The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently published an article about the most recent Marquette poll for the Democratic presidential race. They were surprised by the significant support that Senator Bernie Sanders is currently showing in Wisconsin. He has a double digit lead with 29% of the voters. Surprising? Well Yes and No. He won here in the 2016 primary and has had a very loyal and vocal following since that time.

But the item that I don’t think has garnered anywhere enough attention is the even more surprising strength of former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg!

Sanders, who won the 2016 Democratic presidential primary election in Wisconsin, tops former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who now has the second-most support at 17% following heavy advertising in the state even though he hasn’t been on a ballot yet this primary cycle.

emphasis mine

And exactly how did Mayor Bloomberg explode onto the scene? Well, the advertising blitz of course…but it appears he may be doing some serious damage to former Vice President Joe Biden.

Since November, support among Wisconsin’s Democratic voters for Sanders has grown from 17% to 29%, while support for Biden has fallen from 30% to 15%.

Yes maybe a few moved to Sanders…but I really doubt that.

I am not supporting Mr. Biden but to me it is very disheartening to see the success that billions of dollars are bringing to Mr. Bloomberg. And it is further disheartening to see Wisconsin fall for his Madison Avenue approach to running for president. He has so many flaws. His efforts in his campaign are beyond the cynical. He is so far away from being representative of the American people…much less the Democratic Party. But apparently even here…money talks.

Hopefully by the time Wisconsin votes in April, Mr. Bloomberg will be out of the race.

3 Responses to Yes, Apparently You Can Buy The Presidential Nomination

  1. Edward Susterich says:

    Most election results are determined by magnitude of $$$$’s spent to “market” a candidate.

    It helps to have a name that is familiar so getting media coverage (paid or free) is a plus. Trump (and other incumbants) gets free coverage and name rcognition worth many $$$$’s.

    It’s like choosing between Coke and Pepsi…while rejecting Brand-X Cola.

  2. Jake formerly of the LP says:

    I’ll note that Steyer underperformed his polls in both Nevada and South Carolina, despite throwing by far the most amount of money into ads there.

    Seems worth keeping in mind with Bloomberg as we look at Super Tuesday results. If he underperforms polls as well, it tells you people are answering based on the names they recognize/last heard vs what people actually vote for.

  3. Edward Susterich says:

    Yes, Steyer underperformed, but would he have gotten even 1% of the vote if he hadn’t spent millions?

    Unfortunately the Citizens-United decision and negating the Feingold-McCain campaign finance reforms have had serious negative effects on our election process.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Set your Twitter account name in your settings to use the TwitterBar Section.