and Trump is 73.
Personally, I loved Bloomberg's heel turn. He has lots of baggage and he is standing taking the punches and not backing down. (Compare that to Klobuchar's whiney "are you calling me dumb"). The hatred of his performance is not universal. I thought most of his night was lame but when he scored, he really scored. Maybe the bar is low, but a full throated unapologetic defense of capitalism was weirdly brave and avant garde at the democratic convention.
It almost felt like when bad guy wrestler come to the town and talk about how all the fans are fat, stupid, losers to work up the crowd. Bloomberg in effect stood on stage and told the Democratic party that it full of stupid, commie, losers that need to get a grip on reality. And everyone is booing now. Except me and people like me.
"Why won't I release the NDAs? Because a deal is a deal and I paid for it and fuck you, that's why...." I can't be alone in admiring the chutzpah.
But it did show how bad he is at communicating. He had one simple statement and he was dead set on repeating it without variation. I think he believed that any deviation from the planned phrase would create new problems and was not worth the risk. So he completely avoided spontaneity.
Sometimes AA makes me want to join up with rhhardin.
The appeal of Althouse, in addition to free speech, is that she's a smart woman unable to notice that it's not a mistake that men and women think differntly.
It's less fascinating if a stupid woman is like that, because that's easily accounted for.
Ann Althouse said...they'd also be resistant to legalisms.
I think that's a bad take. There's no downside to saying "I'm not Bloomberg LLP and I can't just tell them to cancel a contract. I'm surprised, Senator, that you, of all people, didn't know that."
It's not a communication problem so much as an audience that won't tolerate the correct answer.
Trump at least had an audience that loved accurate zingers of those needing to be zinged.
Bloomberg would have been better off pleading the 5th.
I'm a little bit astonished that no one told him this wasn't going to work. Did he not notice that Donald Trump became president by acknowledging it all and brushing it aside? Who in the world became president by continuing to cover it up ineffectually?
I imagine, by the way, that he probably didn't do anything much that terrible. Just a vulgar jerk, more or less. But did he really imagine that he could keep that hidden? Or at least as hidden as it is right now?
"Only Rosie O'Donnell"
Kill the Pig, kill the Pig, kill the Pig. Or maybe it's kill the Hog in Bloomie's case.The Cherokee Chief Warren knows how to lead a tribe in hunting down, capturing and killing a pig.
And how many trips did Piggie take to Orgy Island on Epstein's Lolita Express?
Maybe Bloomberg is managing expectations, running a hustle. Next time everybody will be amazed at how much better he does.
The big takeaway of the night for me: why did they all hit Bloomberg so hard when Bernie is the frontrunner? It's like they all see something obvious that voters don't...
"... a deal is a deal..."
A contract can be changed by agreement. The phrase "a deal is a deal" is what one party to a deal says to the other when conditions change and it's no longer a deal you would make. But if both parties want to renegotiate and come to a new agreement, the original deal is no obstacle. It's implicit in the deal that the deal can be changed by agreement of the parties.
"BLOOMBERG: Let me finish"
When you're defending, you're losing.
Points are only score on offense.
D.D. Driver said..."Why won't I release the NDAs? Because a deal is a deal and I paid for it and fuck you, that's why...."
+1
I would laugh out loud and probably be more likely to vote for him if he said that verbatim.
My guess is that The Bloom doesn't ask anyone for their advice.
Bloomberg is just in the wrong party. Simple. He thinks his support of abortion makes him a Democrat. That is so 1980.
In Japan, according to Radio Japan, if one party to a contract finds he's not making money, they renegotiate the contract. Sort of a friendly business environment.
"I think that's a bad take. There's no downside to saying "I'm not Bloomberg LLP and I can't just tell them to cancel a contract. I'm surprised, Senator, that you, of all people, didn't know that.""
Well, if you don't see the downside, that's your limitation. Just saying "LLP" is confusing. Saying "I can't just" makes anybody wonder, yes, but what CAN you do... and how will you perform as President, with this tendency to view yourself as disempowered. And the "you, of all people" aimed at Warren would provoke hellfire from the lady.
I think that's a bad take. There's no downside to saying "I'm not Bloomberg LLP and I can't just tell them to cancel a contract. I'm surprised, Senator, that you, of all people, didn't know that."
Too easy... "There he goes again, just like other Billionaires, hiding behind corporations to evade responsibility. What other things did you get away with hiding behind your corporate shield. When I'm president...."
Maybe Bloomberg has a rope-a-dope strategy we’re not understanding (and I’m not saying I buy this).
His basic message was - these buffoons are incompetent and can run the country and I’m sophisticated and can.
If his ads shift, we’ll see if this is a strategy. What he could start pushing is the democrat party has become a party of personal destruction. All we heard last night were one-up attacks. Most said their policies were basically the same so they have to destroy each other.
I don’t destroy. I work with all kinds of people. Democrats have a choice. Destroy each other and lose to Trump. Or, pick me, save the party from these morons, and we might have a chance to beat Trump.
I don’t think that’s a winning strategy. I think the democrats have allowed Trump to drive them insane. Only Trump can be Trump and no one on that stage can out-Trump Trump.
Sounds super compelling and interesting. Zzzzzzz
ST:
I doubt your ADA covered future sexual harassment and discrimination claims. It probably covered IP, trade secrets, customer lists and the like.
AA:
Warren is the last person you want to hold up as an example of a law prof. She's not that smart (not first at NYU), kind of crazy, a liar about her race and very unlikable. Her shrieking manner turns everyone off. I can't get past it. That's what people a see: an angry harridan.
You pay women to go away. It's like whores. While looking pointedly at Warren.
The more I read about Bloomberg's performance the more clear it is that he whiffed badly. If he actually did all the debate prepping that was reported then the miss is that he, and his advisers and coaches, didn't understand how his answers would be received.
So, yeah, woefully out of touch AND not ready. Trump seems surprised by this too.
I stand by it. "LLP" is not an obscure term, people know what a companty is (and if you want to quibble over the precise wording, then change it). You're talking about the people who can't stop shouting about how Trump is a dictator, now dictator is a good thing? And, finally, go ahead. Provoke hellfire. If that's too scary, then Bloomberg doesn't belong up there.
"The prey is down and the pack of predators leaps upon him..."
From the Electable One to the Delectable One in a single debate.
In answer to Ann's question, how did Bloomberg imagine he could get away with it, I would guess he (like Harvey Weinstein) assumed his status as a Democrat masher and scourge of the NRA and Republicans would buy him the Clinton pass. If he considered Roseanne Barr at all, her (staged or real) support of Trump was sufficient explanation of cancellation.
maybe they didn't like a joke I told
Did anyone walk into a bar?
I wonder if he even knew as he was speaking how badly he was failing.
Probably not. It's very hard for powerful people to understand the environment outside their control since people self-censor around them. This is especially true when they openly express strong opinions. He's told his media advisors his answers will work 1,000 times and been wrong all 1,000. But this is the first time he can't control the effects of being wrong.
This is why "fresh" faces seem to deal better with the public. They haven't been in position for this effect to influence them as long as others.
Didn't Ace of Spades run through a fictional questioning of Bloomberg on this very topic that more or less went the same way? Does Warren read Ace?
The notion that jokes don't matter is profoundly out of touch.
No, Bloomberg isn't "profoundly out of touch" because he doesn't grasp that he must bow to the power of the Woke Brigade, the great collective She Who Must Be Obeyed, whose power is unassailable and whose eternal reign inevitable. (According to some, ahem.)
He's "out of touch" only within the progressive scold and control-freak frame, which he can't get out of because he, too, is essentially one of them.
Picture Warren in a debate trying to run "lawprof rigor" on Trump re unapproved joking. (Now *that's* funny.)
Really appreciate all the different takes on this. I watched about 5 minutes of the debate and then went to sleep. The only thing I can figure given that Bloomberg is a smart dude very successful is that he knew he was going to take a haircut in this debate and so when you know you're going to be punished, you just keep your mouth shut think happy thoughts and get done with it. What will be telling in the next debate if they keep hammering him on the same issues and how he responds my guess is he's going to go for asked and answered, time to move on.
A contract can be changed by agreement. The phrase "a deal is a deal" is what one party to a deal says to the other when conditions change and it's no longer a deal you would make. But if both parties want to renegotiate and come to a new agreement, the original deal is no obstacle. It's implicit in the deal that the deal can be changed by agreement of the parties."
No offense, Professor, but "duh." When people use the phrase "a deal is a deal" it is usually communicating that we have a deal and I am holding you to your end of the bargain. Nobody says "a deal is a deal" because they are confused about whether can amend a deal. [Joe Biden Voice] Come on, man!
...expect everyone to recognize that facts are facts and he's the only one who could beat Donald Trump and then carry out presidential duties with competence and pragmatism. But he could not even figure out how to handle the predictable attacks at this planned event.
Yes! He needs to first get the Dem nomination and, like it or not, there are certain things he needs to do to get it. He's already done it with saying he was wrong about Stop and Frisk.
His response that he did nothing wrong except perhaps say some jokes that the women didn't like is, politically, about the stupidest thing he could have said. He would have gotten by with some boilerplate language about how times have changed and then say, after a long pause with a look of contrition, what was viewed as acceptable behavior in the rough and tumble trading world 30 years ago is clearly no longer acceptable.
"save the party from these morons"
Sorry, Mini Mike. Progs prefer them.
Of course, Mike has baggage, including not having the courage of any convictions. But he is at least relatively sane, and he is vastly more accomplished. Built a big company, was a pretty successful mayor of the biggest city, not South Bend. It's not clear he could really get actual Dem voters to take that seriously, but at least he had to reach out to them, instead of running a general election strategy in the primaries.
We deplorables rejoice.
Thanks, Mike! Thanks, Dems!
If Michael Bloomberg is elected, horse-faced lesbians will finally have a champion in the White House. Finally!
Everyone thought Bill C was toast several times in 1991-92. Bloomer doesn't have to worry about donors or rats leaving the treasure ship.
I would expect that all of the senior staff at Bloomberg have signed NDAs. It is commonplace. That Dem candidates for POTUS would not know this says a lot. They likely think NDAs are to hush women who have been repeatedly raped on the conference table ten years ago.
"save the party from these morons"
Warren, Biden and Bloomberg are out fishing in a rowboat on a big lake when a bad storm swamps the boat and it sinks - who is saved?
The US of A!
I can think of at least three people who probably wouldn't like that joke.
"Democrat macher" not masher. Although sometimes autocorrect shows a wicked, if Brit, sense of humor.
There's no downside to saying "I'm not Bloomberg LLP and I can't just tell them to cancel a contract. I'm surprised, Senator, that you, of all people, didn't know that."
The response is obvious, "You control Bloomberg LLP, and if you told them to cancel the NDAs, they'd do it in a New York minute."
There's no downside to not canceling the NDAs, just like there was no downside to Obama not releasing his records from his Congressional office, and no downside to pretending Bill Ayers didn't put him on the map.
If we've learned anything, it's.....power through.
Remember, Elizabeth Warren released her DNA results because she thought it proved her claim. Not because she had been hiding her bad results.
Utilizing the separate person corporate defense for an L.L.P. seems even more fraught legalistically. The whole point is NOT to have a separate entity for tax purposes. Try explaining that in front of a bunch of Bernie Bros. The dance of the corporate veil--now you see it, now you don't.
I'm glad I didn't go with my first comment: "I'd have just said, 'I don't discuss issues with NDA's in place'" I skipped it because I realized that was an option that, as Althouse noted, was rejected as a response. I think such a comment is the equivalent of "I plead the fifth", which is fair in trial, but in politics, it opens the question of what my you be implicated as having done. Only instructions by a judge to jury says pleading the fifth can't be used against you. It is meaningless in politics.
Bloomberg knew he was going to take some guff at the debate. His strategy was OK.
He definitely looked like he wanted to be a Republican again after spending two hours with The Senators.
Obama made all his people sign NDA’s.
He’s not letting them out of theirs either.
He should have countered that at least people know about is NDAs; how many and how much have been paid for confidential settlements between Congress and staff. At least his NDAs come with funds paid from a private entity; the Congressional settlements are secret and paid with our tax money. Would all the Senators running agree to at least let the public know if they have been a party in one of these settlements?
Biden’s starting to wish his NDA prevented him from running for President.
Bloomberg should have asked Joe when he’s making Hunter’s tax returns public.
In answer to Ann's question, how did Bloomberg imagine he could get away with it, I would guess he (like Harvey Weinstein) assumed his status as a Democrat masher and scourge of the NRA and Republicans would buy him the Clinton pass.
Probably the answer. He does not look like a guy who cheerfully accepts criticism.
He bought the VA legislature but deluded himself that he could be the front man. Soros is smarter than that.
How can Bloomberg live in the Democrats' America and not realize that telling a bad joke is cause for cancellation — banishment from your own well-established professional life?
Roseanne Barr was only cancelled because of her offhand support of Trump. Democrats routinely allow their friends and allies to do and say reprehensible things that would ruin a regular American, much less a Rebulican. Kathy Griffin would be a better analogy. Her transgression was pretty violent in spirit in contrast to Roseanne.
Do republicans wear blackface?
Do they host private email servers?
Who gets prosecuted for process crimes and who gets a free pass for the same?
Does #MeToo apply to ex-presidents?
The list goes on and on.
Bloomberg rightly understands that as a D any firestorm will be quickly ignored when he waggles his fat wallet at the power brokers.
Women and minors cannot be held to legally binding contracts.
Left Bank of the Charles: "Lizzie Warren took an axe ...
After that performance, I’d love to see Warren debate Trump but debating Pence would be fun too."
LOL
It's now 2020 and Left Bank STILL thinks Mini Mike is somehow an approximation of DJT.
I don't think its possible to cure that degree of doltishness.
I didn't see the debate. Did Bloomberg stand on a box?
[Bloomberg] thinks he can shrug off a mere joke in the old male chauvinist style that would have us picture women as priggish and humor deaf.
Who says Althouse doesn't do sarcasm?
All the comments about Bloomberg looking weak on sexism, racism, etc are correct.
But Bloomberg's alleged strength is pragmatic, get it done competence. Anyone think that is how he came across on TV?
Bill Buckley and Christopher Hitchens seldom lost a debate, but that's not to say their arguments would win elections. Warren looked hectoring when she demanded the release of the NDA's. The other candidates looked like they were piling on. Bloomberg didn't look sympathetic, but neither did he look dismissive or contemptuous. I don't think Warren won any votes for herself, and Bloomberg might have picked up a few. He definitely stood out from the rest of the field, if only because he was the one they all ganged up on. My heart went out to that small, frail old man with nothing but his billions to protect him from the wrath of the mob.
Bloomberg is by far the best of the Democratic candidates.
Think about that.
I live in coastal CA, there is no value to voting in the R primary, so I vote D. I vote for the D which I think would be best. After watching last night, my choice of Bloomberg is cemented.
For all his immense faults, Bloomberg is not a nutty socialist. The rest of them are.
In the land of the blind, the cataract man is king.
Seriously think: which would you choose?
In contrast, I hated what Warren did. I hate gotcha. I hate cancel culture. I don’t care how skillfully Warren distorts, demonizes, demagogues, and witch-hunts. That is just what is wrong with our culture. I don’t approve of Mao's cultural revolution, and I don’t agree of this pale copy of it either.
Does Nanny Bloomie have binders full of NDA women?
Bloomberg is a bad communicator. Maybe one on one his is better. But his speaking to the masses is a miss. His talk about farming not being difficult because the agrarian revolution was 3000 years ago, and today its been reduced to a process, is mostly on point, but he over simplified and used bad analogies. The debate stage position that capitalism is far superior to "democratic socialism" is a no brainer. Capitalism has lifted the planet out of abject poverty. Thousands of examples exist of failed socialism. Bernie uses Norway. I would counter with France. The blue collar class has been demonstrating against "democratic socialism" for over 2 years! Same with other countries across the EU,(of which England is no longer a member). South America is 200 years of, 100's of attempts at "democratic socialism". Today, at least half a dozen SA countries are struggling, and that doesn't have to include Venezuela.
In the arena of communicating with the masses. President Trump wins hands down.
As has been pointed out since November 10,2016, Democrats have not yet fiqured out why President Trump is elected, and why he is more popular than Obama, at the same time of their Presidency. That with the sycophantic press propping up Obama, and the Deep State and press have been in full smear mode since before President Trump was elected.
President Trump connects with voters. Not by design, and practice, but because he truly is advancing policies for the betterment of all the people. Not pandering to specific identity groups.
Biden: Barack and I making things right in NYC with monitors, minotaurs, moderators ...
But it did show how bad he is at communicating. He had one simple statement and he was dead set on repeating it without variation. I think he believed that any deviation from the planned phrase would create new problems and was not worth the risk. So he completely avoided spontaneity.
2/20/20, 7:53 AM
"My opponent is a liar and cannot be trusted!"
Yeah, Bloomberg does not have nearly as much Merit as he pretends, and his path is over before it began. Even Inga was turning on him last night and embracing the Sandernistas. This election is done.
Was Justin Trudeau cancelled?
Even after he physically assaulted two members of parliament?
Cancellation is selective.
Look these women didn't go to Bloomberg and pay HIM money for HIS silence. It was the other way around. There's ZERO Reason he can't say, "I release you from the NDA, say what you wish". And Bloomberg LLP = mike bloomberg! BTW, he's worth $50 Billion and if the releasing them from the NDA costs a couple million, so what? He's already spent $100 million.
Fortunately, his natural charisma made his bad choice of words, persuasive. That Mike Bloomberg could sell ice to Eskimos.
"Even after he physically assaulted two members of parliament?"
And Trudeau assaulted them while wearing black face! But they were LIBERAL women, so it doesn't matter. They love to "take one for the team"
"Push the right buttons, and pfft goes cruel neutrality."
I'll defend the Prof here. It's possible to like something someone did or does without endorsing them wholeheartedly.
I have an NDA with every previous employer. I designed software. NDAs are standard.
Those fussing about the NDAs know perfectly well there is nothing but chickenshit. What they want is to make chickenshit the issue. What jokes did she not like in 1993? This is the Kavanaugh approach, again. Pfui.
This is another rhhardin vindication thread. I used to hate those.
We don't know what Bloomberg did. HE's the one saying it a "JOKE". Why should we take his word?
Absurd. Let Bloomberg release the women. Have them tell us what he did. Then we can judge for ourselves, if we want to laugh or not at his so-called "Jokes".
Q for the thread winner
If the NDA's are "Chickenshit" than that's even more reason for Bloomberg to release the women from them.
I am certain that we will see those agreements hiding behind the NDAs around the same time that we will see Trump's tax returns, eg. never
What a revolting culture Prof. Althouse and her political comrades have created, where people get canceled for telling a joke.
Sean, who stole your balls? What does it take to get your panties in a bunch over a bunch of shrieking harpies.
Bloomberg is either not great at thinking on the fly or is in thrall to "advisers' who pressed upon him to stay "on script".
There are many reasons for NDAs:
They could be for business reasons--strategy or operational procedures that need to be kept private. Some could be related to complaints, but there is a valid justification to NDAs here too. If a matter is resolved to everyone's satisfaction, it may be very complicated to just issue a blanket dissolution of the contract. Say, two employees are at loggerheads and there is no assignment of blame but the solution is to put them into different departments. One of them may be happy to talk about this, the other might sue Bloomberg L.P. because they are unilaterally dissolving a contract.
Ken B: Those fussing about the NDAs know perfectly well there is nothing but chickenshit. What they want is to make chickenshit the issue. What jokes did she not like in 1993? This is the Kavanaugh approach, again. Pfui.
If only they all knew it was chickenshit. I wish Althouse and voters like her thought it was all chickenshit, a cynical distraction from stuff that matters, but they don't.
On the other hand, I don't mind the Dem candidates choking on chickenshit all the way to November and beyond. I hope they go all in pandering to the soap-opera women demographic. That strategy lost them the last election and will lose them this one, Deo volente and the crick don't rise.
I think that's a bad take. There's no downside to saying "I'm not Bloomberg LLP and I can't just tell them to cancel a contract. I'm surprised, Senator, that you, of all people, didn't know that."
Her response could certainly be that the managing partner of Bloomberg LLP is probably not Frankie Bloomberg, and that his K-1 would inform him that he owns the controlling membership interests...which would account for his billion$$.
It’s remarkably tone deaf of the guy not to have planned this out better. It was entirely foreseeable. I imagine that’s what comes from living on the upper east side
- Krumhorn
This 19 second clip reveals the clear winner of last night's debate.
This is not a compliment, but I loved our hostess’ underscoring to the transcript. It was the text equivalent to the iconic John Williams Jaws score.
- Krumhorn
Browndog: This 19 second clip reveals the clear winner of last night's debate.
Lol. Comment at link: "Sorry what was this audition for? The Presidential nomination or the next empty seat on The View?"
Bill Buckley and Christopher Hitchens seldom lost a debate
You maybe didn’t see Hitchens take on Christian apologist William Lane Craig.
Bloomberg won the second hour of the debate. He took Sanders apart. The media narrative built quickly last night that those first brutal minutes with Warren slashing and cutting were the whole story. They weren’t. But media narratives still have some power to drive the national view. I’m thinking Bloomberg survives pretty much unscathed.
rhhardin said...
If they want to be released from the NDA, let them return the money they got for signing it plus interest. That's how both parties came out ahead and you got a "we."
Bernie's campaign should still have more than enough money to cover several women's NDA breaking payouts.
The real problem is that if they break their NDA, no one in the financial services industry will ever hire them again, so he also has to get them an equal paying job at one of the "non-profits"
MayBee said...
Elizabeth Warren pretended to be a minority so she could get preferences in getting jobs. So forgive me if I don't think that's a morally superior position to making uncomfortable jokes while actually creating jobs for others.
I feel like a moron, because this didn't occur to me, first.
We now see Bloomberg's total lack of debate prep here. When Warren pounded on him about his NDAs (something they HAD to expect would happen), he should have shot back with "you are a white woman who pretended to be Native American if order to take advantage of affirmative action while you were trying to become a tenured Harvard Professor. Are you willing to agree here and now that every school you ever worked for, or applied to, should release all your application documents, and anything they had that would have indicated your claims of Native American heritage helped you get those jobs?
And if Amy attacked him he should have been quoting articles where staff talked about her throwing things at people.
Biden? Records of contacts with companies that hired his son / brother
Pete? Bernie? I'm sure they have things they aren't releasing. Bloomberg should have been ready for all of them. And would have, if he'd gone through competent debate prep.
But, instead, he looked like a pissed off deer in the headlights, because apparently all; he hires are yes men
Stone sentenced to 3 years, 4 months.
Krumhorn said...
It’s remarkably tone deaf of the guy not to have planned this out better. It was entirely foreseeable. I imagine that’s what comes from living on the upper east side
It's what comes of only hiring yes men, instead of people willing to tell you when you're screwing up.
Or, at least, it comes of not being willing to listen to them.
The US Army trains under the policy of "the more you sweat, the less you bleed". Bloomberg didn't sweat nearly enough before hand, so, there he was on the stage, bleeding from self inflicted wounds
I wonder if Bloomberg donated any money to any of these candidates' previous campaigns. If so, he could have said, you weren't worried about any of this when you were taking my money back when. Anyway, NDAs work both ways. Bloomberg would have to be careful about talking about them because maybe he'd breach and one of the women who wouldn't want to waive who'd have a new cause of action.
He could have said something to that effect, how in the real world where people have jobs and responsibility for other people's jobs, disputes happen, people have grievances or think they do and an employer has to try to find a way to resolve those disagreements so they settle and the parties agree not to talk about it anymore as part of that settlement. And he thinks several of the people on the stage know all about this because Congress has been doing this for decades with staffers who complain about harassment, etc.
No reason to stick to the sex topic.
Sanders really lacks instincts in the debates - here, Bloomberg was a dead man walking, and Sanders jumps in to change the subject and let him off the hook. 2016 election cycle, Clinton is spinning in the wind over the homebrew e-mail server, Sanders jumps in and says everyone is tired of the topic and we should move on, letting her off the hook.
Bloomberg won the second hour of the debate. He took Sanders apart. The media narrative built quickly last night that those first brutal minutes with Warren slashing and cutting were the whole story. They weren’t. But media narratives still have some power to drive the national view. I’m thinking Bloomberg survives pretty much unscathed.
I thought I was alone. I actually missed the first 10 minutes or so last night so perhaps that colored my perception. But I thought when Bloomberg went on offense he was very effective. Bloomberg's attack on Sanders was brutal. And Sanders' come back was hilarious: he has his one house in DC, and then also his normal house, and the third house doesn't really count because its a lake house! Wait? What?
All Bloomberg needed to do was be convincing about being a decent human. He didn't. That farming blather is going to hurt him. The election isn't about who runs things well. It is about who benefits.
He could have said something like'a couple women who worked for me were put into uncomfortable positions, inadvertantly mostly. I made sure they were looked after. I pay people very well, and if there is something not right I fix it right away.'
But he didn't. He minimized the harm, 'just a joke'. I consider all this stuff beneath me, I just write a check and make sure it all goes away.
This election is going to be about who is important. Trump and the Democrats will fight it out, with the Democrats standing up for bureaucrats, Trump for the working class. Bloomberg thinks it's about Trump. It isn't.
It's Bloomberg L.P. (limited partnership) not Bloomberg LLP (limited liability partnership).
The difference primarily is that the lead partner (Bloomberg) runs the place and has liability for it's actions.
tim maguire said...
Bloomberg clearly did not see this one coming. (Why didn't he?)
Do you think in debate prep, when his aides (gingerly) brought it up, he just waved it aside and snapped at them to forget about that trivial crap and stick to policy? That's the impression I got: that Bloomie thought he was going come out and be the Voice of Reason, the policy wonk, who would get to stand there and calmly show off his business expertise. Of course, that's not how political debates work nowadays (they used to, once upon a time: watch an old clip of the Kennedy-Nixon debates) but are his employees gonna argue with a guy with more money than God?
So nobody on his staff leveled with him and then he stepped out on stage and promptly got leveled.
exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...
Of course, that's not how political debates work nowadays but are his employees gonna argue with a guy with more money than God?
So nobody on his staff leveled with him and then he stepped out on stage and promptly got leveled.
The strongest argument one can give for "why you shouldn't vote for Bloomberg" is "he tries to only hire yes men. And ignores anyone else"
It doesn't matter how much you like his policies. He has no competence
Marshall Rose said:
"Roseanne Barr was only cancelled because of her offhand support of Trump. Democrats routinely allow their friends and allies to do and say reprehensible things that would ruin a regular American, much less a Rebulican. Kathy Griffin would be a better analogy. Her transgression was pretty violent in spirit in contrast to Roseanne."
Very true, but Kathy Griffin isn't running for office against other Democrats.
Bernie threw Hillary softballs in '16. Perhaps Bloomie thought that he's given so much money to Dem candidates that his opponents would handle him with kid gloves. He was wrong.
Althouse cheers as another business owner is turned into a Green Grocer.
It's not a good look.
I wouldn't assume that some joke a few years ago disqualifies a candidate for the presidency. These things are still in flux, and sometimes a candidate who angers the politically correct right-thinking scolds can get away with it. When enough pundits say somebody lost the night, there's often a backlash. When the consensus is that somebody is stuck it can be a pleasure to see him wriggle out of it. Voters may hate Bloomberg, but they don't want authorities or moralists telling them to hate Bloomberg. They have to come to it on their own.
"... that would have us picture women as priggish and humor deaf. "
Pretty accurate description of uptight Democrat feminist scolds seeking to codify and enforce their personal sensibilities into cultural law that cannot be broken.
How can Bloomberg live in the Democrats' America and not realize that telling a bad joke is cause for cancellation — banishment from your own well-established professional life?
You're just as melodramatic as usual. "Banishment?" Roseanne's business partners stopped doing business with her because her statements were felt to be bad for their businesses, given the business in which she was in and promoting herself as a working class hero. Black Americans tend heavily toward working class. Once she wants to run in a presidential primary and garner the funding and polling needed to qualify for debates then we can talk. Apples and oranges. You really do confuse issues a lot, don't you?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा