Mike Bloomberg for President, 2008

**chris** · December 24th, 2007, 03:46 AM

.

I support an independent run for the Presidency by New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg. If you're interested to learn some reasons why, please have a look here:

Mike Bloomberg for President, 2008
http://www.RunMikeRun.com

And if you feel the same, please sign this petition:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/r...run/index.html

Being a New York centric board, I figure this is a good place to find Bloomberg supporters. I hope this will spur some conversation and bring the prospect to the attention of people who may not have been following these developments.

Very truly,
Chris

.

**lofter1** · December 24th, 2007, 09:06 AM

Don't pursue this ^ unless you want to see a Republican take the White House in '08.

Bloomberg, although an attractive candidate to many, would mostly capture votes from disgruntled Democrats who can't bring themselves to vote for Hillary. A Bloomberg candidacy would lead mainly to a split of the Democratic Parties' voting base, with far fewer Republican voters moving over to his side. Unless, perhaps, the Presidential campaign devolves into a full fledged "Who's the better friend of Jesus" situation. That < could lead to a big number of dissatisfied Republicans who find Bloomberg's economic platform to be of more importance than Huckabee's piety -- and more palatable than taking a chance on a candidate as old as McCain.

**chris** · December 24th, 2007, 10:54 AM

You're assuming I'm a disgruntled Democrat, and I'm not.

Depends on who the Republican candidate is. I could deal with a President Romney. He might be as slippery as Kerry, and I voted him (damn Kerry and Romney remind me of each other). At least Romney made his own money, and he has substantial executive management experience. The only positive thing about Hillary is that she brings Bill along with her, and he could be very useful as a diplomat. Obama is a nice young wide-eyed guy with a positive message, all the wrong ideas, and no qualifications at all. McCain, I like him ok. His shameful sucking up to Bush has been pathetic, but he wanted to be the "establishment candidate" this time around. A Huckabee Republican ticket would be ideal, because Bloomberg would then have a real chance.

If Bloomberg gets in the race, I will vote for him, no matter who runs what candidate.

This whole two party duopoly needs to be torn down. Whatever it takes.

**chris** · December 24th, 2007, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by lofter1

Don't pursue this ^ unless you want to see a Republican take the White House in '08.

Oh, incidentally, on boards I goto where there are conservative (omg, shock, there are conservatives on the internets!), they all say the mirror of your statement.

They say, "A vote for Bloomberg is a vote for Hillary." and Bloomberg will only be stealing votes away from the pro-business wing of the Republican party, "Don't vote for Bloomberg unless you want Hillary in the Whitehouse."

**ZippyTheChimp** · December 24th, 2007, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by chris

This whole two party duopoly needs to be torn down. Whatever it takes.

And you do that by voting for Bloomberg?

Just don't see it.

**ablarc** · December 24th, 2007, 11:24 AM

^ Why not?

Certainly a worthy goal.

**lofter1** · December 24th, 2007, 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by chris

on boards I goto where there are conservative (omg, shock, there are conservatives on the internets!), they all say the mirror of your statement.

More indication that a 3rd party candidate will do nothing but split votes -- no matter what position(s) that candidate might take.

The only strategic use of a 3rd party candidacy: Find one who will whittle down support for your most challenging opponent. Then get behind that new 3rd Party guy in order to weaken the real opposition. Use the 3rd Party candidate as a means to an end. But don't fool yourself that the 3rd Party guy will ever get elected -- not in this generation anyways.

**ablarc** · December 24th, 2007, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by lofter1

But don't fool yourself that the 3rd Party guy will ever get elected

Lincoln?

**ZippyTheChimp** · December 24th, 2007, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by ablarc

^ Why not?

Certainly a worthy goal.

The goal is worthy, but I don't see it being pursued by a vote for Bloomberg.

He's would not be a true third party candidate. The way he's moved effortlessly between Republican and Democrat (how would you even define him now - a REP with DEM tendencies, or vice versa?), it seems you would be replacing a duopoly with a monopoly.

If the intent is to send a message protesting the two party system, a vote for Ron Paul is the most effective.

**chris** · December 24th, 2007, 12:30 PM

.

If Bloomberg enters the race, I will be voting for him.

You, on the otherhand, can vote for whomever you choose.
That's the way it works.

.

**ZippyTheChimp** · December 24th, 2007, 12:45 PM

^
Don't assume that, unlike you, I was trying to tell anyone who to vote for. You can do whatever you want.

I was commenting on your idea of breaking up a duopoly. It doesn't make sense.

A "third party" run is just a variation of the mechanism that elected the Democrat/Republican as mayor.

**BrooklynRider** · December 24th, 2007, 11:19 PM

An independent candidate wouldn't have the stripes of Republicans or the spots of Democrats. Bloomberg has both and any person that holds a dual citizenship - in this case USA / Israel - should be unqualified to hold ANY public office. I want to hear a clear renouncement of any "citizenship" other than American, whether it is birthright, a pursued dual citizenship, or a bestowed citizenship.

I also don't think Bloomberg will find much traction with his self-supposed notion that he is an independent or that he bridges the gaps between ideologies. He has given hundreds of thousands to elect Republicans in the past eight years. He arrested and illegally held peaceful protesters during the RNC in NYC. He is hostile to freedom of speech and particularly progressive and liberal freedom of speech. You wouldn't know if you haven't actively protested anthinbg in New York. His illegal use of video taping peaceful protesters (a legal challenge brought by his own City'S PBA) is a good indication of his acceptance of domestic surveillance.

The guy has done NOTHING for the middle class in NYC and has no record to run on in regard to bolstering it nationwide. He is YET ANOTHER pro-corporate candidate. Pro-business. Pro-wealth. Pro-elitist. He throw's a bone to lower income constituencies once in a while to shut up the poor black and hispanic communities when they become agitated.

What has he given us? Stadiums. Whoopdee doo. That's his legacy.

**MidtownGuy** · December 26th, 2007, 01:20 PM

^what he said!
I agree totally.

any person that holds a dual citizenship - in this case USA / Israel - should be unqualified to hold ANY public office.

Especially this. A US president having Israeli citizenship is outrageously inappropriate and he would do more damage to relations in the Middle East than just about any other candidate I could think of.

**Ninjahedge** · December 26th, 2007, 02:05 PM

So you would support Cheney for President over Bloomie?

**MikeW** · December 26th, 2007, 04:19 PM

I'm thinking a Bloomie run is looking more and more likely, since none of the Major party candidates seem particularly popular. Whomever the majors nominate will likely get damages enough in the primary battles that an indie, especially one with the bottomless pockets of Mikie, could blast a hole between the two of them large enough to drive a winning campaign through.