Michael Bloomberg Could Deadlock Both the Electoral College and the House of Representatives

Rasmussen Reports ^ | June 01, 2007 | Rasmussen Reports

[kabar]

Perot didn’t win a single state either.

[penowa]

All I know, without consulting the tea leaves of Rasmussen’s polling, is that if the candidates are Rudy and Hillary, and Bloomberg makes it a 3-way race, why would anyone bother to vote? “The Three Faces of Soros!”

[Nonstatist]

He’s never do as well as Nader; 2 maybe 3 %, and even that seems high.

[Cicero]

Bloomberg would hurt Giuliani, probably, but not Fred, who would win a different combination of states. Against Fred, Bloomberg would hurt Hillary more, because he’s a raving leftist who doesn’t even deserve to be called a RINO.

[Always Right]

...it’s very simple, really...dthe Dem’s will likely have 250 electoral votes in the pocket

I doubt if either party has 250 ev's locked. There are numerous states that could flip either way.

[zeugma]

After Perot handed Clintoon the presidency twice, I believe America will NOT do that same mistake again!.........

I don't. Hillary's negatives are so high a strong 3rd party candidate is her only hope for winning if she's the nominee.

That said, if the pubbies nominate Rudy or McCain, I ain't voting for them. I refuse to vote for even the lessor of evils any more.

[mathluv]

I tend to agree with you, but there are some FReepers who probably don’t agree - who will sit it out instead of voting against the dim.

[Red Badger]

I hope the race comes down to Thompson vs. Hillary!........

[Red Badger]

I will NOT sit out, no matter who is on the(R) ticket if H! is on the OTHER SIDE!.......

[NeoCaveman]

Sounds like a case for instant runoff where you vote for your #1 choice and then your #2 choice at the same time.

In a 3 way race, I’d vote for the GOP candidate #1, the democrat #2, and vote never on that nanny state fascist Bloomberg.

[mathluv]

ABSOLUTELY!!!!!

[Southside_Chicago_Republican]

I would hope that the people would see a Bloomberg candidacy for what it would be — an expensive ego trip — and tell him what he can do with both his ambitions and his money; a reaction which, I assume, he has very rarely experienced. There’s too much at stake in the next election to have some fool (even a mega-rich fool) monkey around with the process.

[Nextrush]

I saw a headline in the NY Post yesterday about Mayor B proposing some sort of tax cuts. Is he setting himself up for next year’s run by portraying himself as a “tax cutter”?

[Tanniker Smith]

After Perot handed Clintoon the presidency twice, I believe America will NOT do that same mistake again!.........

Some would argue that the same thing happened with Nader and Bush/Gore.

[Tanniker Smith]

Mikey is a joke. He has no judgment capability other than nanny government...

He's a joke with a lot of money and better sensibilities than Perot had. Yes, he would be a lousy president. No, I don't think he could win. However, I do believe that should he want to, he can make himself a factor in this race.

[Bitsy]

Gosh, you sound like you’re from Louisiana - New Orleans to be exact. We have had to make nauseous choices from time to time - Nagin-Landrieu is our more recent decision...ug! Republicans do’t have a chance in NO....YET!

[The Pack Knight]

I too have doubts about Bloomberg's ability to win any states, but I do think his natural constituency will be moderate Republicans who defected over the war. There are a substantial number of those, but not enough by themselves to send the election to the House.

There are also a substantial number of liberals who dislike Hillary, and they might be persuaded to vote for him as well. If he can secure votes from both constituencies, then he may have a chance.

If Bloomberg runs, it will almost certainly be on the "Unity '08" ticket, which I strongly suspect was created for him, and perhaps even by him. This means he must either change his party affiliation or select a running mate who is a Democrat, independent, or third party. I expect this running mate to be Wesley Clark.

[Tanniker Smith]

Bloomie's got business sense as well as the mistake of the Perot campaign.

If Bloomie ultimate goal is to make a national presence for himself within whatever party wins, he can easily take a different approach. If he decides to spend minimally at the national level but doles out the cash at a regional level, there's no reason that he couldn't take several states on the theory that he could buy enough of the House of Representatives.

Longshot, maybe. But if he's delusional enough to run from president in the first place . . .

[kabar]

I doubt if either party has 250 ev's locked. There are numerous states that could flip either way.

I consider the following states a lock for the Dems: California [55], NY [31], NJ [15], MA [12] , MD [10], CT [7], Del [3], DC [3], HI [4], Ill [21], OR [7], RI [4], VT [3], and WA [11]. I am leaving out MI [17] and MN [10]. This totals: 186

[kabar]

Unless you buy votes, you need enough people, a plurality, to vote for you to capture the electoral votes. Can you name one state where Bloomberg has even the slightest chance of doing so?