How come New Yorkers aren't supporting Michael Bloomberg for President?

Here are the latest estimated odds of which Democrat will win the New York Presidential primary from Predictit.



But despite massive campaign expenditures, Bloomberg is still not ahead in any of the states.

When the left is attacking Mark Zuckerberg for being too friendly with Trump, you at least know that Facebook won't be quite as pro-Democrat

In an op-ed, George Soros claims that Facebook got Trump elected in 2016 because it didn't censor what he claims was incorrect news. He also claims that FB is trying to help out out Trump again.

More recently, direct contact between the two men has raised serious questions. Mr. Zuckerberg met with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office on Sept. 19, 2019. We don’t know what was said. But from an interview on the sidelines at the World Economic Forum on Jan. 22, we do know what Mr. Trump said about the meeting: Mr. Zuckerberg “told me that I’m No. 1 in the world in Facebook.” Mr. Trump apparently had no problem with Facebook’s decision not to fact-check political ads. “I’d rather have him just do whatever he is going to do,” Mr. Trump said of Mr. Zuckerberg. “He’s done a hell of a job, when you think of it.” 

The president’s 2016 campaign mounted a robust data-centric communications effort and has continued to build on that program over the past few years, using Facebook as a key part of their strategy. 

Facebook’s decision not to require fact-checking for political candidates’ advertising in 2020 has flung open the door for false, manipulated, extreme and incendiary statements. Such content is rewarded with prime placement and promotion if it meets Facebook-designed algorithmic standards for popularity and engagement. . . .  

I expressed my fear that with Facebook’s help, Mr. Trump will win the 2020 election. The recent hiring of a right-wing figure to help manage its news tab has reinforced those fears. . . . 

DNC changes rules so that Michael Bloomberg can enter Democrat debates

How come the DNC has changed the rules to help Bloomberg but not to help other candidates? Not everyone is pleased by the double standard. From Politico:

“Now, suddenly because Mr. Bloomberg couldn’t satisfy one of the prongs, we see it get changed?” Weaver said. “That’s the definition of a rigged system where the rich can buy their way in.” . . . 

Steyer — like Bloomberg, a billionaire — has also been accused of buying his spot on the debate stage, having spent well over $150 million of his own money to fuel his bid, including spending eight figures to solicit donations from enough individuals to qualify. But Steyer and Bloomberg are taking two very different paths to trying to secure the nomination: Steyer is competing extensively in the four early states, while Bloomberg is skipping them entirely to focus on Super Tuesday and beyond. 

Steyer, like Weaver, the Sanders' adviser, accused the DNC of changing the criteria to benefit Bloomberg. "Back in December, I called on the DNC to open up the debate requirements so that more candidates, including candidates of color, would be able to participate, he said. “Instead, they are changing the rules for a candidate who is ignoring early states voters and grassroots donors.” . . .

Michael Moore has gotten quite vexed about this.

"They removed it so that [Bloomberg] could be in the next debate," Moore said about the donor requirement. "...He can just buy his way onto the debate stage!" 

Billionaire Tom Steyer had to spend dollars convincing ppl to donate to his campaign, but not Bloomberg.

Truly massive campaign spending by Michael Bloomberg

From Politico:

Michael Bloomberg’s big-spending, shock-and-awe TV ad campaign has made politicking more expensive for everyone from his 2020 rivals to Senate, House and state legislative candidates around the country. 

Eight weeks into his presidential campaign, Bloomberg has already spent more money on advertising — $248 million — than most candidates could spend in years. That amount has squeezed TV ad inventory in nearly every state, lowering supply and causing stations to raise ad prices at a time of high demand, as candidates around the country gear up for their primaries. . . . 

Bloomberg’s ad onslaught comes with benefits to Democrats around the country, too: His ads have pushed issues that are critical to the party, like health care and climate change, and he has attacked President Donald Trump relentlessly in key swing states where Democrats might not have aired ads for months, softening up the Republican incumbent before the 2020 election. . . .

And $100 million has been spent just on attack ads against Trump. Of course, with all of Drudge's attacks on Trump, this shows how close Drudge is to the Bloomberg campaign.

Former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg has already dropped a fortune in support of his 2020 presidential bid — including, reportedly, $10 million for ad time during Sunday’s Super Bowl. Now, the exact figures are coming to light. And they are staggering. . . . 

Drudge, reporting through a Bloomberg campaign source, says the campaign has spent in excess of $25 million on digital ads, and has topped $85 million in TV buys. 

The Bloomberg source called the massive spending a “down payment” on the former mayor’s effort to take down Trump in November. . . . 

All this is on top of the $60 million that Bloomberg's Everytown will spend pushing gun control issues. It is nearly double the $36 million that the NRA spent in 2016, but it ignores the fact that Bloomberg funneled even much more money through other liberal groups (environmental, abortion, and other similar groups).

Bloomberg compares the US to Nazi Germany

https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/1221881826945441794