Have Bloomberg & Steyer Been Totally Honest About Taxes?

W e know Donald Trump has been dishonest about his taxes. During the 2016 campaign, he promised to release his tax returns. He has still not done that over three years later.

The two billionaires running for the Democratic presidential nomination have excoriated Trump for that, and bragged about releasing their own tax returns. Is that true? Well, partially.

Here is what the fact-checkers for The Washington Post have to say about that:

The two billionaires in the Democratic primary were not as transparent with their tax returns as they let on in these remarks.

Bloomberg, who is ranked as the 10th-richest person in the world by Forbes, never “released” his tax returns while he was mayor in the traditional sense of the word. Instead, he allowed reporters to view redacted versions of his returns for a few hours every year.

Traditionally, candidates for high office in New York and throughout the country release full, unredacted versions of their tax returns for public consumption, so there’s a big difference between what Bloomberg did and the norm. “One year when a reporter rolled in a photo-copy machine to the viewing room, the photo-copy machine got the heave-ho,” a Wall Street Journal editor who covered Bloomberg as mayor tweeted.

Steyer has released tax returns showing he earned more than $1 billion over nine years, but “he withheld nearly every page that showed where all his money came from,” according to the Los Angeles Times.

Can Bloomberg (Or Steyer) Buy The Democratic Nomination?

The chart above is from Axios.com. It shows the amount of money each candidate for president has already spent on their campaigns.

The two biggest spenders are billionaires Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg -- both of whom are trying to secure the Democratic presidential nomination. Both are self-funding their campaigns.

Steyer, who has been in the race for a while, has spent the most money on advertising so far -- about $54.8 million. He has asked people to send him a dollar, but that was just so he could register enough "donors" to get on the debate stage with other Democratic candidates. 99.99% of the money he has spent is his own.

Bloomberg has only been a candidate for a few days, but has already spent $35 million on TV ads. He is not asking for donations and won't be on the debate stage. He also will not try to compete in the early states (Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada). He is hoping his massive advertising can help him compete in the Super Tuesday states (voting on March 3rd) and beyond.

Both of these candidates say their self-funding means they won't be beholding to anyone if nominated. They think that's a selling point. I don't. I think candidates should be beholding to the many thousands of Democrats who send their hard-earned money to their campaigns. I don't want candidates who owe anything to corporations or lobbyists. But they should owe their allegiance to the  base of the party.

Personally, it just looks to me like Bloomberg and Steyer are trying to buy the nomination. They are both super-rich, and they can outspend any other candidate in the field (even those who are doing very well in fundraising among Democrats). There is no real limit to how much they can spend.

Do Democrats really want a candidate who can just spend the most money? I don't think so. Steyer, with all his spending is still in low single-digits in the polls. I doubt Bloomberg will do much better.

Republicans may be happy to sell their nomination and be represented by a billionaire, but I think Democrats are different. They want a candidate with policies that will help most Americans -- especially the poor, the working class, and the middle class (all of whom have been ignored by Republicans).

I could be wrong, but I don't think Bloomberg or Steyer can buy the Democratic nomination. What do you think?

Could Bloomberg Win The Nomination? (The Answer Is NO!)

This chart reflects the results of the November 3-5 Economist/YouGov Poll.


Last March, New York billionaire Michael Bloomberg ended speculation that he might run for the Democratic presidential nomination. But he seems to be once again considering it. His campaign is entering his name as a candidate in Alabama (the state with the earliest deadline for candidacy -- yesterday).

Aides say he will make a decision on whether to run in about a week. Why is he doing this?

He will tell you that he thinks a moderate must be nominated to defeat Trump. I think it's because it is starting to look like Elizabeth Warren has a chance of winning the nomination -- and Bloomberg, like some other billionaires, is afraid of that. While Bloomberg may have some liberal ideas (guns, gays, etc.), he is not an economic liberal. He likes the Republican economic plan (to give more to the rich and claim that helps everyone). And that is why Democrats should and will not nominate him if he runs.

Democrats don't want a billionaire heading their party. Ask Tom Steyer. Steyer has spent more money than any other trying to get the Democratic nomination -- about $47 million dollars. And the best he can do in any poll is about 2% or 3%.

The truth is that, while Bloomberg may not be satisfied with the current crop of Democratic candidates, the Democratic voters are (see the chart above). Nearly 4 out of 5 Democratic voters say they are satisfied with the candidates in the race -- the choices they already have. There is no clamoring for another candidate -- not Bloomberg or anyone else.

If Bloomberg is back, then he needs to go away again. He cannot win the nomination. Like Steyer, he would just be wasting a lot of his own money.

Democrats don't want, and won't nominate a billionaire with no experience to be their candidate.