5 ms·

He's been doing this since atleast 2016. I wouldn't rule out he having sights on a presidential run since atleast then. He did form an exploratory committee onc

He's been doing this since atleast 2016. I wouldn't rule out he having sights on a presidential run since atleast then. He did form an exploratory committee once before and abandoned the run when it showed he didnt have enough support.[1] [2] Stocks keep climbing and climbing, but Michael Bloomberg isn't sure why. "I cannot for the life of me understand why the market keeps going up," the former New York City mayor said Tuesday in an interview with CBS News' Anthony Mason. "Our economy has some real challenges," he continued. "The infrastructure's falling apart. We're destroying jobs with technology. We are keeping the best and the brightest from around the world from coming to America to create new jobs and create new businesses. "All of those things would give you pause to worry about the future."[3] [1] Former New York mayor Bloomberg mulls presidential run on heels of Trump surge https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/23/michael-bloomberg-considers-third-party-presidential-bid https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/23/michael-bloo... [2] Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg Will Not Run for President https://time.com/4250295/michael-bloomberg-president-trump-cruz/ https://time.com/4250295/michael-bloomberg-president-trump-c... [3] BLOOMBERG: 'I cannot for the life of me understand why the market keeps going up' https://www.businessinsider.com/stock-market-news-michael-bloomberg-2017-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/stock-market-news-michael-bl...

alamaslah 7y ago
Why is this being downvoted? It is a interesting contribution and gives valuable insight into the article that has been posted.
- jcadam 7y ago
  > Why is this being downvoted? So was the other comment by the same user. They're being downvoted because they're critical of a Democratic presidential candidate.
  - troydavis 7y ago
    At least in my case, I downvoted it because it cited Daily Mail as a reliable source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail and https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ have more, but basically, it’s a tabloid. Their assessment of the decision is incomplete, probably because reporting is not how they differentiate. Here’s a few other entities' explanations of Bloomberg’s decision: https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/782732936/bloomberg-news-says-it-wont-cover-owners-presidential-campaign-or-his-rivals https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/782732936/bloomberg-news-says..., https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/473542-bloomberg-reporting-policy-not-pretty-or-perfect-but-right https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/473542-bloomberg-report..., https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/michael_bloomberg_news_president.php https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/michael_bloomberg_news_p...
    - leereeves 7y ago
      Did you downvote the wrong comment? It was a different comment by the same author, with the same unique format, that cited the Daily Mail.
      - troydavis 7y ago
        (Update: I'm no longer sure whether this is correct. More on this, for the three other people who care: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21969051 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21969051) No, OP subsequently edited the comment without saying so. This whole reply thread is now useless.
        wozniacki 7y ago
        I'm sorry to say but you seem to be a petulant person or someone with an axe to grind, here. I haven't seen anyone try to vociferously beat down a fully citation-ed comment with legitimate sources as if it were salvaged from some hearsay somewhere. Some would mistake you for someone who works for the aforementioned billionaire's campaign, the way you seem to want to launder his image, here.
- ianai 7y ago
  HN tends to take a dim view of political discussions in my experience. There have been a number of indicators of a slowing economy for quite some time now. There was at least one run towards bonds in recent months. The Fed has been famously weighing its rate decisions sighting troubling economic outlooks. The yield curve inverted. GDP figures are trending downward. This is all just off the top of my head.
  - turk73 7y ago
    The yield curve inverted but then the Fed cut rates and it sprung back. I don't think these low rates are a good idea, mind you, but I'm just saying that the yield curve is no longer inverted.
  - merpnderp 7y ago
    Most importantly of all, a stagnating economy is likely the only way anyone in the Democratic primary can beat Trump. And there's not an editor in the country who isn't carefully weighing this when picking what finance stories to run.
troydavis 7y ago
Edit: As far as I can tell, my comment below was totally incorrect. Parent comment may well be unchanged. I dug up the web archive to confirm because there was uncertainty, and as far as I can tell, it's unchanged. I have a version on my phone that renders a different comment, but since, I can't repro it or verify it now, I need to retract what I wrote below. My original comment: OP has edited the comment above without mentioning it, rendering this entire reply thread useless.
- adger 7y ago
  No. This is not true. The comment is exactly the same. Why are you doing this?
throwno 7y ago
It's comical how Bloomberg wouldn't get into the race until Warren polled higher than Biden for two days. Even a tiny chance that a wealth tax could happen was enough for Bloomberg to commit to the race. Haha.
- rtkwe 7y ago
  It certainly feels that way. Honestly though I'm not sure if his goal is for a moderate nominee that joining the race is the way to do it. Seems much more likely to me he'll peel some support away from Biden rather than actually decreasing support for Warren/Bernie/et al.

alamaslah 7y ago

Why is this being downvoted? It is a interesting contribution and gives valuable insight into the article that has been posted.

jcadam 7y ago
> Why is this being downvoted? So was the other comment by the same user. They're being downvoted because they're critical of a Democratic presidential candidate.
- troydavis 7y ago
  At least in my case, I downvoted it because it cited Daily Mail as a reliable source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail and https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ have more, but basically, it’s a tabloid. Their assessment of the decision is incomplete, probably because reporting is not how they differentiate. Here’s a few other entities' explanations of Bloomberg’s decision: https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/782732936/bloomberg-news-says-it-wont-cover-owners-presidential-campaign-or-his-rivals https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/782732936/bloomberg-news-says..., https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/473542-bloomberg-reporting-policy-not-pretty-or-perfect-but-right https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/473542-bloomberg-report..., https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/michael_bloomberg_news_president.php https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/michael_bloomberg_news_p...
  - leereeves 7y ago
    Did you downvote the wrong comment? It was a different comment by the same author, with the same unique format, that cited the Daily Mail.
    - troydavis 7y ago
      (Update: I'm no longer sure whether this is correct. More on this, for the three other people who care: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21969051 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21969051) No, OP subsequently edited the comment without saying so. This whole reply thread is now useless.
      - wozniacki 7y ago
        I'm sorry to say but you seem to be a petulant person or someone with an axe to grind, here. I haven't seen anyone try to vociferously beat down a fully citation-ed comment with legitimate sources as if it were salvaged from some hearsay somewhere. Some would mistake you for someone who works for the aforementioned billionaire's campaign, the way you seem to want to launder his image, here.
ianai 7y ago
HN tends to take a dim view of political discussions in my experience. There have been a number of indicators of a slowing economy for quite some time now. There was at least one run towards bonds in recent months. The Fed has been famously weighing its rate decisions sighting troubling economic outlooks. The yield curve inverted. GDP figures are trending downward. This is all just off the top of my head.
- turk73 7y ago
  The yield curve inverted but then the Fed cut rates and it sprung back. I don't think these low rates are a good idea, mind you, but I'm just saying that the yield curve is no longer inverted.
- merpnderp 7y ago
  Most importantly of all, a stagnating economy is likely the only way anyone in the Democratic primary can beat Trump. And there's not an editor in the country who isn't carefully weighing this when picking what finance stories to run.

troydavis 7y ago

Edit: As far as I can tell, my comment below was totally incorrect. Parent comment may well be unchanged. I dug up the web archive to confirm because there was uncertainty, and as far as I can tell, it's unchanged. I have a version on my phone that renders a different comment, but since, I can't repro it or verify it now, I need to retract what I wrote below. My original comment: OP has edited the comment above without mentioning it, rendering this entire reply thread useless.

adger 7y ago
No. This is not true. The comment is exactly the same. Why are you doing this?

throwno 7y ago

It's comical how Bloomberg wouldn't get into the race until Warren polled higher than Biden for two days. Even a tiny chance that a wealth tax could happen was enough for Bloomberg to commit to the race. Haha.

rtkwe 7y ago
It certainly feels that way. Honestly though I'm not sure if his goal is for a moderate nominee that joining the race is the way to do it. Seems much more likely to me he'll peel some support away from Biden rather than actually decreasing support for Warren/Bernie/et al.