Part I:  Then-New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg implemented, and enthusiastically approved of “stop and frisk” policing – disproportionately conducted in minority areas.

That. pretty obviously, is very bad for a Democrat presidential nominee.

Part II:  Audio tape emerged in which Bloomberg informed his audience:

“It’s controversial, but first thing is, all of your – 95% percent of your murders, murderers and murder victims, fit one M.O. [method of operation]

“You can just take the description, Xerox it and pass out to all the cops. They are male minorities, 16 to 25. That’s true in New York.

“It’s true in virtually every city. And that’s where the real crime is. You’ve got to get the guns out of the hands of the people that are getting killed.”

That. pretty obviously, is very bad for a Democrat presidential nominee.

Part III:  And now we have this from an Associated Press article, via the New York Post:

At the height of the 2008 economic collapse, then-New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the elimination of a discriminatory housing practice known as “redlining” was responsible for instigating the meltdown.

“It all started back when there was a lot of pressure on banks to make loans to everyone,” Bloomberg, now a Democratic presidential candidate, said at a forum that was hosted by Georgetown University in September 2008. “Redlining, if you remember, was the term where banks took whole neighborhoods and said, ‘People in these neighborhoods are poor, they’re not going to be able to pay off their mortgages, tell your salesmen don’t go into those areas.’”

He continued: “And then Congress got involved — local elected officials, as well — and said, ‘Oh that’s not fair, these people should be able to get credit.’ And once you started pushing in that direction, banks started making more and more loans where the credit of the person buying the house wasn’t as good as you would like.”

That. pretty obviously, is VERY bad for a Democrat presidential nominee.

Put all three parts together,and it, pretty obviously, is VERY, VERY, VERY  bad for a Democrat presidential nominee.

What kind of apology can Michael Bloomberg float/invent/purchase to get past these three parts (assuming there aren’t still more out there which we haven’t heard about yet)?

I don’t have an answer for that one.  Do you?


  • That racist *#*@*%* !

    Steal his platform shoes!

    But since we’re talking About Him, just How accurate are the numbers he presents?

    Does the cohort of minority males 16 to 25 actually encompass 95% of the murders
    in NYC?

    Forcing banks and mortgage providers to make High risk loans to people lacking financial resources
    Was Instituted by Andrew cuomo when he was secretary of Hud. Thanks again Andrew Berry

  • I agree with Ann Coulter’s latest column, where she says Bloomberg shouldn’t have to apologize for saving black lives. I think most Trump supporters would agree with what Bloomberg said about stop and frisk and redlining. I also agree that the ultra left Democrats will recoil in horror. But as Dick Morris reported, the “centrist” Democrats….Buttigeig, Klobuchar and Biden….have gotten a lot more votes than the leftist candidates….Sanders and Warren. Bloomberg is going to make this primary season very interesting, starting on Super Tuesday.

    • I agree that a strong, persuasive argument can be made in favor of “stop and frisk” being disproportionately conducted in minority areas, on the basis that there is disproportionately more crime in those areas.

      Bloomberg’s problem, though, is that a large percentage of minorities emphatically disagree, and the language he used to explain it – including that exaggerated “95% of all crime” non-statistic, and his throwing kids up against the wall and frisking them comment, are both way over-the-line offensive and almost certainly will be seen as racial stereotyping.

  • If Bloomberg were an honorable man he would come out and own those comments, stand by them and tell people the truth. He would probably pick up more votes by doing so.
    Let’s see what he ends up doing.

    • I agree that he might not be hurt in a general election – he would lose some votes and win others, maybe with a resulting net gain. But the problem is that he has to win his party’s nomination first…and there is no way Democrats are running with a candidate who proudly supports “stop and frisk”.

Leave a Reply

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