Image 01 Image 03

NYT Editor and Brian Williams Fail at Math on Bloomberg Spending

NYT Editor and Brian Williams Fail at Math on Bloomberg Spending

2+2 = Dolphin

New York Times editor Mara Gay and MSNBC’s Brian Williams showed off their superior math skills last night on The 11th Hour.

Mekita Rivers, a writer at Glamour and The Washington Post, posted that Michael Bloomberg could have used the $500 million he spent on ads on the American people. She said he could have given everyone $1 million and have money to spare.

I guess you’d become a millionaire if Bloomberg gave you $1.53!

You’ll laugh at this. Rivas admits in her protected Twitter profile that she’s bad at math.

To make matters worse, Gay and Williams never caught the bad math. You know the producers and editors of the show saw the tweet, but no one said anything.

Thing is, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Rivers’ math was way off!

From Mediaite:

“You see it as a possibility, if he wants to spend a billion bucks beating this guy, he could do it?” Williams asked Gay in a discussion of Bloomberg’s primary ad spending and the billionaire’s promise to continue his political ad campaign through November to defeat President Donald Trump.

“Absolutely. Somebody tweeted recently that actually with the money he’s spent, he could have given every American a million dollars,” Gay said, as Rivas’ false claim appeared on screen.

“I’ve got it. Let’s put it on the screen,” Williams said, clearly not seeing the faulty math either. “When I read it tonight on social media, it kind of all became clear. Bloomberg spent $500 million on ads. U.S. Population, $327 million. Don’t tell us if you’re ahead of us on the math,” he added, not realizing that his viewers were ahead of him on the math, because he and his guest were botching it so badly.

“He could have given each American $1 million and have had lunch money left over. It’s an incredible way of putting it,” he added.

In fact, it’s an incredibly wrong way of putting it. But Gay certainly didn’t catch on.

“It’s an incredible way of putting it. It’s true,” Gay said incredibly, as, still, no one on the show stepped in to shut down this ongoing, embarrassing display of innumeracy. “It does suggest, you know, what we’re talking about here, which is there is too much money in politics. It makes it difficult because what we want in politics — the point is to have competition, and the point is to have the best candidates and have people from all backgrounds be able to run. So that gives people real choice, not just super PACS and dark money flooding elections or even just a single billionaire with good intentions.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


UnCivilServant | March 6, 2020 at 9:05 am

Where my $1.25?

Yes, with that intuitive grasp of math, they must be Sanders supporters, for sure.

Personally, I’m holding out for a bribe from Hillary. Considering what she spent in 2016, I should get something close to $5.00.

I suppose I should be amazed at the level of dumb but they’ve proven it so many times I’m numb to it now.

    CapeBuffalo in reply to NGAREADER. | March 6, 2020 at 4:35 pm

    Maybe Sweetpea will have Barbie on for a hard hitting interview of the need to bring up our children’s math scores and what are their plans to bring this about.

Sort of puts their economic policies into context, doesn’t it?

“All right, Brian, you’ve earned a raise so we’re going to increase your salary to $14.00 a week. Congratulations.”

And they both have college degrees.

And these people wake up every single day to go out there and tell us how much smarter than us they are, and they expect us to do, and say, and vote and live as they say, because you know, they’re so much smarter and stuff.
And it’s their job to do that.
And stuff.

“Stupid is as stupid does” — Forrest Gump

As this is a NYT editor, I would like to point out that if you consider the 1619 Project, the NYT is still better at math than it is history.

Voodoo economics is real

It’s just a fool-the-eye thing, subtracting instead of dividing.

All the billionaires in the US are only worth in the neighborhood of $3 trillion. If we confiscated every penny of their collective wealth, that would be less than $10,000 per person in the US, less than one year of current annual federal spending and less then 15% of the national debt.

1/2 American. 0/1, +/-1 American, and with multipliers… yeah, the math can be tricky… a trick.

Give the Dems time and the reins of government and Zimbabwe math will make that reference possible. The Dems can truthfully promise to make everyone in the USA not only a millionaire but a billionaire.

Well, if you subtract the 150 million who were killed by guns, the per person dollars go up.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Obie1. | March 6, 2020 at 12:14 pm

    And the two errors cancel each other out because they are of the same order of magnitude, so their libmath was correct all along, right?

    I think I’m ready to go start a fight at Bernie rally.

      Milhouse in reply to healthguyfsu. | March 6, 2020 at 1:51 pm

      No, the two errors are not of the same order of magnitude. Biden was only off by a factor of 1,000. These idiots were off by a factor of 1,000,000.

        GWB in reply to Milhouse. | March 6, 2020 at 4:01 pm

        I think he meant that in the liberal sense of “order of magnitude” not the math sense. Because 1,000 and 1,000,000 are both what’s known to liberals as ‘BIG numbers’ they’re the same order of magnitude. So are 1,000,000,000 and 1,000,000,000,000.

        Though, sometimes that last one moves into the order of magnitude defined as ‘REALLY BIG numbers’.

“Math is hard.”


buckeyeminuteman | March 6, 2020 at 12:23 pm

What did you expect from the ChopperWhopper?

This would only get one Pinocchio – mostly true if you use that alternative math. The same math that Leftists use when they calculate how much all their giveaways will cost.

No wonder socialism makes sense to these people. Anything can make sense to them.

charlie kirk does too and many conservatives pushing meme w/o checking the facts.
first, the commie said that was for people making 10 million or more but even IF the cutoff was 29K that would mean 2200 $ would be taxed at 52%. so tax on the 2200 would be approx 1144 $.
but people see a meme and just spread the fking thing w/o even looking.

    and thats not taking into account we have that stupid progressive tax rate. if sanders ever released a plan that could be checked the numbers owed on that 2200 may even be less.
    but again, its a meme and everything on da interwebs is true so gotta hurry up and repost it….

Some say a million, some say a dollar,
Some say “investment,” some say “tax increase.”
A million, a dollar, investment, tax increase,
Let’s call the whole thing off!

Clearly there is NOT ENOUGH money in politics, and wont be until candidates can pony up that $ 1,000,000.00 USD to each voter. If all candidates pay up equally the $$ will cancel and we can decide the election on its merits. 🙂

CaptScientist | March 8, 2020 at 7:47 am

This says it all about our so-called education system….It’s no wonder we have to import talent to work in today’s commerce