Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Live Digest: 10/10 (361 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Because Bloomberg is a pompous, (14+ / 0-)

    tone-deaf elitist, who principally views government as a vehicle that should aid those who are prosperous; he epitomizes trickle down ideology and he's hardly a technocrat, so much as he is a self-serving statist. There's a reason why anti-Bloomberg Democrats swept the Democratic primary and a candidate running against Bloomberg's legacy is dominating the polling of NYC by a gargantuan amount right now.

    A centrist technocrat is an entirely inappropriate term for a political bully who built his career off right-wing law and order narratives alongside social liberalism and a view of economics that is lasseiz faire with a few regulatory trappings meant to ensure the profits of the elites, a man whose entire mayoral tenure focused on economic policies which helped the wealthy rather than taking any truly proactive measures to help the poor, which Bloomberg views as automatically helped when new billionaires decide to live in NYC.

    "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

    by ArkDem14 on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 11:41:36 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I don't remember the era (0+ / 0-)

      but do you really want NY to be the cesspool it was in the 70s?

      follow me at: http://rumromerebellion.wordpress.com/

      by demographicarmageddon on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 12:06:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm Sure The Crime Is Way Down...... (6+ / 0-)

        but I bet a lot of NYC wage-earners would love to have 70s-era purchasing power back.

        •  also (9+ / 0-)

          crime has gone down pretty much everywhere since the 70s, and the last few mayors of NYC were not also mayors of everywhere.

          ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

          by James Allen on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 12:22:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  For those who are interested in this (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gabjoh, MichaelNY

            subject, I suggest checking out this link. Also see this link. I haven't read the guy's book, but it looks like you can get a general idea of his claims by Googling him. A fair summary is, I think, that a lot of the "knowledge" around crime control is anything but, and that certain politicians' legacies are, at best, overrated.  There's a lot we don't know about this stuff just yet, it seems.

            You're a Constitutional conservative. I'm a Constitutional conservative. Who isn't a Constitutional conservative? We are all proud Constitutional conservatives. Ted Cruz in 2016!

            by bjssp on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 12:54:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well there's lots of theories (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              I mean, Freakonomics says it was Roe v. Wade.

              All of the theoies do however discount the politicians role in crime reduction, however.

              "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

              by rdw72777 on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 01:05:08 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I Found Out The Hard Way..... (5+ / 0-)

                ....that the quickest way to make a room full of small-town social conservatives incredibly uncomfortable is to mention the Freakonomics theory on why crime is down.  I wasn't looking for trouble either....they asked.  

                •  There is also a strange, positive (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY, aamail6, askew

                  correlation between violent crime and lead exposure. And undoubtedly certain community programs and simply increasing the raw numbers of police have non-negligible effects.

                  "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

                  by ArkDem14 on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 01:49:21 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I commented before reading yours (0+ / 0-)

                    I find the evidence presented by the authors of the book presenting the theory that lead poisoning caused most of the violent crime to be convincing.

                    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                    by MichaelNY on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 06:44:16 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The nice thing about the lead theory (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY

                      is that there are plenty of reasons to get rid of lead besides its possible effects on crime. Either way, we get a lot out of eliminating it, but it if happens to help reduce crime, so much the better.

                      You're a Constitutional conservative. I'm a Constitutional conservative. Who isn't a Constitutional conservative? We are all proud Constitutional conservatives. Ted Cruz in 2016!

                      by bjssp on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 09:17:18 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Hehe (0+ / 0-)

                  He warned you at the beginning of that chapter about that exact scenario.

                  "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

                  by rdw72777 on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 01:50:28 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Lead poisoning is a big one, too. n/t (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                askew

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 06:42:57 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  There's a pretty strong correlation (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, askew

            of crime decline with a number of factors, such as banning lead paint, family planning, and successful community programs. It's one of the hugely unfair bits of modern politics that everyone, especially in the Zimmerman debate, liked to talk about crime and conservatives especially like to bring up black on black violence, which ignores the fact that so-called black on black murder has had the steepest decline of any homocide category, dropping over 60% over the past two decades as a result of a number of proactive community policies.

            Gun regulation opponents though aren't very good at statistics. I see Chicago memes about "gun control" and how it leads to more murder everyday. It makes peoples heads explode when I explain that it nonsense statistics because it has no point of comparison to anything else, and that Chicago's murder rate is about half as large as it was when the city instituted its 1982 handgun ban.

            "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

            by ArkDem14 on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 01:48:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Freakonomics (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            argued that abortion suddenly being legal everywhere may have played a role in this, actually.

            The idea is that more widespread access to abortion = fewer children growing up with parents who never wanted them in the first place = fewer children likely to turn to crime.

            I believe they claimed that the first major drop in the crime rates in the United States came around the time the children who were born within a few years of Roe v. Wade were coming of age.

      •  That sounds like a right-wing talking point to me. (6+ / 0-)

        25, Practical Progressive Democratic Socialist (-9.38, -8.51), Gay, IN-02 - Defeat Wacky Jackie!

        by HoosierD42 on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 02:51:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Bloomberg didn't create any trends (0+ / 0-)

        and the city wasn't high-crime when he took over.

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 06:42:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  this is why we need more than two parties (0+ / 0-)

      In the link below, it talks about a hypothetical four party system. Bloomberg would certainly fall under the "Postmodern" category, which I am too.
      http://uselectionatlas.org/...

      follow me at: http://rumromerebellion.wordpress.com/

      by demographicarmageddon on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 03:01:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Being in a category (0+ / 0-)

        with Thomas Friedman, Corey Booker and Mike Bloomberg doesn't sound like a very fun place to be, nor a particularly intellectually heavy-hitting place, since it seems like it would absorb a lot of the plutocrats and bug-eyed idealists whose conceptualization of the real world and its challenges is actually quite lacking in stunningly fundamental ways.

        "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

        by ArkDem14 on Fri Oct 11, 2013 at 02:15:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site