Fake billionaire Trump bashes real billionaire "little Bloomberg" on Twitter

[Simfan34]

I haven't seen any actual evidence to suggest Trump isn't actually a billionaire, first things first.

Otherwise, what a joke. Bloomberg is everything Trump claims to be-- a self-made entrepreneur, someone with a net worth in the tens of billions and (still!) rising, a generous philanthropist, a successful politician, in-demand in the most rarefied parts of Society. Bloomie has done everything Trump wishes he could, so he's left to knock Bloomberg, like a child, on the only thing he can-- his height. I bet every night, Trump goes to sleep wishing he was like Bloomberg, Buffett, the Kochs, Li Ka-Shing, and so forth; that he lived up to his own hype.

Bloomberg's last term as mayor was the exact opposite of a disaster, and if he actually ran for Mayor again (which he could, given that NYC term limits apply to consecutive terms) as I dearly wish he would, he would handily defeat de Blasio in a rout.

[Simfan34]

Ugh guys, I know Drumpf is awful, but Democrats should never fawn over billionaires regardless of their politics.

Because... being a billionaire is morally wrong, or what?

[Simfan34]

Ugh guys, I know Drumpf is awful, but Democrats should never fawn over billionaires regardless of their politics.

Because... being a billionaire is morally wrong, or what?

Because admiring wealth and valuing people based on their wealth is morally wrong.

I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with that-- given that wealth is used as a proxy, as it is in Bloomberg's case, for success in business-- but you throw me off further by adding "regardless of their politics"? Why can't billionaires be fawned over for their politics?

Furthermore, Trump is someone who definitely values people based on their wealth, and there's an irony one can appreciate in him attempting to denigrate someone who, by his own metric, ought to be considered his better.

[Simfan34]

I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with that-- given that wealth is used as a proxy, as it is in Bloomberg's case, for success in business--

I don't see success in business as something inherently deserving of praise. For every business(wo)man who made their wealth through socially useful activities, there is another who made it through shamefully parasitic ways (if anything, considering the way our modern economic system works, there are probably more of the latter).

Well sure. But when it isn't "parasitic", there's no reason why that shouldn't be something to applaud and look up to. Unless you want to give Trump some suggestions, I think the idea that Bloomberg's career has been "parasitic" is transparently baseless. Not that you necessarily meant that, but it was implied...

I was just saying that Democrats shouldn't start worshiping "success" the way Republicans do just because a successful guy happen to support them.

One could have an endless philosophical debate on what constitutes "success", but I think that Republicans are not alone in placing great value in it, whatever it is.

[Simfan34]

Can you imagine a Trump-Bloomberg debate? All Donald would have is personal insults if he couldn't talk about how much more wealth he had.

Bloomberg, out of exasperation, would probably end up challenging Trump to compare the size of their hands. Trump, being the stubby-fingered coward he is, would refuse, and Bloomberg would tell Trump to stop banging on about about his height if he doesn't want to talk about his hands.