What is Michael Bloomberg thinking?

[imawhosure]

Would the House vote to make Trump the President, if neither candidate receive a plurality of electoral votes? Yes, there are enough RW wing nuts there to do that.

First of all, if the choosing of the President devolves to the House the members do not vote individually. Votes are cast by the representation of the several states, with each state having one vote.

Second, exactly how many "RW wing nuts" do you think are in the House? They elected Ryan as Speaker, didn't they? Seems pretty clear that the lunatic tea party fringe remains little more than a vocal obstructionist minority.

Third, you do realize that the Republican party establishment loathes Trump, right? And that they don't trust him for a second to do anything good for the country, nor be even at least be a useful party pawn, right?

If the choosing of the President devolves to the House, with the options being Trump, Bloomberg, or the Democratic candidate, I have no doubt that Bloomberg would easily be selected. He would be embraced by elements on both sides of the aisle. House Republicans would prefer him over Trump. Many House Democrats would prefer him over the risk of Trump. And many on both sides would love the chance to play a heroic role to not be bound to partisanship to support someone who is capable of governing.

Now that tells you right here, this quoted post, how out of touch the left really is! They actually believe that the House would go against their own voters because some left winger on here, actually BELIEVES his own narrative, taken from his party.

Now that my friends, just goes to show you, that many people on here are sooooooooo partisan, that they will make any excuse they can, to convince everyone that any GOP candidate is so bad, that their own party would choose an independent as a COMPROMISE to screw themselves out of the Whitehouse.

People on here actually BELIEVE, that primary rhetoric is going to divide the party after a nominee is chosen, lol. Didn't see it with Reagan, Bush, or Romney, did you? Oh sure, some stayed home, but the party got behind their nominee, period! To suggest any other outcome, would be to believe if Bernie dispatches Hilly, the Democrats are going to tell everyone to vote for the GOP nominee.

Oh boy, sometimes, you just got to wonder-)

 

[SwimExpert]

Which state delegations would vote for Bloomberg over Trump, among the Republicans?

The vast majority would prefer Bloomberg over Trump. I think the reason question is in what scenario do you see any delegation of Washington politicians supporting Trump over a centrist independent and seasoned politician with a track record of successful government leadership, pro business focus, and fiscal responsibility? Trump is a joke to the people on Capital Hill.

Which state delegations would vote for Bloomberg over Clinton/Sanders, among the Dems?

Most would prefer him over Sanders. Clinton would be a harder sell, but I think that many purple state delegations would be swayed to Bloomberg over Clinton relatively easily.

 

[SwimExpert]

Now that tells you right here, this quoted post, how out of touch the left really is! They actually believe that the House would go against their own voters because some left winger on here, actually BELIEVES his own narrative, taken from his party.

The fuck are you talking about?

 

[Mac1958]

I wish there were some way to harness the egos of some of these politicians and would-be politicians.

Imagine the energy it could produce, and so cost-effectively!
.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Which state delegations would vote for Bloomberg over Trump, among the Republicans?

The vast majority would prefer Bloomberg over Trump. I think the reason question is in what scenario do you see any delegation of Washington politicians supporting Trump over a centrist independent and seasoned politician with a track record of successful government leadership, pro business focus, and fiscal responsibility? Trump is a joke to the people on Capital Hill.

Which state delegations would vote for Bloomberg over Clinton/Sanders, among the Dems?

Most would prefer him over Sanders. Clinton would be a harder sell, but I think that many purple state delegations would be swayed to Bloomberg over Clinton relatively easily.

The vast majority would prefer Bloomberg over Trump.

Based on his nanny state history in New York? I don't believe you.

I think the reason question is in what scenario do you see any delegation of Washington politicians supporting Trump over a centrist independent

I think politicians who want to get re-elected will vote for the Republican over the big government, liberal "independent"
The only scenario this would even play out would be if there were a tie.
Which state(s) will Bloomberg win? Perot got 19% of the vote, zero in the EC.
You really think the people would accept a guy with zero electoral votes getting elected by the House, over either candidate with 269?

 

[SwimExpert]

I respectfully disagree. As much as many House GOP member hate Trump, they will choose party over thought.

You're not getting it. Bloomberg over Trump IS choosing the party, from the perspective of a Washington politician. The people on Capital Hill know that Trump is a disaster for the party. He's a disaster for GOP branding, and his political alignment is far closer to the Democrats in the reality of things. Trump won't support the GOP party. He won't be an ally. In fact, all he's done as a candidate is trash the GOP party.

Bloomberg is talking, like he did in 2008.

Yeah, and? He decided not to run that time around. Right about now he's probably thinking that it could be even more important for him to go for it this time. It will ultimately depend on how the rest of the primary process pans out. Trump or Cruz being nominated makes a Bloomberg run much more likely. A Sanders nomination makes a Bloomberg run much more likely. A Clinton nomination is probably neutral. Hypothetically, a Kasich v Clinton general election would have no chance whatsoever of Bloomberg running.

 

[SwimExpert]

The vast majority would prefer Bloomberg over Trump.

Based on his nanny state history in New York? I don't believe you.

Because you think Trump is some kind of small government advocate? Or because you don't actually know what you're talking about and are simply spewing sound bytes while you suck Trump off?

I think politicians who want to get re-elected will vote for the Republican over the big government, liberal "independent"

Trump is the big government liberal. Bloomberg is more Republican than Trump will ever be. But by all means, continue to give Trump free fellatio.

The only scenario this would even play out would be if there were a tie.
Which state(s) will Bloomberg win? Perot got 19% of the vote, zero in the EC.

This just goes to show that you're quite ignorant and don't know what you're talking about. The choosing of the President falls to the House any time no candidate receives a majority of all votes in the Electoral College. Come back when you have at least an 8th grade level education.

 

[Eaglewings]

We need an Independent run by a big nanny State Anti-gun Progressive billionaire who wants to control what you eat

they are already controlling what you eat with the most lethal crap of GMOs ..unless if you grow your own or buy from a organic local farmer your eating a GMO... The government voted it in ..all of them

The government voted for GMOs?
Why are GMOs lethal?

Here is a documentary..and the fact that GMO's are poison is not a myth..it took me to get cancer to see what the fucking government is allowing in our food and animal food.

You have any non-fiction sources?

GMOs May Feed the World Using Fewer Pesticides — NOVA Next | PBS

Here you go again, try looking it up yourself if you don't like the link above ...and go ahead and try to discredit the facts jack...keep eating your corn and find out the hard way. I don't gain a profit telling you this.


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The vast majority would prefer Bloomberg over Trump.

Based on his nanny state history in New York? I don't believe you.

Because you think Trump is some kind of small government advocate? Or because you don't actually know what you're talking about and are simply spewing sound bytes while you suck Trump off?

I think politicians who want to get re-elected will vote for the Republican over the big government, liberal "independent"

Trump is the big government liberal. Bloomberg is more Republican than Trump will ever be. But by all means, continue to give Trump free fellatio.

The only scenario this would even play out would be if there were a tie.
Which state(s) will Bloomberg win? Perot got 19% of the vote, zero in the EC.

This just goes to show that you're quite ignorant and don't know what you're talking about. The choosing of the President falls to the House any time no candidate receives a majority of all votes in the Electoral College. Come back when you have at least an 8th grade level education.

Because you think Trump is some kind of small government advocate?

No, but any state delegation that votes against him would be primaried out of office.

Bloomberg is more Republican than Trump will ever be.

Yeah, his anti-gun and anti-soda stances have me convinced. LOL!

The choosing of the President falls to the House any time no candidate receives a majority of all votes in the Electoral College.

And as I said, since Bloomberg will win no state, the only case that takes it to a House vote is a 269-269 tie.

Come back when you have at least an 8th grade level education.

But then I'd only have 5 grades more than you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We need an Independent run by a big nanny State Anti-gun Progressive billionaire who wants to control what you eat

they are already controlling what you eat with the most lethal crap of GMOs ..unless if you grow your own or buy from a organic local farmer your eating a GMO... The government voted it in ..all of them

The government voted for GMOs?
Why are GMOs lethal?

Here is a documentary..and the fact that GMO's are poison is not a myth..it took me to get cancer to see what the fucking government is allowing in our food and animal food.

You have any non-fiction sources?

GMOs May Feed the World Using Fewer Pesticides — NOVA Next | PBS

Here you go again, try looking it up yourself if you don't like the link above ...and go ahead and try to discredit the facts jack...keep eating your corn and find out the hard way. I don't gain a profit telling you this.


.

You posted a good link. Are you feeling ok?

By contrast, genetically modified organisms are ones where scientists have taken a gene for a specific trait that would not be found in that species normally, and spliced it into the genome. The process is a far more accurate way of producing these desirable mutations than using chemical means or radiation.

Absolutely!

GMOs can save lives
In many parts of the world, people — many under the age of five — suffer from vitamin A (beta-carotene) deficiency because they don't get enough of the nutrient in their diets. Between 250,000 and 500,000 vitamin A-deficient children become blind every year, and half of them die within a year, according to the WHO.

Rice, a staple crop for many people, is missing two proteins necessary to make this vitamin. In the 1990s, scientists found these proteins in the DNA of daffodils and soil bacteria, and used them to make a GMO rice called "golden rice." But the vitamin A content was still low, so they turned to a gene found in corn, which increased the amount of vitamin A 23 times.

In 2001, golden rice was made freely available to developing countries, but activists blocked the move, claiming the rice was useless or unsafe.


Stupid activists block rice that can save children's lives. Just evil. Don't you agree?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What is Michael Bloomberg thinking?

WOW! He is playing a dangerous game of chicken. Would the House vote to make Trump the President, if neither candidate receive a plurality of electoral votes? Yes, there are enough RW wing nuts there to do that.

If there is a Republican majority in the House, which there likely would be, I don't see why they wouldn't.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The vast majority would prefer Bloomberg over Trump. I think the reason question is in what scenario do you see any delegation of Washington politicians supporting Trump over a centrist independent and seasoned politician with a track record of successful government leadership, pro business focus, and fiscal responsibility? Trump is a joke to the people on Capital Hill.

Bloomberg is not a centrist. He is very much a leftist. Furthermore, if the Republican House were to select Bloomberg as president over Trump there would be a massive backlash among Republicans they have never seen and it would be political suicide for them.

In any case, this scenario is unlikely even if he runs.

 

[bendog]

If Bern is the nominee, Bloomberg might run. I doubt it, but if he got the thing thrown into the House, Trump wins.

 

[easyt65]

Go Bloomberg, go! Split that Liberal / Democratic party vote!

 

[JimH52]

The vast majority would prefer Bloomberg over Trump.

Based on his nanny state history in New York? I don't believe you.

Because you think Trump is some kind of small government advocate? Or because you don't actually know what you're talking about and are simply spewing sound bytes while you suck Trump off?

I think politicians who want to get re-elected will vote for the Republican over the big government, liberal "independent"

Trump is the big government liberal. Bloomberg is more Republican than Trump will ever be. But by all means, continue to give Trump free fellatio.

The only scenario this would even play out would be if there were a tie.
Which state(s) will Bloomberg win? Perot got 19% of the vote, zero in the EC.

This just goes to show that you're quite ignorant and don't know what you're talking about. The choosing of the President falls to the House any time no candidate receives a majority of all votes in the Electoral College. Come back when you have at least an 8th grade level education.

Realistically, Bloomberg will not win any states if he runs as an independent. Therefore, he will not have any electoral votes. It will be between the GOP and Dem nominees. Tell me what I am missing.

 

[JimH52]

If Bern is the nominee, Bloomberg might run. I doubt it, but if he got the thing thrown into the House, Trump wins.

Which will make the heads of the RWers explode after he does a 180 and becomes Mr. Big Government.

 

[SwimExpert]

Realistically, Bloomberg will not win any states if he runs as an independent. Therefore, he will not have any electoral votes. It will be between the GOP and Dem nominees. Tell me what I am missing.

What you're missing is that "Realistically, Bloomberg will not win any states if he runs as an independent" has no foundation whatsoever. Bloomberg carrying states in a three way match between himself, Trump, and Sanders is far more realistic than Bloomberg carrying no states.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Realistically, Bloomberg will not win any states if he runs as an independent. Therefore, he will not have any electoral votes. It will be between the GOP and Dem nominees. Tell me what I am missing.

What you're missing is that "Realistically, Bloomberg will not win any states if he runs as an independent" has no foundation whatsoever. Bloomberg carrying states in a three way match between himself, Trump, and Sanders is far more realistic than Bloomberg carrying no states.

Would he get more or fewer popular votes than Perot?
Which state(s) would he carry?

 

[SwimExpert]

Bloomberg is not a centrist. He is very much a leftist.

No, Bloomberg is fairly centrist. On social issues he's pretty progressive, but he's a strong pro-business fiscal conservative.

Furthermore, if the Republican House were to select Bloomberg as president over Trump there would be a massive backlash among Republicans they have never seen and it would be political suicide for them.

How do you figure? You have to remember that if it were to come to the House making the decision, that would mean that the people as a whole were not very hot on Trump. It would mean that alot of Republicans themselves turned their backs on Trump.

In any case, this scenario is unlikely even if he runs.

If Bloomberg runs, I think that a possible victory is not so unlikely. I mean, do you really think that in a general election the public will be so keen to choose Trump or Sanders over someone who isn't batshit crazy? Remember, there's no way that he even bothers to run if someone other than Trump or Cruz gets the nomination, and possibly not even then unless Sanders also gets the nomination on the other side. Bloomberg would be the natural least-of-three-evils for about 80% of the population under such circumstances.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bloomberg is not a centrist. He is very much a leftist.

No, Bloomberg is fairly centrist. On social issues he's pretty progressive, but he's a strong pro-business fiscal conservative.

Furthermore, if the Republican House were to select Bloomberg as president over Trump there would be a massive backlash among Republicans they have never seen and it would be political suicide for them.

How do you figure? You have to remember that if it were to come to the House making the decision, that would mean that the people as a whole were not very hot on Trump. It would mean that alot of Republicans themselves turned their backs on Trump.

In any case, this scenario is unlikely even if he runs.

If Bloomberg runs, I think that a possible victory is not so unlikely. I mean, do you really think that in a general election the public will be so keen to choose Trump or Sanders over someone who isn't batshit crazy? Remember, there's no way that he even bothers to run if someone other than Trump or Cruz gets the nomination, and possibly not even then unless Sanders also gets the nomination on the other side. Bloomberg would be the natural least-of-three-evils for about 80% of the population under such circumstances.

How do you figure? You have to remember that if it were to come to the House making the decision, that would mean that the people as a whole were not very hot on Trump.

If it was between Trump with 40%, Sanders 40% and Bloomie with 20%, how does a Republican delegation vote for Bloomie? Or a Dem one?

Bloomberg would be the natural least-of-three-evils for about 80% of the population

For 20% of the liberal portion of the population.