SPONSORED:

Bloomberg underscores that only pragmatism can defeat Trump

Bloomberg underscores that only pragmatism can defeat Trump
© Getty Images

I recently watched Amy Goodman’s program, “Democracy Now,” when she was reporting from the UN Climate Change conference in Madrid. Things got interesting when Goodman tracked Michael BloombergMichael BloombergYang: 'Defund the police is the wrong approach for New York City' New York mayoral candidates go viral for vastly underestimating housing costs Melinda Gates tapped divorce lawyers in 2019 after Epstein links to husband: report MORE out of the venue of the conference — for minutes on end. The journalist repeatedly shouted a question at the former mayor, who ignored her and was largely shielded by his entourage as they continued on foot to a destination that never seemed to arrive. It was not a good look for Bloomberg, and Goodman played the scene to maximum effect

Though minor, the incident actually has troubling implications for Democratic prospects against Donald Trump in 2020.

Goodman's charge was that because the Madrid meeting had identified inequality as a driver of climate change, Bloomberg was a hypocrite for attempting to win the presidency by leveraging his personal fortune. The logic was tortuous, but the contempt was unmistakable — not only for Bloomberg’s candidacy, but for what he, perhaps more than any single individual on the planet, has done to combat global warming.

ADVERTISEMENT

By mobilizing states and municipalities to meet U.S. commitments under the Paris Agreement despite President TrumpDonald TrumpProject Veritas surveilled government officials to expose anti-Trump sentiments: report Cheney: Fox News has 'a particular obligation' to refute election fraud claims The Memo: What now for anti-Trump Republicans? MORE’s shameful withdrawal, Bloomberg has helped keep a flicker of U.S. global leadership alive in benighted times.

It is understandable that progressives would not favor Bloomberg’s candidacy, notwithstanding his ardent support for many progressive causes. At this stage of the campaign there are candidates on the left, notably Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersStudy: Early unemployment cutoff would cost 16M people 0B Machine Gun Kelly reveals how Bernie Sanders aided him in his relationship with Megan Fox Overnight Health Care: CDC approves Pfizer vaccine for adolescents aged 12-15 | House moderates signal concerns with Pelosi drug pricing bill | Panel blasts COVID-19 response MORE (I-Vt.) and Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenWarren says Republican Party 'eating itself and it is discovering that the meal is poisonous' Briahna Joy Gray: Warren not endorsing Sanders in 2020 was 'really frustrating' McConnell hits Democratic critics of Israel MORE (D-Mass.), with a realistic shot at the nomination who have a better claim on those voters. But the idea that Michael Bloomberg might be viewed by progressives as an inconceivable nominee under any circumstances is a bad sign for Democrats of all persuasions. 

For one, holding his wealth against him is not something most Americans would regard as appropriate in and of itself. Bloomberg is an American success story; he comes from a middle-class background and owes his wealth only to his own entrepreneurial and managerial genius. He has created value and contributed to the general prosperity, not enriched himself through speculation or exploitation. And he is intent on giving virtually his entire fortune away. Far from being an emblem of inequality, his philanthropy promotes progress and expanded opportunity with regard to health, education and other critical issues. 

The separate charge that Bloomberg is attempting to buy the presidency has more to it, but only somewhat. In reality his wealth is meant to compensate for a deficit of political skills. He would likely give anything to have the eloquence of Pete ButtigiegPete ButtigiegBiden says he and GOP both 'sincere about' seeking infrastructure compromise The Hill's 12:30 Report - Presented by Facebook - Colonial pays hackers as service is restored The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - Biden expresses optimism on bipartisanship; Cheney ousted MORE, the plainspoken folksiness of Joe BidenJoe BidenFauci says school should be open 'full blast' five days a week in the fall Overnight Defense: Military sexual assault reform bill has votes to pass in Senate l First active duty service member arrested over Jan. 6 riot l Israeli troops attack Gaza Strip Immigration experts say GOP senators questioned DHS secretary with misleading chart MORE or the fire of Bernie Sanders. What his money buys is the opportunity to acquaint voters with unique leadership and problem-solving skills that would potentially make Bloomberg an outstanding chief executive for the nation. By self-financing, moreover, he is the only candidate in the race of either party who cannot be corrupted by political donations. 

The fact is that until the disgraceful current system of campaign finance in the United States is reformed, Democrats can compete with Republicans only if they are able to match them financially. In that respect, Michael Bloomberg is doing more than anyone in the party to ensure a level playing field — underwriting multiple efforts aimed at identifying, registering and mobilizing every potential voter against Donald Trump. Given that his candidacy is a long shot, his efforts will likely benefit someone else. Bloomberg will in fact do everything he can to help any of his rivals defeat Trump. Would that the same could be said of all.

ADVERTISEMENT

It is surely now critical for progressives to learn from their ideological opposites, who seem to take elections and their consequences for policy and governance far more seriously.

In 2016 conservatives cynically embraced a man who shared neither their values nor convictions in relentless pursuit of a right-wing agenda. Can it be that liberals value the shape and direction of the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary less than conservatives?

The election in 2000, which yielded the catastrophic war in Iraq, underscores the same point.

Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonHillary Clinton to speak at Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders summit More than half of eligible Latinos voted in 2020, setting record Fox News signs Trey Gowdy, Dan Bongino for new shows MORE and Al GoreAlbert (Al) Arnold GoreHawaii legislature passes bill to implement automatic voter registration Libertarians elected Biden Gore believes China will 'overachieve' on emissions goal MORE respectively bear responsibility, of course, for those Democratic defeats — but they likely would have won had progressives rallied to them in sufficient numbers.

2020 now brings us to potentially the most consequential election of our time. Our long national nightmare will be prolonged an unthinkable four more years unless all wings of the party unite behind the Democratic nominee — unless, at least this once, pragmatism trumps purity.

James B. Foley is a retired career foreign service officer and was U.S. Ambassador to Haiti, 2003-2005, and to Croatia, 2009-2012. He coordinated Iraqi refugee issues for the State Department, was deputy commandant of the National War College and a deputy permanent U.S. representative to the United Nations in Geneva.