Connect with us

Politics

Hillary and Bloomberg are not running together….or are they?!

They’re not Obama and Uncle Joe, but they do have public chemistry and you can imagine the two of them working side by side for the next four years.

Published

on

Mike Bloomberg could team up with Hillary Clinton to try to take down President Trump in November — by making her his running mate.

Bloomberg’s internal polling found the combo “would be a formidable force,” sources close to the campaign told the Drudge Report Saturday.

Bloomberg’s communications director did not deny the rumored matchmaking effort.

“We are focused on the primary and the debate, not VP speculation,” Jason Schechter said in a statement.

But minutes after Drudge broke the news, Bloomberg himself posted a coy message about working with female colleagues.

“I would not be where I am today without the talented women around me,” he tweeted. “I’ve depended on their leadership, their advice and their contributions.”

(cont. NY Post)

Before I start, let me just be clear: the only reason I “care” about this at all is because so many of y’all were so antsy to get off a hot take to the internet as quickly as possible with digs about Hillary Clinton. We not just finna drag that old woman every time a baseless rumor pops up because she ain’t did nothing to y’all but try to save us from THIS current shitstorm we’re wading through okay? But let me just go on ahead and let y’all in on all sides of this non-story so you can draw your own conclusions.

Exhibit A: Bloomberg and Hillary like each other.

They were just out and about in December with a group of rich white folks celebrating somebody’s birthday in New York. She was a NY Senator when he was the Mayor of NYC. They’ve run in the same circles for at least 20 years now.

They’re not Obama and Uncle Joe, but they do have public chemistry and you can imagine the two of them working side by side for the next four years.

Put a Plus One in the column for They’re Running Together.

Exhibit B: Bloomberg would need a Progressive.

Remember how Hillary beat Sanders for the nomination and four years later we still have a lot of progressive folks in the party reminding us every chance they get that she stole the nomination from Sanders, that Sanders would have beat Trump, that centrism wasn’t the way to go, etc. Can you imagine the fallout if Michael Billionaire Racist Bloomberg was the conservative “liberal” who beat Sanders this time? And then had the nerve to pick the woman who beat Sanders the last time? Bloomberg is a lot of things, but stupid isn’t one of them.

Put a Plus One in the column for They’re Absolutely Not Running Together.

Exhibit C: Speaking of racism…

Superpredators vs. Throw them up against the wall. These are two very old white people with very inflammatory statements about Black folks in the public record. Hillary’s superpredator comments were downplayed during her run, but I promise you if she linked up with Bloomberg, both of their comments together would be magnified ten times over.

Another Plus One for Not Running Together.

Exhibit D: Trump might actually implode if they were on the same ticket.

Tom Steyer is a billionaire who can get under Trump’s skin. Elizabeth Warren is a wordsmith unafraid of confrontation who can get under Trump’s skin. Michael Bloomberg is a billionaire wordsmith unafraid of confrontation who comes with an added layer of belonging to the same social circles as Donald Trump. He can annoy that man like no other because Bloomberg is what Trump wishes he was — an actual billionaire businessman accepted by New York City’s Elite, not a bumbling buffoon being laughed at by the same people he’s been trying to impress since the 1980s.

For her part, Hillary has just run out of f*cks to give. She has been needling that man for the past two years and he loses it every time. If the two of them together took on Trump, he might actually snatch his wig off and throw a tantrum on the White House lawn.

Plus One for Running Together.

Exhibit E: The 12th Amendment

A lot of people who say Clinton and Bloomberg can’t run together erroneously point to the 12th Amendment to support their conclusion, but most people understand this part incorrectly:

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves

They’re both from New York so I’ve seen people say they can’t run together because of this, but that’s not what it means. The electors from New York can’t vote for both of them, but the electors from every other state can. This was set up to prevent electors from trying to install “two favorite sons” from their own state in the White House. If they were from a smaller state they may consider running anyway, but because New York has a lot of electors, obviously Bloomberg and Clinton wouldn’t forfeit all those votes by running together as two people from New York. Even though the reasoning is off, the conclusions are still correct in assuming the 12th Amendment would keep them off the same ticket.

But!

Hillary can change her residency before declaring. That’s what Dick Cheney did. He sold his house in Dallas and got a driver’s license from Wyoming where he had a vacation home so he could run with Dubbya and not forfeit all of Texas’s electoral votes. Hillary could essentially do the same thing so…

Put a One in both columns. It’s a wash.

Exhibit F: This is the most important point — Hillary Clinton is more ambitious than this.

There are a lot of things you can say about Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton but “someone who settles for less” is not one of them (and most of the other things I’ll probably ignore anyway because I drank the Kool Aid back in 2000 when she WOULD have run for President if her husband hadn’t screwed up the plan by sleeping with his intern, getting impeached, and making Hillary look like a fool in front of the whole country).

Hillary Clinton has been one or two steps from the Presidency multiple times. She was Secretary of State and her husband’s number one policy adviser. She would not take a demotion just to be less powerful than she’s been before. She would not jump into the lion’s den of criticism and not-so-thinly-veiled disdain for a thankless title. Hillary has been dragged by journalism for her hair, her face, her ankles, her attitude, the sound of her voice, and her audacity(!) since the 1980s. This is a woman who changed everything about her public image — including finally taking her husband’s last name, which she hadn’t originally — because the public made it very clear to her that she was not wanted the way she was and if she wanted the top job (her goal was always to be President) she would have to accept the beatings, make changes, and press forward.

She has pressed forward as far as she is going to press. She tried to turn the position of First Lady into a political post by putting forth healthcare legislation. It didn’t work, so she played the role the way America wanted it to be played to wait out her time and run for President once her husband was on his way out. It didn’t work, thanks to Bill, so she ran for Senate instead to use that as a springboard to the nomination. It didn’t work, because no one could’ve beat Obama, so she accepted a Secretary of State post in his administration to use that as a springboard to the White House. It didn’t work, because we elected Trump instead. The political trajectory has always been aim higher, do more, use this setback as a step UP to the next position. Hillary Clinton would never step DOWN to Vice President.

Plus One in the column for They’re Not Running. Plus Three in that column. Plus One Hundred in that column.

Hillary Clinton would never run for Vice President. Period.

Go drag somebody else for awhile and let that lady have her tweets and her soundbytes. She plays coy with the press because it gives her something to do. Your retired grandma is just as messy but without the national spotlight, so Nana Hillary is alright by me.

facebook.com/SoLetsTalkAbout/
twitter.com/RafiDAngelo
Email: rafi@soletstalkabout.com
Venmo: Rafi-DAngelo
CashApp: $RafiDAngelo
paypal.me/soletstalkabout

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Politics

Trump sues the Internet, because he needs money.

He’s filing a suit he can’t win so his cult will give him more cash.

Published

on

Donald Trump sued Twitter, Facebook, and Google yesterday because he misses being able to shit in America’s face whenever the mood strikes, and because he needs money.

Former President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced that he will lead a lawsuit over alleged censorship against Twitter, Facebook and Google – three tech companies that removed him from their platforms after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol by a mob of his supporters.

The lawsuit will be a class-action, with Trump as the lead plaintiff, claiming that he’s been censored by the companies. He spoke about the legal action from his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.

“I stand before you this morning to announce a very important… development for our freedom and freedom of speech,” Trump said. “In conjunction with the America First Policy Institute, I’m filing, as the lead class-action representative, a major class-action lawsuit against the big tech giants, including Facebook, Google and Twitter, as well as their CEOs.”

(cont. Fox News)

Fox News is reporting this story to its viewers and readers the way it reports everything else: with half of the truth and a Conservative tilt that builds a false reality in the minds of its consumers. Trump is indeed filing suit and he does indeed feel that his First Amendment rights have been infringed upon, but if Fox News would just say plainly that these suits have zero chance of success, people would be less likely to send Trump money, which is all that orange bastard wants in the first place.

Donald Trump’s entire fundraising strategy is to present himself as a champion of white Conservatives who feel they’ve been silenced. They feel like he’s the only one who’s fighting for them, so they send him — a supposed billionaire in their eyes — money to fight liberals, to fight Democrats, to fight the legal establishment, to fight media elites. Fine, if you want to throw away your money so your champion has enough cash to fight the good fight, that’s your right.

Where’s the good fight though? These are lawsuits for show. They won’t be pursued because they have no chance of winning and Trump hates to lose. From a legal precedent, we just had a ruling on this exact same situation less than two weeks ago, and it was in Florida where Trump filed his lawsuit.

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked a Florida law that would penalize social media companies for blocking a politician’s posts, a blow to conservatives’ efforts to respond to Facebook and other websites’ suspension of former president Donald Trump. The law was due to go into effect Thursday, but in issuing a preliminary injunction, U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle of the Northern District of Florida suggested that the law would be found unconstitutional.

(cont. WaPo)

Speaking of Florida, you can’t sue Facebook or Twitter from Florida. You have to sue them in California. I’m not a legal scholar and I don’t know why that is. I would suspect that a company would choose to set up shop in a state whose legal system was more likely to side with the company should an issue arise. If I’m a gun manufacturer, I’d rather be sued in Texas than in New York because my Texas judges will probably see it my way. Whatever the reasons, we all agree to file suit against Facebook and Twitter in California. When you sign up to use the platform, it says in the Terms of Service that any dispute you have must be filed in California.

It’s a done deal. Case closed, before it’s even open. Courts almost always uphold Terms of Service agreements unless there’s something egregiously illegal or unconstitutional in them, and specifying a jurisdiction in which to file a lawsuit is so commonplace, there’s no court that would even look twice at this filing from Florida. The Terms of Service agreement isn’t suddenly rendered invalid because you don’t like what you agreed to or you didn’t read it. It’s a legally binding contract that you agreed to, and if Trump wanted us to believe even for a second that he would pursue this lawsuit seriously, he would’ve at least bothered to file it in California. It’s so clearly Trump’s latest grift to wring money out of his cult, a way to keep his name trending, and another virtue-signaling tactic to his brainwashed followers that says, “hey…I’m still fighting for you guys.”

But he’s just fighting for his bank account.

facebook.com/SoLetsTalkAbout/
twitter.com/RafiDAngelo
Email: rafi@soletstalkabout.com
Venmo: Rafi-DAngelo
CashApp: $RafiDAngelo
paypal.me/soletstalkabout

 

 

Continue Reading

Politics

Dr. Jill Biden for Vogue

Published

on

First Lady Dr. Jill Biden covers Vogue this month and the accompanying write up is great.

I don’t feel like I know as much about her as I did about Michelle Obama, because the press were breathlessly reporting on every little Obama Tidbit, but Dr. Jill has firmly had me in her camp since I noticed how often she perfectly matches her gloves to her outfit.

This passage about the Navajo nation made me give her two snaps:

Dr. Biden’s trip to the Navajo Nation was, in fact, her third official visit to the tribal land—a fact that was lost on no one. (Business leader and Navajo advocate Clara Pratte says, “As someone who has worked in this field for a long time, I can tell you: This is not the norm. But it should be the norm.”) Dr. Biden’s last trip was two years ago, when she came to open “the very first cancer-treatment center on any American Indian reservation,” as the Navajo Nation’s first lady, Phefelia Nez, pointed out. Her husband, President Jonathan Nez, added that it was the Navajo Nation that helped put Biden over the top in Arizona, with “60, 70, even 80 percent turnout in some places.” There is a Navajo word, jooba’ii, that sounds like “Joe Biden” and means compassion, he said. “That’s how a lot of our elders remembered it at the polls.”

(cont.)

How about that. She’s the real deal.

Also: I love that this photo of Dr. Jill and her grandchildren from a couple of years ago pops up again. Annie Liebovitz did some good work here.

 

facebook.com/SoLetsTalkAbout/
twitter.com/RafiDAngelo
Email: rafi@soletstalkabout.com
Venmo: Rafi-DAngelo
CashApp: $RafiDAngelo
paypal.me/soletstalkabout

Continue Reading

Politics

WaPo: 21 House Republicans vote against awarding Congressional Gold Medal to all police officers who responded on Jan. 6

Published

on

Twenty-one House Republicans on Tuesday voted against awarding the Congressional Gold Medal to all police officers who responded to the Jan. 6 violent attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob.

The measure passed the House with overwhelming bipartisan support from 406 lawmakers. But the 21 Republicans who voted “no” drew immediate condemnation from some of their colleagues, and the vote underscored the lingering tensions in Congress amid efforts by some GOP lawmakers to whitewash the events of that day.

(cont.)

Imagine facing down an angry mob and putting your life on the line for a group of people who largely look past you day to day, and then having those people say “oh it wasn’t that bad” and refuse to give you recognition.

The way I would CUSS them out to their FACE. The GOP has no floor. Their party is in hell.

 

facebook.com/SoLetsTalkAbout/
twitter.com/RafiDAngelo
Email: rafi@soletstalkabout.com
Venmo: Rafi-DAngelo
CashApp: $RafiDAngelo
paypal.me/soletstalkabout

Continue Reading

Trending

%d bloggers like this: