The more Mike Bloomberg talks, the less the public like him
Late-entrant Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg, billionaire and former mayor of New York City, isn't exactly a popular guy.
To us, we remember him well enough — the guy who was so busy stealing salt shakers off New York diners' tables and telling them how much Big Gulps were good for them that he forgot to prepare the huge metropolis for Hurricane Sandy.
These days, he's talking about packing the Supreme Court with anti-gun activists, a real political winner if there ever was one, given the repeated failure of such measures across the country. Gun control is always a loser. And voters know what rigging is, and packing the Court is rigging.
So it's no surprise he's seeing numbers like these following his multi-million-dollar shell-out for campaign ads, something the other candidates (not that they deserve any sympathy) can't afford:
A newly-released poll shows billionaire and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is deeply unpopular with registered voters after jumping into the crowded 2020 Democrat primary field.
A Monmouth University poll released Tuesday found voters react to Bloomberg twice as negatively than they do positively — 54 percent unfavorable and 26 percent favorable — signaling that it will take more than multi-million-dollar ad buys to win over the electorate.
This comes after he splashed out all that cash and hired all those best-and-brightests from the company he founded, Bloomberg News, as his campaign handlers.
Voters can now see him up close from those nonstop ads, praising himself as better than the mere middle class, selling himself to voters as "not a deplorable," and they don't like it.
The more he talks, the less they like him.
It all goes to show how bad his judgment is.
For starters, it makes sense that billionaire Bloomberg is annoying to leftists, given that they think all the world's ills were caused by billionaires — and they don't like billionaires as it is. Remember Occupy! Wall Street and all that hollering about the 1%. Bloomie, with his $55-billion or so fortune, would be around the top 0.01% actually, so his argument of course is on the importance of tamping down that dreaded 1%, something that tastes funny to leftists.
But he also isn't resonating with moderates, who have some semblance of liking for capitalism. Instead of promoting capitalism for them, as Trump did for the right-wingers in 2016, he's promising bigger government, all the money — and all the power, in hands like his.
Has he really done anything for "the people"? It's true he's hired a lot, but he made money off those hires, so no need to give him any special credits unless he gets honest with voters and tells them that capitalism helped him get rich and he will sure as heck make sure that capitalism, and not government, does the same thing for them.
He's too far up in the economic stratosphere to recognize that. He's in Buffett territory, a rich guy trying to defend his fortress at the expense of all those nouveaux riches.
Bad premise. No wonder it's not working. Good to see him lose money on his own cynical buy-an-election ego project, though. Run, Mike, run...