Multi-billionaire and Former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg Debates
By Julia Tuck
Staff Bloomer Expert
It’s 2020, and although this may seem like another typical article regarding the presidential election, I can assure you that it is not. While watching the Democratic debate on February 19th, I managed to actually stay awake for the full two hours of the debate, a feat I am exceptionally proud of. I do not say this in such a way as to dismiss any of the candidates, but simply to say that I found this particular debate quite substantive and closely relevant to my personal concerns in the current political realm.
I would like to start this article off by being honest about my perspective when it comes to politics. Growing up as a child, I never really talked much about politics and it was something that was somewhat kept hushed because it would either erupt into an argument at Thanksgiving dinner or become a friend association problem at school (“You support Obama? Lol we aren’t friends anymore”). This seemed to be an ongoing phenomenon for me for a long time and I absolutely disliked how certain people became polarized, something that almost completely inhibited me from forming personal connections to them, despite the fact that I appreciated their opinions. I think that a main problem in modern society is that major issues are not talked about in a civil manner, resulting in violence or condemnation.
In regards to the debate, it was quite prominent on many surfaces because 1) it introduced billionaire Michael Bloomberg, 2) there was much conversation regarding topical issues such as access to health care, and 3) it addressed the most pressing question of who will have what it takes to defeat Donald Trump. The debate opened immediately with all eyes on Michael Bloomberg, CEO of Bloomberg L.P. and former mayor of New York City. He seemed to generally agree with the topic of taxing the billionaire class but was pinpointed by candidates such as Senator Elizabeth Warren who mentioned him as a person who formerly made sexist comments on his women workers in the 1980s and 1990s, a time when the “Me Too” movement had not yet begun. It seemed that Bloomberg was taken aback by such remarks and did not steadily defend himself against Warren who pointed to his major faults.
The argument on healthcare was prolific, to say the least. As Senator Bernie Sanders once again advocated for his “Medicare for All” health care promise, certain candidates such as Mayor Pete Buttigieg seemed hesitant. There was much discussion regarding the healthcare industry and the very real fact that under the current presidential administration large hauls of people with health issues or no insurance at all are vastly suffering. It is also relevant to be pointed out that several European nations have already taken on a similar plan to that proposed by Sanders which would increase taxes but would do so in a way as to benefit the large expanse of humanity by ensuring no co pays or surprise bills. In actuality, Bernie Sanders’s proposal is not actually that radical and looks to benefit the majority of people so that large profiteering industries such as pharmaceuticals do not leverage off of the money of working class individuals who pay exorbitant amounts for health care. This plan may seem only relevant to those suffering from chronic illnesses but it is also relevant to young people and those who are trying to start up their own life and want to have an accessible and fair health care system.
In my own personal experiences, I have found the polarization of political issues, including health care, to be a very large problem. I am currently reading a book regarding Liberalism and how it is becoming skewed as a political ideology in the modern age, almost a blasphemy by many Conservatives. I know that what I am saying seems to not be related to the debate but it is in many senses because people are choosing to view these issues through a lens that is either too far left or too far right. There seems to be no middle ground when it comes to certain people voicing their opinions and it is saddening to me to hear of noble ideas, many Liberal, to be immediately disregarded by people with little knowledge on the topics.
In regards to the debate, between much of the fierce quarrels, it seems to all come down to the one burning question of which Democratic candidate will be able to come out as on top. I have noticed that this debate entailed much heated debate, but it seems that there is still somewhat of a discrepancy on the idea of unity. It seems that the candidate who has a solid grasp and proud envisionment of the future is Bernie Sanders, along with some of his fellow candidates. The main idea, however, is that no matter who the Democratic nominee will be for the election, there must be a solid ground of unity in backing the decision for the sake of the party and for the sake of winning the election. There needs to be a president in the White House who represents those who are working to make life possible and a new president should therefore be chosen based on principle, moral, and a united vision for all.