The celebrity endorsements among Democrats have been kind of weird. Andrew Yang, for instance, has received the endorsement of Donald Glover, Dave Chappelle, Steven Yeun, Rivers Cuomo, Nic Cage, and Jack Dorsey, among others. I get it: They like universal basic income, and they are rich people, so they think that $1,000 a month is a lot of money to poor people, because they don’t know how much a gallon of milk cost (it’s $4.20 here). Chappelle, for instance, was going on earlier this week about how poor people in Ohio don’t care about health insurance because they just want to be able to feed themselves.
Dave Chappelle in Ames with @AndrewYang: “You take a poll in Dayton and say what would you rather have, $12,000 a year or health insurance? Everyone’s taking the money. Health insurance is great, but groceries are necessary too.” pic.twitter.com/XJZY4Bexmr— Iowa Starting Line (@IAStartingLine) January 29, 2020
As Emily noted yesterday, “I like that we think poor people can have either healthcare or food, but definitely not both. It’s just such a fucking weird position to be in. ‘Man, you think we need to give people free healthcare when they don’t even have any food.’ ‘So can we give them food too?” ” … No.’”
The biggest fucking issue for me is the continued belief that resources are scarce. We behave like wealth is a finite commodity that can only be doled out in specific ways rather than acknowledging that income inequality is created in order to make some people more powerful. We’ve been able to demonstrate that we have the food and technology needed to feed literally every person in the country. The reason that food insecurity still exists is because people can’t overcome the stigma attached to asking for assistance. People are literally starving because of the mindset that some people need to be poor in order for the system to function.
“Poverty isn’t lack of money,” Steven added. “It’s lack of power. Giving people money without changing the power structure just gets you poor people who can’t afford their $1000 rent instead of their $500 rent.”
In any respect, this is not about Yang. It’s about Bloomberg, who has gathered another odd assortment of celebrity endorsements, as well, including Ted Danson, Judge Judy, Tim Gunn, and Michael Douglas, which is to say: Rich people who want to protect their wealth but also care about social issues and the environment. And here’s the thing about Bloomberg: Between January 1st and January 24th, he spent $262 million in TV ads, which is enough to provide Universal Basic Income to 22,000 people for a year … or, fund a more viable candidate who can actually beat Donald Trump, and provide both food and health insurance to poor people!
Bloomberg is skipping Iowa and New Hampshire and thinks he can buy his way to a Super Tuesday victory. It seems unlikely, although he’ll grab 5 percent of the vote or so through the sheer omnipresence of his television ad campaign. Advertising works! I mean, if Michael Bloomberg — one of the least interesting people on the planet — can collect the support of 5 percent of Democratic voters, that alone illustrates the effectiveness of advertising, although it’s very expensive. Hillary got 65 million votes in 2016. Let’s say these ads give Michael Bloomberg 5 percent of that vote count. That means he’s paying roughly $80.62 per vote so far.
He’s about to add $11 million more for a Super Bowl ad. It’s a good ad, designed to reach out to Black voters and those who support gun reform, but will it boost his campaign?
Are you persuaded? Before you say anything, watch this:
What the fuck is this. pic.twitter.com/g9Hffw9aQt— Tania Singh (@TwinklingTania) January 29, 2020
I think the cost per vote just went up $10.
Header Image Source: Bloomberg Campaign