Michael Bloomberg gearing up to form a 3rd party run for the White House?????
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070518/pl_nm/usa_politics_bloomberg_dc
Quote from: Murffieus on May 18, 2007, 04:32:18 PM
Michael Bloomberg gearing up to form a 3rd party run for the White House?????
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070518/pl_nm/usa_politics_bloomberg_dc
The last time this happened, it put a Clinton in the White House with 43% of the vote. It would do the same thing again. It would split the GOP vote more than the Democrat vote unless enough moderates went over to Bloomberg. Problem is that Bloomberg will still be seen as a Republican (even though he's an ultra RINO) and the Dems would paint him as that.
I don't see how this puts a Republican in office at all, looks like it assures another Clinton in there to me.
But Perot had the perspective of being a Republican (or at least closer to the conservative philosophy than Clinton) which hurt Bush Sr.----Bloomberg has the perspective of being a Dem----would split the Dem vote as a result.
Under this circumstance the only way the Dems win is if the Republicans commit suicide and nominate Gingrich or Thompson (which won't happen)----or if the conservatives get upset and stay home in Nov. 2008 because Romney or Rudy is the nominee!
Don't get me wrong---my first chice would be a conservative---but they just are not electable this time around----remember Barry Goldwater in 1964----the time just wasn't right!
is it just about winning and losing, and not getting the most qualified president... too many people in this world are preoccupied with titles and not realize that people are winning seats in our government without being qualified and competant.
why do all these NY city mayors think they actually have a shot at the presidency??? they were mayors of a city for goodness sake.
during the last republican debate, rudy said that he was the best prepared candidate because he was mayor of nyc. what???? please tell me how someone who ran a city is more prepared than someone who ran a state?
if bloomsburg entering from a 3rd party ensures a republican wins (unless its rudy) im all for it.
The Dems are pretty united. Bloomberg only pulls from moderate Republicans and independents. Perot, in '92, was pro-choice, moderate socially, virulently anti-NAFTA (ya see, its simple. That giant sucking sound is American jobs going to Mexico), strongly pro-balanced budget. Also, in 92, you had R fatigue after 12 years of Reagan/Bush. The country wanted change. Personally, I voted for Tsongas in the primary. Loved his dry sense of humor and dedication to balancing the budget and paying down the deficit.