Here's the post I wrote yesterday. This got published at The Wall Street Journal (here, behind a pay wall and with some elisions, which I'll put in red):
It's crazy that Bloomberg has achieved such status in the race without exposing his candidate skills to the people. We have no idea what impression he will make on a debate stage, which will be crucial for challenging Trump. Bloomberg has stood back and watched so many of the Democratic candidates drop out, candidates who had to try to stand out in a debate and couldn't make it in a heavy crowd. Now, the crowd has thinned out, and everyone left is running out of money. And here's Mike, with endless money and still waiting to go on stage.
Will he even be in the next debate, which is this Wednesday? The DNC changed the qualification rules to help Bloomberg. They got rid of the requirement of a number of donors. But he needs some number of polls putting him over 10%, and the latest info I can find, here, says he's still one short. It's funny, because I was just checking for new polls at Real Clear Politics, and there hasn't been anything new since last Friday and no new national poll since last Wednesday. The most recent national poll surveyed people from 2/9 to 2/11. That seems odd, doesn't it? Are polls being held back? I remember before the Iowa caucus, the Des Moines Register held back its poll.
I wonder if the Democrats aren't getting themselves into terrible trouble over Mike Bloomberg. I like listening to "Morning Joe" on my car radio as I drive back home after my sunrise run. This is a 5 minute drive and about all I can tolerate, but it's good for giving me a sense of what Democrats are freaking out about at the moment. Today, they were tormenting themselves over Mike Bloomberg. He's got race-and-gender problems, but so did Trump. He's a billionaire, but so is Trump. If Trump did it, shouldn't that mean Bloomberg can do it?
I don't think they've faced up to why Trump was able to do what he did. Without first giving Trump credit, they're in no position to say so then Mike can do it too. It sounded to me as though they think of Trump as evidence that weird magic things happen. So, why not Mike? At the very least, they should recognize that Trump had a powerful skill in knocking down rivals on the debate stage, and Bloomberg has yet to set foot on the stage. It's crazy to forsake all others for Bloomberg.
पोस्ट्स
१२८ टिप्पण्या:
Woke up this morning, after the long holiday weekend, was eating a bowl of granola with blueberries for breakfast, broke out the trusty WSJ, and lo behold, saw the Althouse reference.
Made my morning!
Congrats, Althouse! I reckon important folks are reading your stuff.
It will be interesting to see how much your page views spike.
Althouse read by the Masters of the Universe! And Rush Limbaugh!
It's silly how pleased I am to see my favorite blog quoted in my favorite paper.
Great that they are reading you but I don't think this shows you at your best.
Not to spam you or anything, but congratulations!
"Congrats, Althouse! I reckon important folks are reading your stuff."
Many years ago (about 2008), the WSJ pushed me to do op-eds for them, but I never did it. It's just too nerve wracking. It might seem like blogging, but it's not. The feeling is so different.
If I'd wanted to publish more in mainstream media, I could have gone in that direction, but I felt a powerful resistance. The blog is easy for me to write, because I'm so perfectly in the zone and have been for 16 years. It's just not something I'm looking to evolve out of. I'm completely satisfied with exactly what it is. Other things are for other people.
But it is WEIRD to think that my casual statements about Morning Joe and Bloomberg could very easily be read by them. And actually I am glad to read some important Democrats with my advice, if they can use it.
I suppose somebody has to be a negative Nancy
It's great that they are reading you and publishing you, and it reveals your perfect timing. Congratulations!
"It will be interesting to see how much your page views spike."
Probably not at all.
They didn't even give a link.
"The blog is easy for me to write, because I'm so perfectly in the zone and have been for 16 years”
You are really channelling Rush today. First with the compliments thing: “Just say dittos and move on...” is how Rush put it. And now, was that statement audited by the Sullivan Group?
“Executing host duties flawlessly”
Not to compliment you or anything, but I agree.
"But it is WEIRD to think that my casual statements about Morning Joe and Bloomberg could very easily be read by them."
These goofballs should be reading you and learning things.
We will know Althouse has reached peak political prestige when the NY Times writes a piece, "The Chuck-Drago Chronicles -- the anatomy of a contentious blogosphere exchange in the era of Trump"
It just fell into my mind that Trump just started running in his own inimitable way inviting us to follow him wherever that takes us, and all these others are making carefully constructed statements aimed at various demographic groups indicating the candidates' willingness to follow them.
“It sounded to me as though they think of Trump as evidence that weird magic things happen. So, why not Mike?”
I’m surprised they would permit you to point out their magical thinking.
That's the essence of con job 101, Hagar. I know it's hard for squareheads but please try and keep up.
TIL what "elisions" means. Thanks for that, Professor.
"Other things are for other people."
I particularly like that.
I am Laslo.
"I don't think they've faced up to why Trump was able to do what he did"
Neither has the WSJ.
"actually I am glad to read some important Democrats with my advice"
I take it you think that the Dems, instigators of the Russia collusion hoax and the sham impeachment, deserve your advice. Why?
Should we still be excited by Ann's appearance in traditional print media? Given the sorry state of NYT and WaPo and MSM print in general haven't we arrived at a place where blogs such as Althouse should no longer be considered subordinate to traditional media in terms of information and quality of journalism? I find myself relying less on mainstream news and more on a mix of blog, tweet and print, usually in that order...
Perhaps WSJ should be excited to be referenced by Althouse?
May I be permitted to add my congratulations?
Bloomberg failed to mention that in 2013 Bloomberg News was caught in a scandal when it killed news stories revealing corruption related to Xi Jinping’s family members, prompting various reporters and editors to resign. It turned out that Bloomberg News leadership told the editors that stories about the families of politburo members were off limits.
Bloomberg is going nowhere.
If there is supposed to be a common goal, such as winning an election, say, some characteristic of leadership in the candidates seeking the leading position for the group would seem to be desirable.
Those were some good elisions by the WSJ.
Did Bloomberg stand back and watch? Certainly he did up to the point where he entered the race on November 24, 2019. But after that the DNC rules kept him out of the debates. Did the DNC change the qualification rules to help Bloomberg? I don't know, perhaps like Althouse the DNC think Bloomberg was getting a free ride and the debates will slow him down.
The big question is whether Bloomberg needs to have Trump's skill in knocking down rivals on the debate stage. That may be fighting the last war.
@Achilles,
"Bloomberg is going nowhere."
But, regrettably, his billions are going somewhere.
quelle surprise
You can only ride one horse and wear one set of silks at a time.
"It's crazy to forsake all others for Bloomberg."
I guess that counts as "advice." But as I said in the thread yesterday, it's not crazy for Dems to do that. For one thing, they have to consider the Althouses of America: liberal women who like to think they vote for "serious" and "competent" candidates, against "chaos" and such. If they were to forsake all others, Dems might miscalculate, for example because the Althouses really prefer a woman, but the miscalculation need not be crazy.
And while it is certainly risky to bet on Mini Mike, it is also risky not to settle on one anti-Bernie soon.
Nice! Congrats.
I think Trump is likely to win on an economic basis, and suspect that there's no real reason to think Bloomberg is as strong a candidate as his checkbook has been. So if it's Trump-Bloomberg and Trump wins, what then for the Democratic party, having nominated basically a billionaire Republican on their ticket in hopes of defeating the exact same thing? Who does the moderate wing run, and on what platform do they run, in 2024-- if they exist at all at that point?
It's about time the MSM caught on that there is more intelligent commentary here than there. There are other blogs with some smart commenters (although Laslo is unique to this one) but you have to wade through dozens of shrill partisan and name-calling comments to find them. There's some of that here, but much less than on other blogs.
“ And actually I am glad to read some important Democrats with my advice, if they can use it.”
Reach.
Not read.
Hagar said...
It just fell into my mind that Trump just started running in his own inimitable way inviting us to follow him wherever that takes us, and all these others are making carefully constructed statements aimed at various demographic groups indicating the candidates' willingness to follow them.
Trump was saying what we wanted said.
Trump said he was going to do the things we wanted done.
And amazingly enough Trump is actually doing what he said he was going to do.
Trump has:
1. Lowered taxes on the working class.
2. Stopped subsidizing blue state millionaires.
3. Lowered taxes on capital used in the US
4. Reduced the massive inflow of cheap labor.
5. Raised costs on capital invested in China.
And magically our economy is the strongest it has ever been.
Bloomberg will fall to Trump because Americans know who will put them first. Bloomberg is a compromised globalist. This will be exposed during the primary.
Have fun with Bernie as the nominee. Not even Michelle is going to save you from this clown fiesta.
By the way, crazy thought experiment, what if "important Democrats" were to read not just Althouse but also the deplorable commenters--I mean seriously, bracketing their usual contempt. Carville, if he still counts as important, could do it. Perhaps a few others. If for once they were willing, what would they learn?
So, does the WSJ pay you? I hope so.
“ And actually I am glad to read some important Democrats with my advice, if they can use it.”
“Forsaking all others” alludes to marriage vows.
In this analogy, I’m recommending premarital sex.
The debate is sex....
If only Bloomberg wouldn't repudiate what he knows! He'd be better than Trump.
Bay Area Guy said...
@Achilles,
"Bloomberg is going nowhere."
But, regrettably, his billions are going somewhere.
He can spend an order of magnitude more money than Jeb and carry the same message.
He is getting an order of magnitude more support than Jeb.
Bloomberg is still a joke.
The problem for Democrats and for Bloomberg and for the GOPe and Jeb is that nobody is buying what they are selling.
Boy that was a lot of shit to go thru for one comment Blogger.
“ So, does the WSJ pay you? I hope so.”
No. They didn’t even ask for permission. But they did unto me what I do unto them, so I am cool with that.
"Speak the truth. It will astound your friends and confound your enemies."
Mark Twain
Besides, it makes life ever so much simpler and easier when you don't have to always try to remember whatever you have told whom on what subject in the past.
I STILL don't understand why you have to drive 5 minutes to go for a run, unless it's an excuse to get your fix of Morning Joe.
Ann Althouse is the E.F. Hutton of the blogging world. Even the WSJ is listening.
AA:
As you know, the edits were so that your content could be used - free of charge - under the Fair Use doctrine of copyright law.
Interesting that the WSJ wanted you to work for them, but no surprise. Your content is superior to most of the stuff in the WSJ and all of the op-eds in the NYT and WaPo. And the WSJ knew it.
@Achilles,
Bloomberg is still a joke.
The problem for Democrats and for Bloomberg and for the GOPe and Jeb is that nobody is buying what they are selling.
Well, I hope you're right. If Bloomer spends $1 Billion trying to wrestle the nomination away from Bernie, that might be great. But my concern is when, this September, Bloomer floods Penn, Mich & Wisc with another $1 Billion to siphon off a few votes.
Nobody has done this before. Nobody knows how it plays out. It is larger than anything we've ever seen in politics.
I am not nervous about Bloomer the Man. On policy, he is a moderate Dem or Liberal Rep, depending on the day of the week.But I am concerned about his money.
I think it's great when they post something of you. You know that means it's not the first time one or some of them have read your blog. More likely some there read it regularly and one found a spot to use it. That's pretty cool.
I hope it does not change what you post or how you write. Remember us small folk when you are getting quoted regularly in Big Media. I promise I'll try to remember the Althouse portal when I order neat and unnecessary things from Amazon.
They are so smart to check out what Althouse thinks of something. Agree or disagree with what she's written, but she writes interesting stuff. I know *I'm* here everyday!
This is getting more fun than a hockey game. A fist fight at a Bernie rally. And a quarter of a billion dollars getting you above 10%.
At coffee this morning someone was talking about spending vast amounts of money to get the nomination. Usually the subjects are skiing and work.
I have no idea where this is going. Bush had 100 million to spend for the primary in 2015, and got nowhere. One thing for sure is that a good proportion of the Democrat base will never vote for Bloomberg. I expect a serious third party candidate that will pick up 15-20% of the Democrat vote in the general. And I expect fistfights at the convention. None of it will be covered on the tv news, but in blogs and youtube, being the final nail in the coffin of the media.
Great fun.
Perfect that Morning Joe and Mika saw your shrewd evaluation of their worth-- 5 minutes at most, to check out whatever Democrats are freaking out about today.
I hope they don't mind that you put them down in words.
Joe and Mika deserve each other. Joe is the biggest blowhard on TV and that's a high bar.
I got a half dozen letters in the WSJ. The secret was column-inch filling zinger length.
“I am glad to [offer] some important Democrats ... my advice, if they can use it.”
Those who understand Cruel Neutrality expect nothing else.
Wait until Bloomberg’s enemies roll out the story of how Bloomberg terminals spied on their customers while providing “market news” thereby providing a blueprint for the Internet giants of today. The customer was the commodity at least until they found out. Mike got it done alright.
Blogger be sucking.
Proposed Althouse Column in WSJ - "The Daily Freak-Out". A lighthearted look at the unending, hysteria of the Democrat Party and its allies, framed through the prism of her "cruel neutrality," and tinged with a sense of humor.
It's gotta be better than Peggy Noonan.
Bay Area Guy said...
I am not nervous about Bloomer the Man. On policy, he is a moderate Dem or Liberal Rep, depending on the day of the week.But I am concerned about his money.
He is not a moderate dem. He is openly pushing gun confiscation. He is not a liberal republican. He is a pure globalist open borders neocon.
He is clearly compromised in China. He clearly hates normal Americans.
Bloomberg just cements the political realignment in the US. It is now the Nationalist party vs. the Globalist party.
I think it interesting that Obama has chosen Bloomberg though.
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
Blogger be sucking.
They do seem to be having some linking problems.
what passes for reportage
But they did unto me what I do unto them, so I am cool with that.
Let's hope the NYT and WaPo don't do unto you what you do unto them.
Now Elizabeth Warren Dumps On The ‘Bernie Bros:’ A ‘Foundation of Hate’
Where ya been, Girlfriend? You're swingin' for the fences, but it's late in the game (for you). The Money grafs:
“I’ve said before that we are all responsible for what our supporters do, and I think Bernie has a lot of questions to answer here,” Warren told reporters. “I am particularly worried about what happened in the attacks on members of the culinary union, particularly on the women in leadership.”
“The whole notion of publishing their personal addresses, their phone numbers, and then making very aggressive threats against their own safety and the safety of their families,” Warren added, referencing how Sanders’ supporters treated members of the Nevada Culinary Union, which refused to endorse a Democratic candidate last week. “That is not how we build an inclusive Democratic Party. We do not build on a foundation of hate.”
I’ve often thought that more people should hear what Althouse says. I guess that we can thank James Taranto (Op Ed editor at the WSJ) for this exposure. It’s too bad I can’t read his column everyday anymore. Anyway, it’s all good!
“Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut and other Democratic senators had a secret meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif during the Munich Security Conference last week, according to a source briefed by the French delegation to the conference. Murphy’s office did not respond to repeated requests for comment by press time,” the outlet reported.
They tried to impeach Trump for colluding with Russia and asking Ukraine to investigate Biden's corruption.
I am absolutely certain Murphy and the other senators at this meeting will be just as forthcoming with complete and verifiable transcripts of this meeting and everything said just like Trump did with his calls to Ukraine.
I am sure they absolutely had the interests of the nation at heart.
They weren't talking about covering up the kickbacks Kerry and Obama cronies got from the Iran deal.
Not at all.
The WSJ has officially made Althouse an opinion leader.
It's a nice and well deserved compliment.
Many years ago (about 2008), the WSJ pushed me to do op-eds for them, but I never did it. It's just too nerve wracking. It might seem like blogging, but it's not. The feeling is so different.
If I'd wanted to publish more in mainstream media, I could have gone in that direction, but I felt a powerful resistance.
Glad we get to enjoy free-spirit Althouse. Thanks for not selling out to The Man.
And actually I am glad to read some important Democrats with my advice, if they can use it.
Wait, no, I don't want Democrats getting sane advice! I want them to keep doing the crazy stuff they've been doing!
(Assume you meant "reach" not "read" there.)
"It's about time the MSM caught on that there is more intelligent commentary here than there."
They haven't and they won't. I've been reading online since 1995 and I've found plenty of intelligent commentary, stories, observations, well-written op-eds, etc. and none of them came from newspapers.
The problem is that almost all of them go against the mainstream narrative, or they're interesting, but on subjects newspapers don't want to cover (whether it's pop culture, or individuals' stories about being a police officer, or a peace corps worker in Nigeria, or a guy working for a p0rn magazine in the UK).
Worst is that very little of the excellent commentary came from the left. For example, round about 2004, I was posting on my blog links to other sites -- a proto-Althouse if you will -- and I went looking at the leftwing sites for interesting commentary.
I found a lot of hectoring, a lot of posturing, but nothing worth repeating. And this was a time when I was a card-carrying Democrat.
P.S. Blogger is being an unbelievable pain in the ass this afternoon.
So Warren will go on the warpath with her "friend" Bernie again tomorrow?
The Dems' new political position is to jointly attack, not Bernie for his socialist policies, but the Bernie Bros for their obstreperous behavior.
1. Liz Warren has attacked the Bernie Bros.
2. Slow Joe Biden has attacked the Bernie Bros.
3. And, of course, Bloomberg has a slew of ads, attacking the Bernie Bros.
Of course, the original gun-toting Bernie Bro, James Hodgkinson, was not available for comment. .
Ann Althouse said...
"It will be interesting to see how much your page views spike."
Probably not at all.
They didn't even give a link."
I see a link in the word "writing" as follows:
"Ann Althouse *writing* on her blog, Feb. 17:"
If you get a free laptop just for working on Bloomberg's campaign, wonder what the Veep gets? My guess is the pols in the Democrat debate are so programmed to suck up to major donors, they'll fall over each other trying to get on Bloomberg's good side. (Steyer may be the only one unaffected, though he'll be pissed at being upstaged.) As a famous Democrat consultant once observed, "you drag a $100 dollar bill through a trailer park..."
Bay Area Guy said...
The Dems' new political position is to jointly attack, not Bernie for his socialist policies, but the Bernie Bros for their obstreperous behavior.
1. Liz Warren has attacked the Bernie Bros.
2. Slow Joe Biden has attacked the Bernie Bros.
3. And, of course, Bloomberg has a slew of ads, attacking the Bernie Bros.
It's an interesting tactic. In politics traditionally it's not a good idea to attack the supporters of your opponent rather than your opponent directly. This is because you want to persuade your opponents to support you rather than your opponent and it's generally not a good idea to insult people who you are trying to persuade. So this must mean that Warren, Biden, and Bloomberg have fully written off the "Bernie Bros." cohort as ever supporting them I guess. They must assume that either 1). They don't need the Bros. votes to beat Trump or 2). they can convince the Bros. to support them at a later date because #Orangemanbad.
James O'Keefe
@JamesOKeefeIII
·
3h
If Bernie Sanders truly wants his supporters to ‘knock off the violence’, then why has he still not disavowed the comments made by his own campaign staff? Kyle Jurek, Martin Weissgerber, Mason Baird, and Daniel Taylor are ALL still employed.
But they did unto me what I do unto them, so I am cool with that.
You're not behind a pay wall.
The advice "important Democrats" really need is to hear what it takes to get Althouse's vote.
It doesn't take much, since they have abortion going for them, but a little more than nothing, which is not such a high standard, though it may be for the current crop.
Of course, the most important thing about Althouse giving advice is that she gives it at all. It tells Dems they can get away with anything: they can stage a collusion hoax, they can stage a sham impeachment, and still Althouse will profess to be "neutral." As long as you are pro-abortion, they'll let you do it.
The second most important thing about Althouse's advice is that it tells Dems implicitly how to get Althouse's vote: it has nothing to do with policy. Economic growth, pressure on China, immigration law enforcement, deregulation--whatever. Just act like you're serious and competent. "Pragmatic" worked for Obama. Say Trump means chaos. Symbolic politics works.
But: no Bernie. That exceeds even Althouse's powers of rationalization. Pretty much the worst thing you can do to her.
I'm happy whenever Althouse is highlighted by a national source like the WSJ or Rush. But at the same time I get a little concerned whenever this blog gets some high level recognition that as a result the comment section becomes overwhelmed by ding-a-lings or trolls. So far it hasn't happened yet.
Let us never forget Althouse's political advice on the day Slow Joe Biden announced:
How dare Biden rest his campaign on a blatant lie — a lie that has been used to stir up fear and racial discord?! The hypocrisy of offering to bring us together and embrace lofty values when he is either repulsively ignorant or just plain lying!
I could not finish watching that video. I tried, but I couldn't force myself. It's utterly toxic bilge.
If Biden does not come forward and retract this video and apologize and commit himself to making amends, I consider him disqualified. He does not have the character or brain power to be President.
Posted by Ann Althouse at 10:33 AM 4.25.19
Reason 3,429 why we love Althouse.
Bloomberg getting the Dem nomination after Trump got the Repub nomination 4 years ago speaks volumes about the sad state of the two major parties: that each party has been so crappy and corrupt and ineffective and worthless that an outsider had to take over.
Ditto to what Bay Area Guy said at 2:24PM
Check out Scott Adams' periscope today and his new "Bernie Bomb" theory. The bomb goes off in the Dems faces if 1) Bernie gets the nomination, 2) if they rob him of the nomination again, or 3) if he legitimately loses the nomination. It's "his turn" and his believers believe it.
Thank goodness Milwaukee Summerfest is prior to the DNC convention. Shit show coming.
Althouse you must have been aware that (a) New York City’s 8 million residents would, on population alone but also in the size of its budget, make it a government about the size of the state of Virginia. Something like the 15th largest state in the nation.
And in his multiple campaigns, Bloomberg had multiple opponents to debate. Including, in his final term, public interest lawyers Mark Green. As a young left-wing lawyer, Green was featured on William F. Buckley’s PBS show, “Firing Line.” Mark Green is a first-class debater. And Bloomberg held his own.
*sneer*
Trump is a billionaire, but he didn't use his wealth to buy the presidency. Unlike Bloomberg, who's outspending everyone using his own money. Basically, Trump used Twitter (free), his appearances on cable news programs (free) and rallies around the country (relatively cheap). He could do Twitter and call into the cable shows from his bedroom. Trump was the master of shoestring campaigning. I wonder how much he even spent before locking up the nomination.
Bloomberg might just be setting money on fire. If he fails in his question, it would be just another example undercutting the popular belief that elections are determined by spending.
you have to be for something, not just against, that was biden's failure, from the get go, he's also not as stakhanovite as the rest of the field, not as polished as buttigeg, not as bland as klobuchar,
not as tedious as warren, whose traveling sideshow has gotten old, what is striking is unlike 2008, there hasn't been a surge in democratic support as measured in the primaries,
Shorter Chuck: I, for one, welcome my new Bloomberg overlord.
https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2020/02/18/show-us-the-transcripts-sen-chris-murphys-thread-on-what-he-told-zarif-makes-their-secret-meeting-seem-even-shadier/
If Bloomberg pays you to write nice things about him, do we all get a cut if we agree with you? //s//
Actually, for a million I’d write a nice letter to the editor urging people to vote for him in the primaries. I write one for Trump, free of charge to vote for him in the general. My principles can only be compromised so much.
Seriously, well done, Ann.
"I've been reading online since 1995 and I've found plenty of intelligent commentary, stories, observations, well-written op-eds, etc. and none of them came from newspapers."
One of biggest self-inflicted wounds of the century is when papers went out and bought blogs or turned their own reporters into bloggers. The purchased blogs got dull, the reporters proved their stupidity, and the papers lost credibility.
The Democratic Party is being menshevized and only now have they realized their danger.
You just garnered 930 bytes of elisions!
Apologies in retrospect for not reading all the comments before this post. I wanted to comment on Michael Bloomberg and this post is an opportunity.
Michael Bloomberg if I dare, which I am about to post, reminds me of that kid in college that obliged to pay attention and surpass a certain professors curriculum.
I found the professor witty in halting the class by simply stating that the class is a bunch of boring computer programming. The next day, in return, half the class was absent for the entire semester. A few more dropped out here and there, as the saying is.
I was respectful enough, and I say that vaguely because I have chosen a certain path that allows me to exist on both sides of a coin. In retrospect I was given another chance and the final lesson within my CiS (computer information science), that was binary code by a professor I admired and was intimidated by more than my Political Science professors, unsimply because she decoded stacks of bi-nary computer code with more pages than any bible. I have failed Political Science classes twice. Invert unhappy face.
I do not wish for prostate cancer at 92 unto Michael Bloomberg, in the sense that would be the reason for him to enjoy his life. Basically, because he is resilient and many people depend on him. If he returned to politics because he is driven, the choice is his. But if he returned because of off balance politics then that is a problem.
Talking about people's horoscopes, leads me to think that he misses being involved rather than other rumours.
I want to read all the comments when I'm warmer indoors :)
- Go team sweaters !
Althouse: "...They didn't even give a link."
Of course not. They fear you as competition.
That was a hell of a comment PluralThumb...
I love the thought of Ann getting a call from MB's minions with a consulting gig too good to pass up.
Bloomberg missed his shot. He should have run as a Republican in 2016 when he still had some credibility. That said he is a godsend to the political media industry. They will never have this good ever again. The premise here among some commenters is that our hostess is a proxy for upper middle class white woman who don't want drama and want a candidate who is not excitable. Bloomberg seems to fit the bill ( for now). So if Sanders wins the nomination where do these woman go for in the general? Crazy Commie Bernie? Trump? Third party? Or pass on voting for the presidency? It's nice to know that the media people pay attention to AA's blog. I wonder if those media people ever read the comments here.
On Wisconsin! The rulers of Wall Street are seeking wisdom at the Oracle of Madison. Just keep it a secret that you share birthdays with the Oracle of Radio, Rush Limbaugh, or Trump may start quoting you and award you a matching Medal of Freedom.
Byron York
@ByronYork
·
58m
Morning event featured 'quiches, smoked salmon with capers and chopped eggs, a fruit platter, cookies, and assorted pastries.' And so on, throughout day.
Quote Tweet
Eater
@Eater
· 4h
Mike Bloomberg is enticing voters to campaign events with unprecedented amounts of free food and booze — and not the cheap stuff, either https://
The WSJ thinks Trump should be more Presidential.
But no "smokes for votes" from Team Bloomie.
So, fellow commenters, if Mini Mike really wants to scorch the earth with his money, and get rid of even mild sources of opposition and ridicule like the deplorables around here, and assuming that he can't simply get some hacker or Google exec to shut Althouse down, what's our price?
Reading all the comments here about Mike Bloomberg, one week at the impression that you deplorables hate American style free market capitalism. If you hate your country so much why don't you move to Mexico? The water is warm and the beer is cold.
Howard said...
Reading all the comments here about Mike Bloomberg, one week at the impression that you deplorables hate American style free market capitalism. If you hate your country so much why don't you move to Mexico? The water is warm and the beer is cold."
Now tell us your feelings about Trump. Do you hate American style free markets?
Congratulations on the notice, Althouse!
’Mark Green is a first-class debater.’
Has he ever won an election?
Attorney Mark Green Tells us Whether or Not Bloomberg Will Receive Support from the Dems in 2020
Lol, Mark Green is or was, a sleazy machine hack whose uninspiring campaign is the reason why relative political outsiders like Giuliani or Bloomberg can run GOP and win in NY. He probably would have made a better mayor than DeBlasio, which is what happens to NYC when a charismatic outsider doesn't pick up the GOP torch to save us from the machine hacks.
Thanks for that hot take Walter. I like Mark Green a lot better as a pundit than I ever did as a public official or candidate. He's not dim like DeBlasio, someone I can't imagine saying anything insightful, as Green did here.
Still, that's pretty boilerplate stuff. But it's interesting to see that he's somewhat gracious towards Bloomberg, because that was not a friendly contest back in the day.
“ I see a link in the word "writing" as follows:...”
Maybe they added it. I don’t see it in the screenshot someone sent me..
No, there’s no link...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-how-will-bloomberg-debate-11581974285
When I'm trying to get the liberal bits of my family to understand that there is more to the "news" than newspapers, I can now say - that Wisconsin blog I'm always recommending had a post used by the WSJ as an article. The sections of the family getting more liberal and trigger-happy all have one thing in common - they don't read any blogs. Some have tried but they see Althouse and Instapundit as right-wing fanatics and conspiracy theory supporters, and can't keep on reading - that's what happens to a mind soaked in newsprint encounters cruel neutrality. Great that the WSJ appreciates you.
WSJ is the only paper I subscribe to anymore but I was in a rush this morning and didn't catch your appearance. Very cool. I had to get out and run, as well, then be at a doctor's appointment at 8:15 so not much time to linger. Yes, they do not, can not, give Trump credit for his campaign mastery so they are wonderfully blind in their Bloomberg dreams. Speaking of Morning Joe, I used to love to watch them when I got dressed in the morning but then it got so noxious that I have not listened to a minute of them in at least a year. For the same reason as you do, I watched, just to see what the Democrat talking points of the moment were. Trump used them for more media exposure, Joe and Mika,than Bloomberg can buy. They groveled to get him on and would still. It would not surprise me if he enticed them to put him back on and they went along. It's all so much like the movie, Network, that I can't even believe it myself.
Ann you are very talented, which is why I would like to read - I don't care where, in the UW alumni magazine, in some Milwaukee free paper, anywhere - I would like to read you explain why you were wrong so long about the greatest issue of our day ..... WHY DO WE LIVE IN A WORLD WHERE VEGANS CAN SUPPORT ABORTION?
Thanks for reading.
I mean, I get it why some people can justify abortion to themselves, but VEGANS?
and you live in Ann Arbor, right, so you must know a few vegans?
or Madison, same thing.
I usually read this blog very early morning. In the future, I intend to be shaved and showered. and please, no shorts for blog readers. still enjoying your winter photo series a great deal.
People seem to dismiss Bloomberg out of hand. I think that's a mistake. Regardless of who they have to screw over, the dems will try to have the convention 'pick' him. He will be a serious threat to Trump, much more than any of the other yahoos still in the race. He will lose, and I'm praying that HRC is his running mate when that happens.
and congratulations on your mention in the paper. and I think we are glad you have decided to stay on blogger. More freedom and much more interesting pieces for us Althouse fans.
Howard said...
Reading all the comments here about Mike Bloomberg, one week at the impression that you deplorables hate American style free market capitalism. If you hate your country so much why don't you move to Mexico? The water is warm and the beer is cold.
2/10.
You are really are just kinda stupid.
Blogger ate my earlier comments. I'm going to bed so I'll look good for the NYT and WP photogs; I recommend y'all do the same.
G'night.
Narr
Fuck Blogger
Jim - Bloomberg can win Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and Florida. In each of those states he starts from a point where 45 percent of the people are going to vote Democratic no matter what. If he wins those three states, and all the other states that someone who wins those states win, he is going to be a boring Brezhnev-like octogenarian president in 2023. Sad!
Trust me, in November, most of the most devoted of Sanders supporters are gonna head to their local election center and vote Bloomberg, and he is also going to get the one or two million cheating votes that all Democratic presidents get every 4 years (the Republicans only get a couple hundred thousand such votes, not that they are more honest, just that they do not have access the way Democrats do to fake votes).
Almost all of the Sanders supporters know that Sanders is a selfish little man with no empathy, a phony lying Socialist, and they will cry no tears if Bloomberg sends him back to the white city in Vermont he chose to live in because he did not want to live in a city like New York City where racism is not a real thing anymore.
By voting day they will have recognized that and will have forgiven Bloomberg.
But what does it matter, in the long run?
God punished America when my great-grandparents were starting out as hopeful adults in life with a horrible civil war that, to tell the truth, was not surprising, considering the fact that so many people back then had hatred in their hearts, including their beloved Lincoln and most of his enemies.
God may punish us with 4 years of an old nasty little man like Bloomberg as the chief executive, but eventually, either this will be a good country or it will not.
I do not dislike Trump - I would not want him as a son-in-law, but that is another story - but he has no greater say in whether this will be a good country or not in the future than anyone reading these words, right here right now in 2020, has.
Tell me I am stupid. Make me laugh.
I’ve mentioned it before, but I’m convinced this blog catches Trump’s interest.
Trump ain’t getting his news from the TV like that fractional wit Obama.
Someone advising Trump definitely paid a lot of attention to certain blogs in 2015 and 2016.
Not sure if that is still true.
What does it matter, the future of our country depends on people deciding whether to be decent or not, and Trump cannot make people decide to be decent.
Congratulations.
I felt a thrill on the few occasions when I have been drawn from the mosh pit of Althouse comments into the empyrean realm of Althouse's front page. It must be like that for AA to make the WSJ's Notable and Quotable. After all, notable. AND quotable.
Congrats, AA. Please don't give the Demmies any more good advice.
Ann is a rarity in the blogosphere, an honest independent voice whose opinions have the virtue of being unpredictable, interesting and fresh.
I hope they don't mind that you put them down in words.
How wonderful life is, while she's in the world.
"He's still one short." Hee hee.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा