It’s shark week in South Carolina, and Bloomberg is the chum
The sharks are circling.
I’m not sure, but I’d be willing to bet that Michael Bloomberg has never been roughed up as badly as he was last week in Las Vegas during the Democratic Party debate.
He was supposed to be a fresh voice for the Democrats, somebody who was not a Beltway habitue, a guy who billed himself as the savior of a party desperate to relieve the nation of the crude, ruthless gargoyle who has taken residence in the White House, an old, immoral fat cat with a specious history and limited intellect.
Instead, Bloomberg came across as just another old, immoral fat cat with a specious history and limited intellect, at least when it comes to political acumen.
Bloomberg had already tossed hundreds of millions into his campaign, flooding the airwaves with pricy ads intended to separate him from the field. His 60-second missives gave him some decent optics, but that’s pretty easy when you are patting yourself on the back.
The debate in Las Vegas was a different matter with real, live opponents breathing fire, and Bloomberg came away scorched.
It was no surprise when he entered the fray, sights aimed at Sen. Bernie Sanders. He borrowed a page from the president’s playbook, hammering Sanders and his brand of democratic socialism — a term not fully understood by much of the voting public. He was a one-trick pony, seemingly unaware that he was facing off against a handful of other candidates on the stage who were already fairly battle-worn.
They all got their pound of flesh from Bloomberg with Sen. Elizabeth Warren arguably taking the biggest chunk.
Warren came out swinging, landing lethal blows as she recounted the charges of sexual harassment against Bloomberg and his associates.
She leveled him, as she should have.
Bloomberg looked bewildered. He looked as if he was insulted that anybody would take him on as Warren, then former Vice President Joe Biden, then the others gored him.
Bloomberg did more to invigorate the campaigns of Warren and Biden than he did in presenting his claim that he is the only Democrat with a chance at unseating the president.
In fact, if his initial foray into the debates is any indication, the president would make mincemeat of Bloomberg on the campaign trail.
He was weak and vulnerable, something you would not expect from the 12th-richest person on the planet, a guy who is so rich he is not asking for any political contributions as he writes checks to buy his way into the nomination.
And that’s the problem. We have seen how wealth has little to do with the ability to govern.
Granted, Bloomberg has actually been in the trenches. He was New York’s mayor in the shadow of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. He held onto that seat for three consecutive terms to mixed reviews, but he did manage to hold onto the reins of the nation’s greatest city for a protracted time.
But do we really want to elect another rich (approximately $62 billion) and old (he just turned 78) guy to serve as president?
Can a rich, old guy relate to the daily struggles of folks like us?
Does this rich, old guy really understand how vital Social Security is to most of us or is it simply a talking point?
Does this rich, old guy understand the need for universal health care or is that simply another talking point?
Does this rich, old guy understand the difficulty in trying to make ends meet while sending your kids to college?
There is something in my DNA that makes me suspicious of the rich and how they accumulated wealth. And I am sure it won’t sit well with other Democrats, who traditionally come from and embrace working class virtues and culture.
But the party also faces several other issues that are problematic.
First, there’s the age thing. Bloomberg is 78, Sanders is 78, Biden is 77, Warren is 70, Sen. Amy Klobuchar is 59, and Pete Buttigieg is 38. The largest age demographic in the United States is the 25- to 54-year-olds, who make up nearly 40 percent of the population. The Golden Corral/Sun City age groups are diminishing. Yet, four of the party’s six candidates are well into their golden years. Do they have the vigor, long-term vision, and mental sharpness to govern? We see how poorly the 73-year-old dotard in the White House is doing. Do we want more of the same?
Then there’s the lack of diversity.
There is, of course, Buttigieg, the first openly gay person to seek their party’s nomination to run for president.
But the United States has a rich, diverse population that is vastly underrepresented.
Finally, I don’t care how many polls Sanders leads. My gut tells me that his electability is an issue. He has a long way to go to shake the “angry old man” image that he has personified.
They take the stage again tonight in Charleston, South Carolina, and it will be interesting to see if in the last week Bloomberg has found a spine, if Warren will be able to score another knockout punch, if Buttigieg will be able to edge Klobuchar deeper in the polls, if Biden will be able to hold onto the slim momentum he gathered after he beat up on Bloomberg, or if Sanders will be able to maintain his lone wolf posture.
I’d wager that the hopefuls will gang up heavily on Bloomberg and Klobuchar in an effort to whittle the field even more.
South Carolina has been a make-or-break state for Biden from the beginning.
He frittered away Iowa, was unimpressive in New Hampshire, and promised he would show us his strength in South Carolina. It may energize him tonight, or he could blow it if he goes in over-confident, a highly likely scenario.
And while Klobuchar most definitely has a huge bull’s eye painted on her back, the punch-drunk Bloomberg will without question see the sharks circling.
There’s blood in the water, and these seasoned candidates smell it, which means that despite his money, despite his tenure as mayor of New York City, and despite his name, Bloomberg is in an untenable position.
It’s shark week in South Carolina, and Bloomberg is the chum.
The viewpoints expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Independent.
How to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or letter to the editor to The Independent
Do you have something to say? Want your voice to be heard by thousands of readers? Send The Independent your letter to the editor or guest opinion piece. All submissions will be considered for publication by our editorial staff. If your letter or editorial is accepted, it will run on suindependent.com, and we’ll promote it through all of our social media channels. We may even decide to include it in our monthly print edition. Just follow our simple submission guidelines and make your voice heard:
—Submissions should be between 300 and 1,500 words.
—Submissions must be sent to editor@infowest.com as a .doc, .docx, .txt, or .rtf file.
—The subject line of the email containing your submission should read “Letter to the editor.”
—Attach your name to both the email and the document file (we don’t run anonymous letters).
—If you have a photo or image you’d like us to use and it’s in .jpg format, at least 1200 X 754 pixels large, and your intellectual property (you own the copyright), feel free to attach it as well, though we reserve the right to choose a different image.
—If you are on Twitter and would like a shout-out when your piece or letter is published, include that in your correspondence and we’ll give you a mention at the time of publication.
