Posted on 12/19/2007 8:32:40 AM PST by Reaganesque
Look out, Hillary and Barack, here comes Mike. No, not Mike Huckabee (though he'd better watch out, too). Mike Bloomberg--Mayor Mike as millions of New Yorkers more or less affectionately call him.
And this time it is for real. Folks close to New York City's twice-elected mayor suggest that he's made up his mind to end one of the city's long-running rumors and become an Independent candidate for president.
The date of his announcement? Pencilled in for right after Super Tuesday--Feb. 5. By then Bloomberg would have a pretty good idea of just who would be lining up against his third-party, self-financed billion-dollar campaign.
So far Bloomberg's pseudo-candidacy has consisted of just a lot of dodging and faking. He told Dan Rather, quite definitively it sounded, a couple of months ago, that there was no way he'd toss his Yankees' (or Red Sox) cap in the ring. And he's been nothing but coy since--rather as he was before he announced he was running for mayor.
But now, having been traveling around America raising his national profile for some months, he's off on a world tour, doing the same for his international one. He's been in China, lecturing his hosts and anyone who will listen on the value of removing barriers to information flow and curbing piracy, and in Bali for the U.N. climate change conference.
One big Bloomberg supporter I met at a recent breakfast makes a credible case for a Bloomberg run at the presidency. First, the media-mogul-turned-mayor is prepared to spend up to 20% of his wealth financing an Independent campaign. He is ranked No. 25 on Forbes latest list of richest Americans, with a fortune estimated at $11.5 billion.
Second, as host of other Bloomberg supporters I've talked to agree, his money and his mind make a formidable combination--and a formidable candidate, especially if the two main parties pick candidates that are unappealing to centrist voters or seen to be heavily dependent on particular party constituencies.
Full disclosure. I worked for Bloomberg for nearly five years at Bloomberg News. He was a tough, no-compromise, unbending, inflexible individual. He built Bloomberg L.P. from five people in a room with an idea into a worldwide media enterprise by pure force of will and seed capital from his Wall Street severance, plus a venture capital cash infusion from Merrill Lynch. You don't do that by being a wimp.
A guy who'd spent his whole life dictating to others how they should operate, banning unions, refusing to negotiate, compromise or give way once his mind was made up should have made a catastrophic mayor of America's most diverse and union-driven city. But Mayor Mike has learned the delicate art of compromise. He's learned to deal with unions. He understands the needs and wants and desires of the little people who voted him into office.
In short, from an entrepreneur, he's become a politician. What's different is that he became one without all the baggage that usually accompanies such a transformation.
Some of it has to do with his wealth. Bloomberg won't have to kowtow to special interests--no lobbyists bearing fat PAC contributions, no sponsors of political fund-raisers, no corporate interests.
In fact, he's always been that way pretty much. I recall a story from his days at Bloomberg L.P. when his assistant came in and said that Bill Gates (yes, that Bill Gates) was going to be in New York in a couple of days and wanted to come see him. Not possible, said Mike. His daughter was going to be in a horse show at Madison Square Garden. Bill Gates would have to reschedule.
Whether this is all enough to take Bloomberg to the White House is very much open to question. There are a host of downsides to an Independent candidate--and potentially even more to an Independent president. He might be able to pick a meritocratic bipartisan cabinet, but equally he would have no base of support--especially when dealing with Congress. A new coalition would have to be assembled for every initiative, every Supreme Court nominee, every ambassador.
These are uncharted waters. America never had a successful Independent candidate for president--and except for Teddy Roosevelt's quixotic bid back in 1912, not even one who came close. These issues have never been seriously explored. With Americans showing ever more disenchantment with two-party hegemony, they should be. The outcome of next fall's presidential race may depend on them.
A Bloomberg presidency still remains a long shot. He is rich and astute enough to shorten the odds and hard-nosed enough to try to beat them. But will it be President Mike or Hamlet on the Hudson?
With Iraq is going better, Bloomberg platform is crumbling faster then the main stream media can stop talking about Iraq.
Bloomberg will be a cross between Ron Paul (nut case), and Romney (numbers are distorted by $$).
You do realize that Bloomberg was a life-long far-Left Democrat who only became a RINO to run for mayor of NYC because the line was shorter?
If this is true,look for the Clinton Machine to throw some mud Bloomberg’s way.Her Highness cannot afford to lose votes to anyone
Except that he doesn’t hold a single position that could conceivably appeal to even the squishiest country club RINO. The guy makes Rudy Giuliani look like Duncan Hunter.
The little Muppet could spend a billion dollars and have no impact on a national race either way. Republicans won’t go anywhere near him. And Democrats only vote for Democrats.
The latest Guns magazine points out that Baltimore’s mayor met with Bloomberg (an a$$hat with arms) recently to discuss her own suits against gun manufacturers.
He doesn’t have enough sense to pound sand in a rat-hole.
You’d think that there was enough northeast liberals in this election cycles already
Not good news at all.
Nader, too, you think? Ain’t he too tired?
The dems want to win badly, and are motivated. No way many of them split off from the main candidate, who will be extreme enough to satisfy most of the Dem socialists. That leaves independents and country clubbers to make up Bloomberg’s constituency. So while I don’t think the statist authoritarian Bloomberg will pull more than 2 or 3 percent, that 2 or 3 percent will come from the right.
Obama/Bloomberg ‘08
Besides his mom, who would vote for Bloomberg?
There’s plenty of commies in the race already.
If he’s so smart, why’s he making this mistake (running and an independent)? Why not declare as a Dem and knock-off the dwarfs?
You are right about Hunter. With a RINO in Bloomberg and a Socialist pretending to be a moderate Dem in Hillary, a strong conservative should win.
His ego is larger than his net worth.
For some reason, FReepers refuse to face this reality. Ras has polled on it several times. Each time, Bloomie took primarily from the GOP and gave the election to Hillary.
It's 1992 all over again. Bloomie is Clinton's Perot. People here are deluding themselves, just like they did last fall when they insisted the polls were all BS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.