Posts Tagged → Michael Bloomberg
Bloomberg playing presidential mindgames
Current New York City mayor and former RINO Republican Michael Bloomberg, now an independent, has admitted the bloody obvious to Dan Rather of HDNet TV, the high-def news channel that hired Rather after he was dumped by CBS.
“Nobody’s going to elect me president of the United States,” Bloomberg told Rather.
Damn right.
While news sources love to fantasize about middle-of-the road candidates who would sweep into the White House by marginalizing both Republican and Democratic extremists, the truth is that middle-of-the-road voters tend to be suspicious of third-party candidates, more than they are actually supportive. And their middle-ground political positions tend to alienate both conservatives and liberals alike.
The idea that most of America exists in the center is more myth than reality. The truth is that there isn’t really a true middle-of-the-road position that is an identifiable ideology. Instead, such labels come from voters who are mostly conservative or mostly liberal, but split from there party on a couple key issues.
For example, the “Reagan Democrats” that swept Ronald Reagan to two overwhemling presidential victories were made of up traditional Democratic Catholics – laber union workers and the like – who felt ill-at-ease with the late 1970s pro-abortion dominance of their party and, feeling pushed aside as pro-lifers, flocked to Reagan’s candidacy over their convictions on abortion in that period of time. The result was that most of the “cultural conservatives” that once peacefully co-existed with liberals in the Democratic party voted for Reagan.
The opposite tends to be true today. Republicans who are cultural conservatives (rather than just fiscal, Wall Street conservatives) are feeling increasingly disaffected by the “compassionate conservatism” that is a mask for RINO Republicans to wear, and who dominate much of today’s GOP. While Bush is an example of this, the prospects for the future are made even more bleak for GOP cultural conservatives who look at front-runners like Rudy Guiliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney and even to some extent, Fred Thompson, and see no hope ahead for a more conservative voice at the head of the party, short of an 11th-hour Newt Gingrich bid.
It is largely these disaffected cultural conservatives, many of them former Reagan Democrats, who decided to give Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and their ilk a shot at controlling Congress, only to become even more disgusted with them than they were the GOP.
Trouble is, most so-called third-party candidates like Schwarzenegger (who can’t run), Bloomberg and, on the Democratic side, Joe Lieberman, aren’t really middle-of-the-roaders to begin with. They are simply watered down versions of the mainstream candidates of their respective parties.
So, give Mike Bloomberg a couple Swiss Army watches for realizing the bloody obvious. Third party candidates are a myth and no one really ever votes for them in sufficient numbers to win anyway – at least not since Teddy Roosevelt’s re-election bid under the Bull Moose Party. No one would elect Bloomberg to anything because the power and fundraising lies within the two major parties, neither of whom are interested in wishy-washy middle-of-the-roaders.
Bloomberg makes a more-honest man of himself
Current New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, the “favorite Republican” of all New York media types who can’t pair the words “favorite” and “Republican” together in a polite sentence, but of no one in the GOP, has dropped out of the GOP.
Well, at least he’s finally being honest with himself. Bloomberg, neither a conservative nor a real Republican, is halfway to being completely honest. He’s admitted he’s no longer in the GOP this week, filing in New York as an independent. Now he just needs to admit that his values have far more in common with MoveOn.org than the Cato Institute, and we’ll finally have the political breakthrough the world has been waiting for: a liberal Republican finally admitting he’s a sham artist out to win election under the GOP banner that he’d never win under more honest labeling.
Of course, don’t tell that to the New York Times, who is hoping Bloomberg can win as an independent if Hillary falls short. Either way, the entire drug-addled staff is readying their vans and their van racks for a return to the hippie hippie 70s, just as soon as Bush is either impeached for no reason at all (which they still believe is possible) or finally leaves office in favor of… anyone except a Republican.
Boy, are they gonna have a hangover when they wake up in November ’08 to President Newt Gingrich and Vice-President Mike Huckabee, or what? Heh-heh-heh.
Bloomberg a dangerous wildcard
Current New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg is a dangerous wild card in the upcoming 2008 presidential election. He is especially dangerous toward the hopes of GOP candidates for office, a danger made more real by a recent online report suggesting Bloomberg is willing to spend up to one billion of his $5.5B personal fortune in a third-party bid for the presidency.
The popular media take is that Bloomberg is a change of pace from far-left Democrats and far-right Republicans, because he is socially liberal, fiscally conservative and from the East Coast. Yet that holds no water as a viable difference from at least two, and possibly three, current top presidential contenders.
First of all, Bloomberg is a virtual carbon-copy of top GOP presidential contender Rudolph Giuliani, who has the benefit of running as a major party candidate. Their views are nearly identical and Giuliani has the benefit of receiving a lion’s share of the credit for post-9/11 leadership in New York City. It Giuliani secures the GOP nod, there would be no appreciable difference between the two that would make a Bloomberg run make any kind of sense, other than to split the vote and allow a Democratic presidential victory.
Second is GOP candidate Mitt Romney, currently battling with Arizona Senator John McCain for second place versus Giuliani for the Republican endorsement. Just like Bloomberg and Giuliani, Romney is of the exact same socially liberal, fiscally conservative, East Coast liberal type represented by Giuliani and Bloomberg. Again, a Romney candidacy would provide no contrast for Bloomberg to run against, other than to split the anti-Hillary/anti-Obama vote and ensure a Democratic win. And it should be noted that McCain, while not an East Coast candidate, fits in lock step positionally with Giuliani, Romney and Bloomberg.
In fact, the GOP field is so packed with East Coast social liberal/fiscal conservative candidates, one has to wonder if there’s any hope for the conservative movement in 2008.
But I mentioned a third candidate who – arguably – fits the same mold. I’m speaking, of course, about Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. Despite being slightly more liberal than Giuliani, Romney and Bloomberg, some votes actually have Sen. Rodham as more conservative than McCain on select issues. Sen. Rodham-Clinton is basically Mayor Bloomberg on Phentermine.
What I think motivated Bloomberg more than any real, substantive “difference” from candidates like Giuliani, Romnet, Bloomberg and Rodham-Clinton is something far more provincial: a good ol’ New York pissing contest. For the last several election cycles, East Coast candidates – and specifically New Yorkers – have been nonfactors in presidential politics, much to the chagrin of the New York-centric liberal news media. New York has taken a back seat to the deep South as the most influential voting block, and New Yorkers are eager to get back into the game of presidential politics.
Think about it.
Bush II/Cheney: Texas and Wyoming
Clinton/Gore: Arkansas and Tennessee
Bush/Quayle: Texas/Maine and Indiana
Reagan/Bush: California and Texas/Maine
Carter/Mondale: Georgia and Minnesota
Ford/Rockefeller: Michigan and New York.
So, you have to go all the way back to 1974-1977, a brief stint as Ford’s vice president, to find the last time a New Yorker was in the White House. That’s at least a 30 year absence and it’s clear that one of the largest states in the nation is eager to be “back in the game.”
By the way, Rockefeller was, in his day, the leader of the liberal wing of the GOP, so even he fit with the ever-more-bloated socially liberal/fiscally conservative mold that is so well represented in this election cycle by Bloomberg, McCain, Giuliani, Romney and – arguably – Rodham-Clinton.
To be blunt, Bloomberg’s “change of pace” proposed candidacy is no “change of pace” at all – it simply litters the field with another sound-alike candidate designed to blot out any legitimate conservatives from getting a foothold in the 2008 election cycle.
The only real hopes for a legitimate change in rhetoric in this election cycle are Fred Thomspon, Newt Gingrich, or – arguably – a dark horse emergence from someone like Mike Huckabee. Bloomberg doesn’t represent change in any fashion; but a potential third-party run could doom the country to a Democratic presidential victory.
