Bloomberg hurts dems more than GOP

By Jason Wright, Editor

Filed Under Race for White House 2008 on Nov 1 

Ralph Hallow at the Washington Times offers today that if NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg runs for president he’ll hurt democrats more than republicans. Insiders says conventional wisdom would be tossed on its head because, despite his recent membership in GOP, Bloomberg has always been more liberal than conservative. Hallow reports that David Norcross, a friend of the mayor, says it’s still 50-50 Bloomberg runs.

I don’t buy it. What does Bloomberg stand to gain? Sure he has the dough to blow, but he can’t win. Even if this country were ready for an independent, it sure as heck wouldn’t be Mike Bloomberg. Bloomberg has never lost–period. Why would he want to spend half-a-billion to lose on the most public of stages? Given Hillary’s strength as the probable nominee of the left, and the reality that few republicans would be supporting him anyway, where will his support come from?

Maybe I’m wrong, it wouldn’t be the 5,423,745th time, but I don’t see Bloomberg making a run.

Comments

5 Comments

  1. BoruJudasDedrich on 01.11.2007 at 10:15 (Reply)

    Good question. Remember to ask it again when it’s over.

  2. TL on 01.11.2007 at 10:45 (Reply)

    Bloomberg will only run if the GOP nominates someone like Fred or Romney.

    If there is a gap in the middle, Bloomberg will try to fill it.

    Unfortunately, most people will think of Bloomberg as former Republican and he will have over half a billion dollars to buy that image. This will ensure that Bloomberg will be the Ross Perot of 08, and Hillary will have a landslide victory.

    The GOP is toast if Bloomberg runs.

  3. kb on 01.11.2007 at 13:45 (Reply)

    what if hillary does NOT win the nomination? would that provide a hole bloomberg could fill?

  4. NewYorkStateConservative on 02.11.2007 at 09:41 (Reply)

    Can half-a-billion really hide the fact the Bloomberg makes Rudy look like James Dobson?? (that’s an exaggerated similie just in case anyone was wondering) Bloomberg is a liberal on all accounts- from spending and taxes to gun-control and other social issues. The differcence bewteen Bloomberg and other liberals is that Bloomberg is a smart, decent leader. But that doesn’t change the fact that he is liberal.

    Sure, an Independent Bloomberg for President might steal some liberal to moderate rebublican voters in the North East, and maybe the West Coast, but he would appeal mostly to Democrats (since his ideology is closest to theirs) who are looking for an alternative to Hillary and nearly 3 decades of a two-family dynasty.

    For Bloomberg’s exact stance on certain issues visit http://www.mikebloomberg.com/en/issues

  5. Bruce, Political Columnist on 02.11.2007 at 11:16 (Reply)

    History is a stern mistress
    The election of 92 anyone?

    following the Reagan revolution
    George the First
    Perot insuring William I in 1992
    followed by George the Second
    and now
    the wife of William the First
    all thanks to

    Bloomberg doing a Perot

    Since 93 there’s been a Bush or Clinton in the Presidency

    1992 – (a possible) 2016
    Think about it
    24 years – a full generation of Americans

    are you worried yet?

Leave a comment