Bloomberg's Independent run will be most like _________'s?

[Totally Committed]

Poll question: Bloomberg's Independent run will be most like _________'s?

Republicans have broken off from the Party to make Third Party runs for the Presidency before. Nader is also a perennial candidate. Each one of them effected the race differently.

Bloomberg's Independent run will be most like _________'s?


TC

[More Than A Feeling]

1. Nader.

Bloomberg is too much to the left to be Buchanan or Perot.

[Bombtrack]

2. Perot, although I disagee with the popular right-wing history rewriting that Perot was right-wing

or a republican.

[Totally Committed]

3. I see him more like a Perot than a Nader.

TC

[Renew Deal]

4. Bigger than Perot

People are looking for an alternative and Bloomy is not a cooke like Perot.

[davidwparker]

7. if he runs, I'd agree. The Dems blew there 2006 mandate big time.

Should have funded the troops only and sent the bill back to the Chimp with benchmarks in place. When he vetoed it, he would have been seen as "not supporting the troops." I read this was Murtha's idea: fund only the troops on the ground.

[IndianaGreen]

31. Bloomberg won't quit like Perot

and he is not a lightweight.

[davidwparker]

5. I voted Perot since Bloomberg will pull from both parties. I was leaning to

Perot in the '92 election until he got out of the race the first time.

My take was that he wanted to influence the election debate (NAFTA being the big thing), but people were drawn to him and that made becoming president all-too-real.

He was a trip and he was right about NAFTA.

[LBJDemocrat]

6. He was a great guy

Many of our own party's leaders aren't fit to lick his boots.

[xmas74]

8. I'd go w/ Perot too.

I'm just hoping for a prime time special with pie charts. I remember drinking when he pulled out the charts in 1992. Every time Perot made comments about how we could keep the money since he had plenty my friends and I took a shot.

I spent quite a bit of 1992 in a haze.

[welshTerrier2]

9. most like elevator doors opening

you know the kind of elevator door where half the door goes left and the other half goes right when it opens? the closed door would be the starting point for a Bloomberg candidacy. The question becomes, how wide can they get the opening. Clearly, it will pull from both the left and the right of the central point.

I'm not sure i can match a Bloomberg run to any previous third party effort. In the sense that he'll bring his own wallet, maybe he'll be most like Perot.

but i think, if Bloomberg runs, 2008 is NOT the ultimate target. It's almost inconceivable that a third party could get its act together that quickly. i think for Bloomberg to jump in, he will have something much, much larger in mind. What has my focus on the issue is the "gang of fourteen."

Imagine if the old gang decides to join Lieberman in "no mans" land ... imagine a centrist demilitarized zone. Imagine taking the view that three will be less partisan than two. Imagine holding the center and siding with whichever party offers the most on any given issue.

The initial campaign will have all the nice, friendly slogans. "We're sick of all the partisan bickering." "We are going to put the American people ahead of all this left and right battling that hurts the country." "The American people want good, effective government - not a bunch of mud slinging." That's going to be a welcome message to many ears.

We've already seen many discussions about whether Lieberman might caucus with the republicans if the Dems didn't give in to him on key issues. Maybe that happened on the Iraq bill. Who knows? If Lieberman flips, the Senate is controlled by the republicans. That's a really big deal. And he's just one Senator. Suppose he, and Bloomberg, teamed up with the rest of the gang? And suppose they voted as a unified block? That's a ton of clout.

So, while this is of course all highly speculative, some of the above analysis seems more than feasible to me. And take it the next step too - what impact would a Third Party in the center have on the two major parties. Would they move more to the center or more to their polar wings? I'm not sure I have any ideas on that. If the votes in the center became impossible for Democrats to win, for example (because they were voting for Bloomberg), perhaps the Democratic Party would choose to cater a bit more to its progressive wing. And, if not, i.e. if they fought harder for votes in the center against the wishes of the progressive wing, the big tent could further split apart. I wrote about this in an earlier post. If the same happened in the republican party, instead of 3 parties, we could end up with five.

Right now, the two major parties have a lock on the electoral process and on the mega-donors. But there sure as hell is a stirring in the land. There sure as hell is. It's palpable. I don't expect our far too passive fellow citizens to storm the Bastille anytime soon; but give them another path, a new path, a different path than the same old same old, and watch out. You have to call it long odds because of the history; but history is filled with unexpected changes.

Great topic, TC.

I'm looking forward to the poll results and to DU's collective wisdom on the topic.

k&r ...

[Totally Committed]

12. The "Gang of Fourteen".... Heaven help us all.

Makes the mind reel.

TC

[calteacherguy]

10. None of the above.

I think if he runs it will be something unprecedented in American politics.

I think with his background, resources, and reputation he would have a real chance...of winning.

[Totally Committed]

11. That's really intriguing...

But, Perot had a personal fortune, too. You really think he has a chance? What an intriguing notion.

TC

[Renew Deal]

13. Perot was less known and seemed a bit nutty.

Bloomberg has governing experience. He seems credible. I think people's desire for change would really be a driver.

[calteacherguy]

14. My thoughts exactly. nt

[Totally Committed]

17. I agree.

The desire for change is certainly out there, alright! Great reasoning!

TC

[sabbat hunter]

23. bloomberg is richer than

perot, and supposedly is willing to spend 500 million of his 5 or so billion if need be on this election. he sure spent a lot on his mayoral runs.

[ruggerson]

15. Victoria Woodhull's

n/t

[Totally Committed]

16. The "Free Love" suffragette? LOL!

How so?

TC

[SaveElmer]

18. John Anderson...except this time...

The Republican will be in the Jimmy Carter role...

[Totally Committed]

22. Another good example.

John Anderson and Michael Bloomberg are equally "scintillating", too.

TC

[Catchawave]

19. Other ? None of the above :)

Bloomberg's got a 70% approval rating, and he said can spend up to $500 mil of his own money, then it depends who the nominees are (looking at a late summer 2008 run?) and if he thinks he can win. (just updated on MSNBC). I'm betting a Hillary v. Guiliani will draw him in. Nader too, as he's even hinted to that fact.

Of the candidates mentioned in your poll, I think he would be much stronger, especially in this historic election year of no sitting prez/vp running.

I'm an Edwards supporter and as of now, I have no second choice. I may now :)

[NoPasaran]

20. Teddy Roosevelt's

[Totally Committed]

21. OOOOOOOOOooooooooooh, that's a good one!

It IS like his!

TC

[John Kerry VonErich]

24. Think on this....

What if both Bloomberg and Nader run? I think this is a dangerous road for us to get into.

[Totally Committed]

25. You mean they'd peel away votes from both sides of the Party?

Bloomberg would certainly carry the Independents, too. The only way the Democratic Party would have to stay in the race would be to de-triangulate and go back to their leftist/Liberal roots. That could take away all need for anyone to vote for Nader.

Hmmmmmmm....


TC

[John Kerry VonErich]

27. Still it would be Danger City.

Bloomberg is the most liberal republican in the nation.

[Totally Committed]

28. I hear that!

I wonder how all this will shake out.

TC

[mckeown1128]

26. Nader

If Bloomberg runs he will cost us the election. Say hello to four years of President Thompson and Vice-President Romney

[LordJFT]

29. Another thing to think about

If Giuliani is the republican nominee do you think the evangelicals and other social conservatives will back a third-party candidate that could give us some help on the right flank?

[Redneck Socialist]

30. Other: Anderson

except with enough money to actually compete. Kind o' scary.