Posted on 02/22/2020 1:40:24 PM PST by John Semmens
Democratic presidential contender and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg lamented that “the $400 million I’ve had to spend on my campaign shows how inefficient the process is. Not only am I out a huge chunk of change, but TV viewers across America are having their homes flooded with my ads. There has to be a better way.”
What a better way might look like, according to Bloomberg, is “like we do it in the business world. When a man with resources sees a company being run ineffectively he buys the owners out. Both sides benefit. The incompetent owners get paid and a better management is installed. Look, the other candidates running for the Democratic presidential nomination have no realistic hope of winning. The sensible option for them would be to agree to drop out in exchange for a generous payment from me. Today, I’m announcing that whoever drops out first will be gifted—so it’s tax-free–$20 million in cash. Whoever drops out second will get $19 million and so on until the field is cleared of dead wood.”
The already-dropped-out Andrew Yang was the first to accept Bloomberg’s offer, saying “think of how many families I can give $1,000 a month to with this gift.” However, Bloomberg quickly pointed out “you already dropped out for free. Only those still in the race, like that fat broad from Minnesota, the preachy Pete, and malarkey Joe are eligible.”
The former Mayor acknowledged “there may be a lot of caterwauling from the attention hounds and their media running dogs, but I think the common people will appreciate my approach. Rather than being tasked with a decision they aren’t qualified to make, they will enjoy the kind of improved product or service that occurs in the corporate world when bad leadership is replaced by superior leadership via the buy-out method.”
In related news, Marquette University political science professor Julia Azari called for “allowing elites to have a bigger say in how we choose who governs us. If the 2016 election proved anything it was that letting people’s votes decide who becomes president is too risky. That’s what gave us Trump. The better model was the ‘super delegate’ system used by the Democrats to ensure that the most qualified person got their Party’s nomination. I think what we should do now is replicate that approach for the general election. Let people cast votes to generate a list of potential presidents. Then have those with the most relevant experience—government employees—have the final say on who becomes their next boss.”
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news/semi-satire posts you can find them at...
https://azconservative.org/2020/02/22/bloomberg-calls-current-election-rules-inefficient/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.