I don't know about ALL democratic elites, there are a lot of them. And with progressive winning some elections the ranks are broken. But sure, some care more about the needs of their wealthy donors than the needs of the ordinary people. And yeah, Bloomberg is outright bad. He is a rich guy who chooses the party as he sees fit for his own benefit. And nothing else.

What really puts me off about the financial data I gathered about the campaigns, that the two billionaires just can crush any fundraising a classic campaign does. This is oligarchy, it is like Ukraine, where a rich guy (like Poroschenko) wins presidency. That is not a healthy democracy. Tom Steyer at least has good intentions, but still I object against a rich guy buying his way into an election. But Bloomberg is outright evil, he is in politics to benefit exactly one person: himself. That must be stopped.

Pretty good poll for Sanders from Texas. Maybe his sincerity is helping him reach voters that perhaps aren't that warm to his left-wing politics but simply like him and believe he's the antidote to Trump.

He's also the most popular candidates amongst Hispanics and Latinos afaik, which certainly helps him in such a state.

Source on that $1000 per month average cost? Isn't medicare not allowed to negotiate costs right now? Meaning they have to pay whatever the private healthcare companies force them to pay? 

I feel like Twitter is over exaggerating everything again. Stop and Frisk was a bad policy but it wasnt really enforced that much and Bloombergs terms as Mayor wasnt terrible. Also theres always the chance that he no longer supports stoo and FrIsK since those clips are from years ago..

Well, I said early on, that I am pretty happy with the democratic field, as everyone is clearly a better candidate than Hillary Clinton was. Bloomberg makes me reconsider that. Not only is he as bad, he is worse than Clinton, and if it comes down between him and Trump I am not sure.

That said, everyone else is a lot better, including Biden. I feel Biden would be a bad pick, as he wouldn't progress things, politics would be stagnant with him more or less. But surely Biden is a lot better than Clinton, Bloomberg and Trump.

I personally have quite a bit of issues with Bloomberg and I think he would lose a general election (nevermind the fact he won't win the primary), but the comments saying he's worse than Trump are completely delusional.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jan/15/bernie-sanders/sanders-medicare-all-plan-targets-health-industrys/

Bernie said during a debate that there is 100 billion in profits made per year by the health care industry. That's $100,000,000,000 a year. Even if we assumed that every last person in the USA had health care costs per year, that would still come out to $327 per year in profits, per person, on average. Edit: This is just the profits made from health insurance companies, and pharma. It doesn't include doctor's offices, or hospitals!

The question I want to ask here, is how many people actually use health care in the US per year? I'd like to get this down to how much profit is made on the average patient.

Trump is a million times worse than the worst Democratic candidate, even Bloomberg or Gabbard. He's a threat to democracy not only in the US but worldwide considering how he likes to be buddies with dictators and how he's morally enabling the far-right from various angles.

That being said, there's one man who will counter Bloomberg's momentum in the Deep South and Florida, which is why I believe he has no path to nomination but a brokered convention.

And here I thought I started something original when I mentioned that hashtag!

Oh well, it's a good cause. The guy's national polling average is now up to 14.2% as of this writing, mostly at Joe Biden's expense. That support, incidentally, comes disproportionately from African American voters, which is perhaps the most insidious thing of it all.

Biden would be among the worst options the Democrats could go with in this field, IMO, but I'd still take him over Bloomberg any day of the week.

Maybe having Bloomberg on the debate stage this next time will be a blessing in disguise. That should expose him to actual scrutiny on national television for pretty much the first time in this contest. Seriously, with all the advertising he's purchased, essentially all of his media coverage so far has been on his own terms. Maybe not being able to control all the terms for once will change things.