Bloomberg tops Trump by 6 points in hypothetical matchup: poll

[JacksinPA]

Bloomberg tops Trump by 6 points in hypothetical matchup: poll | TheHill

Former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg leads President Trump by 6 percentage points in a hypothetical 2020 match-up, a new poll shows.

Bloomberg, who on Friday filed as a Democratic presidential candidate in Alabama but has not announced an official campaign, leads Trump, 43 to 37 percent with 21 percent unsure, according to the Morning Consult/Politico survey released early Sunday.
===========================================
The major difference between Bloomberg & Trump: Mike has morals & a spine.

 

[Drawdown]

He won't win the nomination unfortunately. If he runs you will see anti-Semitic veins within the DNC line up behind Biden.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Bloomberg tops Trump by 6 points in hypothetical matchup: poll | TheHill

Former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg leads President Trump by 6 percentage points in a hypothetical 2020 match-up, a new poll shows.

Bloomberg, who on Friday filed as a Democratic presidential candidate in Alabama but has not announced an official campaign, leads Trump, 43 to 37 percent with 21 percent unsure, according to the Morning Consult/Politico survey released early Sunday.
===========================================
The major difference between Bloomberg & Trump: Mike has morals & a spine.

Another major difference is that Trump is very likely to be running in the 2020 general POTUS election.

 

[swing_voter]

That's because voters don't know anything about Bloomberg. If the democrats nominate Bloomberg, media will focus on him and voters will find out all the things they don't like about him.

It's the same with every election.

 

[dcsports]

That's because voters don't know anything about Bloomberg. If the democrats nominate Bloomberg, media will focus on him and voters will find out all the things they don't like about him.

It's the same with every election.

Absolutely. That's a part of the vetting process which happens with the primaries.

IMHO - Bloomberg and Trump are cut of the same cloth. Bloomberg is just more careful with what he says. If he actually enters the race, we'll find out lots of interesting things about him. New York likes to elect people with celebrity status. A presidential race tends to shine a flashlight in all the dark corners.

 

[dcsports]

Bloomberg tops Trump by 6 points in hypothetical matchup: poll | TheHill

Former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg leads President Trump by 6 percentage points in a hypothetical 2020 match-up, a new poll shows.

Bloomberg, who on Friday filed as a Democratic presidential candidate in Alabama but has not announced an official campaign, leads Trump, 43 to 37 percent with 21 percent unsure, according to the Morning Consult/Politico survey released early Sunday.
===========================================
The major difference between Bloomberg & Trump: Mike has morals & a spine.

That's very interesting. Bloomberg would throw the democrat primary into chaos. I'll bet he's fielding a lot of calls right now begging him to stop.

 

[weaver2]

That's because voters don't know anything about Bloomberg. If the democrats nominate Bloomberg, media will focus on him and voters will find out all the things they don't like about him.

It's the same with every election.

Bloomberg's ability to pull New York and New Yorkers out of the depths of fear and depression after 9/11 is a talent this country desperately needs. He isn't just a cheerleader. He got stuff done. He rebuilt NYC ancient zoning laws, oversaw major building boom that added much needed housing units, created parks, cleaned up the streets, dealt with the homeless and above all restored optimism about the future. Does he have some faults and drawbacks? Name a person that doesn't. But let's look for a candidate that has the skills we need right now instead of wasting time looking for a perfect candidate.

Warren and Sanders are energetic, intelligent, accomplished, experienced but they are so focused on their plans for the country they can't tune in on what we need right now. They are not good candidates. Biden's bumbles are endearing, he's pleasant, gracious and experienced, but he's never actually been in charge of anything or changed anything. Buttiigieg is very inexperienced and will be learning on the job. Bloomberg, a cheerleading optimist with experience and the ability to rebuild could be a winning candidate. He just has to learn how to eat corn dogs in Iowa.

 

[Chomsky]

Bloomberg tops Trump by 6 points in hypothetical matchup: poll | TheHill

Former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg leads President Trump by 6 percentage points in a hypothetical 2020 match-up, a new poll shows.

Bloomberg, who on Friday filed as a Democratic presidential candidate in Alabama but has not announced an official campaign, leads Trump, 43 to 37 percent with 21 percent unsure, according to the Morning Consult/Politico survey released early Sunday.
===========================================
The major difference between Bloomberg & Trump: Mike has morals & a spine.

I find this pretty damn interesting. I'd love to see a break-out by battleground states.

 

[Cardinal]

I'm really not excited by the idea of another billionaire being President.

 

[Chomsky]

That's because voters don't know anything about Bloomberg. If the democrats nominate Bloomberg, media will focus on him and voters will find out all the things they don't like about him.

It's the same with every election.

Very possible, with the large 21% "don't know enough" in the poll.

 

[Chomsky]

Absolutely. That's a part of the vetting process which happens with the primaries.

IMHO - Bloomberg and Trump are cut of the same cloth. Bloomberg is just more careful with what he says. If he actually enters the race, we'll find out lots of interesting things about him. New York likes to elect people with celebrity status. A presidential race tends to shine a flashlight in all the dark corners.

All true. I still suspect Bloomberg would take Trump in the General, though. He's the real deal - a self-made millionaire with an immigrant family rags-to-riches story, running a city that's more populous than many states. He also has strong policy chops, intelligence, he's knowledgeable, and has a calm demeanor.

While he'd likely steal some Trump voters in the battle-ground states, I can see his pro-gun-control stance causing him troubles there. On the other-hand the election might then be seen as a referendum on gun control, which would be a good concussion to have.

 

[Helix]

we don't need another novelty billionaire candidate, and Bloomberg is a nanny who garners bipartisan disgust. his presidential priorities would be **** like banning soda and whatever other nanny fad is currently making headlines. i hope that Democrats are intelligent enough to avoid nominating him.

 

[Chomsky]

I'm really not excited by the idea of another billionaire being President.

Not just another "billionaire", but another NYC billionaire! However, at least this one is real. He'd make for some interesting debate if Trump has the guts to debate him.

 

[Cardinal]

Not just another "billionaire", but another NYC billionaire! However, at least this one is real. He'd make for some interesting debate if Trump has the guts to debate him.

Operas could be written about my unexcitement.

 

[Chomsky]

Operas could be written about my unexcitement.

I'm still not sure what to make of all this, to be honest.

 

[Cardinal]

I'm still not sure what to make of all this, to be honest.

Fear of Trump winning a second term is leading many Democrats to prioritize the idea of "electability" above all else. I think this is a mistake.

 

[Surrealistik]

That's very interesting. Bloomberg would throw the democrat primary into chaos. I'll bet he's fielding a lot of calls right now begging him to stop.

The problem with that theory is that he generally isn't liked among Democrats; I expect he'd poll about as well as Steyer which is to say not at all.

 

[Chomsky]

Fear of Trump winning a second term is leading many Democrats to prioritize the idea of "electability" above all else. I think this is a mistake.

I agree, in part. I'm torn, because there are two ways to slay this:

1] Overwhelming turnout of the base

2] Flipping Trump's battle-ground states back

No matter how overwhelming #1 is, if it doesn't do #2 - it's to no effect. That's what is making me paranoid when I see the battle-ground polling. I think Biden is the only match-up solidly beating Trump there. It would be interesting seeing how Bloomberg does in direct Trump match-ups in these states.

 

[Cardinal]

I agree, in part. I'm torn, because there are two ways to slay this:

1] Overwhelming turnout of the base

2] Flipping Trump's battle-ground states back

No matter how overwhelming #1 is, if it doesn't do #2 it's to no effect. That's what is making me paranoid when I see the battle-ground polling. I think Biden is the only match-up solidly beating Trump there. It would be interesting seeing how Bloomberg does in direct Trump match-ups in these states.

3] Fighting voter suppression by creating a massive public campaign to make sure everybody is registered. This, I believe, will be the biggest fight of 2020. The motivation and effort by Republicans to cheat next year will like nothing you or I have ever seen.

 

[Chomsky]

The problem with that theory is that he generally isn't liked among Democrats; I expect he'd poll about as well as Steyer which is to say not at all.

If it appears Bloomberg's serious, I think he'll easily eclipse Steyer. But I have no idea how high would indeed go.

 

[Chomsky]

3] Fighting voter suppression by creating a massive public campaign to make sure everybody is registered. This, I believe, will be the biggest fight of 2020. The motivation and effort by Republicans to cheat next year will like nothing you or I have ever seen.

Good point. Thanks for bringing this up.

 

[dcsports]

All true. I still suspect Bloomberg would take Trump in the General, though. He's the real deal - a self-made millionaire with an immigrant family rags-to-riches story, running a city that's more populous than many states. He also has strong policy chops, intelligence, he's knowledgeable, and has a calm demeanor.

While he'd likely steal some Trump voters in the battle-ground states, I can see his pro-gun-control stance causing him troubles there. On the other-hand the election might then be seen as a referendum on gun control, which would be a good concussion to have.

I doubt Bloomberg would make it to the general. The other candidates, as well as establishment Democrats, would be on him like a pack of wild dogs. I DO think he would be an awesome addition though, in that he would bring some spotlight back on the Democrat primary, which has been all but invisible. He would also likely throw some emphasis on budgeting and the economy, pulling the field back toward the center on fiscal issues. Regardless of whether he won, it would be healthy for the process.

 

[dcsports]

The problem with that theory is that he generally isn't liked among Democrats; I expect he'd poll about as well as Steyer which is to say not at all.

He'd be in the pack. There are too many people frustrated with the Democrat field, as well as a certain group that would love his celebrity status. He may not be liked by establishment democrats, but he would pull support from them, as well as pulling others generally frustrated with DC politics. (Maybe even carving off some Sanders supporters).

 

[mrdeltoid]

Fear of Trump winning a second term is leading many Democrats to prioritize the idea of "electability" above all else. I think this is a mistake.

You are correct. You gotta play to win. The Dems are so worried about “ electability “, whatever that means, they are playing scared. Going into the battle against Trump that way is a bad strategy.

 

[Chomsky]

I doubt Bloomberg would make it to the general. The other candidates, as well as establishment Democrats, would be on him like a pack of wild dogs. I DO think he would be an awesome addition though, in that he would bring some spotlight back on the Democrat primary, which has been all but invisible. He would also likely throw some emphasis on budgeting and the economy, pulling the field back toward the center on fiscal issues. Regardless of whether he won, it would be healthy for the process.

Yep, I agree with pretty much all you wrote. I'm all for the-more-the-merrier. I want Dems to be the big-tent party, and allow Dem candidates to tailor themselves to their locales. We saw in recent elections that a good strategy. Regardless of who gets the nod, I'd like to see more moderate and - God forbid - even conservative policy to be represented in the debates and party as a whole. There's a lot of great discussion to be had.