I guess Michael Bloomberg noticed that the Stanford-educated Sen. Cory Booker doesn’t speak like he comes from the hood. Maybe he’ll refrain from having him stopped and frisked. Booker didn’t appreciate getting the backhanded compliment of being “well-spoken,” and expressed his frustration with having to continually be insulted in the same old ways.
“It’s sort of stunning at times that we are still revisiting these sort of tired, you know, tropes or the language we have out there that folks I don’t think understand. And the fact that they don’t understand is problematic,” the 2020 presidential candidate told Signal Boost on SiriusXM.
In an interview that aired Friday morning, Bloomberg told CBS This Morning, “Cory Booker endorsed me a number of times. And I endorsed Cory Booker a number of times. He’s very well-spoken. He’s got some good ideas. It would be better the more diverse any group is.”
Bloomberg admitted that he probably should have used a different word, which might indicate that he understands the political fallout if little else.
Booker said he hopes Bloomberg “gets it now” and that people around him are talking to him about why that language is problematic. He said he has known Bloomberg for a long time and that he has a “great deal of regard” for his fellow candidate.
“I hope people around (Bloomberg) are talking to him about why that plays into what is for the black community in particular, just these are signs of frustration that we continue to deal with issues, whether it was the black face controversies from earlier this year, to the challenges that I don’t think folks understand with Kamala dropping out of the race,” Booker said.
It really shouldn’t be so hard to avoid lazily insulting an entire race of Americans. But Bloomberg has a tin ear in general which is easy to see in his criticism of anyone who isn’t a multibillionaire.
Michael R. Bloomberg on Friday brushed back critiques about his wealth and bristled at the suggestion that he was using it to buy success in the 2020 presidential race, arguing that other Democrats who have complained about his entry into their party’s primary could have taken it upon themselves to earn their own personal fortunes, as he had done.
In a television interview, Mr. Bloomberg’s first since he announced his presidential campaign, the billionaire and former mayor of New York City rejected the idea that he had an unfair advantage, saying that while other candidates asked donors for money, he had made his money himself and then given most of it away.
“I turn and they’re criticizing me for it,” he said on “CBS This Morning.” “They had a chance to go out and make a lot of money. And how much of their own money do they put into their campaigns?”
“I’m doing exactly the same thing they’re doing, except that I am using my own money,” he added. “They’re using somebody else’s money and those other people expect something from them. Nobody gives you money if they don’t expect something. And I don’t want to be bought.”
Personally, I’d prefer a president bought by any combination of interest groups that doesn’t include multibillionaire media moguls. But that’s just me. I’m not going to be swayed by Bloomberg spending a hundred million dollars on television commercials, but a lot of other will be because that’s how advertising works.
Hopefully, he’ll keep acting like a clueless elitist brat and Democrats will run from him like an outbreak of ebola.
One of the more hopeful signs of this primary season (so far) is the way Democrats have responded to billionaire candidates: Schultz driven from the race before he really got in, all others scared off until this fall, Steyer doing poorly despite spending tens of millions, and now Bloomberg getting hammered by multiple factions of the party.
“I’m doing exactly the same thing they’re doing”.
Actually, Bloomberg is blanketing the (Blue) nation 24/7 with “intro” ads that sound like he would support whatever policies Bernie and Warren advocate. So the entire reason for his “candidacy” (“moderation”) is to be hidden as we all watch Smilin’ Plutocrat Mike and his rags-to-riches story. At least he’s not attacking progressive Dems from the right yet, like Mayor Pete and Amy K.
Bloomberg’s money shoveling is a perfect example of the error of Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and its “Money is Speech” ruling. It took some time (and multiple rounds of “conservative” tax cuts) to create enough billionaires to really benefit from the case, but now they are coming out of the woodwork, self regarding narcissists with no national constituency whatsoever, paying to become players. One does have to grant that at least Bloomberg has held elective office, although mayor of NY was not thought an adequate qualification in the past. But Trump, of course, has forever ended the notion of “qualifications” for the office of prez.
Anyway, Actual Billionaire Mike v. Phony Billionaire Trump—great optics for American democracy, 2020!