SmootSmack
06-19-2007, 09:03 PM
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. He continues to deny any presidential aspirations. But I wouldn't be surprised if he enters the fray this fall along with Gore and Gingrich.
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg leaves GOP - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070620/ap_on_el_pr/bloomberg_politics_20;_ylt=AqpEOBk_seNEKTz2cFUSFkh lM3wV)
70Chip
06-19-2007, 09:28 PM
Can anyone explain the rationale for a Bloomberg candidacy? What does he offer that's different? He has a big pile of the cash, though, so the press will encourage him because then it will be their billion dollars. There is an element of Mike Lupica Syndrome at work here as well. The Rangers win the Stanley Cup so we will subject an uninterested nation to endless hockey talk (1995 or so) and now New York has a likable mayor so certainly he should be taken seriously as a presidential candidate. I'd be more likely to vote for the mayor of Tipton, Indiana. People say that Rudy was nothing before 9/11. Bloomberg wasn't there for 9/11 so where does that leave him?
SmootSmack
06-19-2007, 09:34 PM
Well, it will be interesting to see what party he takes votes away from.
skinsfan_nn
06-19-2007, 09:40 PM
Can anyone explain the rationale for a Bloomberg candidacy? What does he offer that's different? He has a big pile of the cash, though, so the press will encourage him because then it will be their billion dollars. There is an element of Mike Lupica Syndrome at work here as well. The Rangers win the Stanley Cup so we will subject an uninterested nation to endless hockey talk (1995 or so) and now New York has a likable mayor so certainly he should be taken seriously as a presidential candidate. I'd be more likely to vote for the mayor of Tipton, Indiana. People say that Rudy was nothing before 9/11. Bloomberg wasn't there for 9/11 so where does that leave him?
Makes no sense to me AT ALL! Waste Land.
Very interesting. He's someone to watch no doubt.
70Chip
06-19-2007, 09:58 PM
Well, it will be interesting to see what party he takes votes away from.
Any viable 3rd option hurts the Republicans more. I'm jut not sure that Bloomberg is viable. 1992 Perot = viable. 2000 Nader + no viable.
70Chip
06-20-2007, 09:42 PM
An interesting take here:
David Frum's Diary on National Review Online (http://frum.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWE0MDg2MWY1MTgwZTJkODRhZDc0NWY1YmQxY2FjYWQ)=
12thMan
06-21-2007, 09:36 AM
I think he'll jump in. But really, three New Yorkers running for President?
I don't see him stealing votes from either Hillary or Obama. That leaves, perhaps, someone like Guilliani, I would think.
firstdown
06-21-2007, 11:39 AM
Any viable 3rd option hurts the Republicans more. I'm jut not sure that Bloomberg is viable. 1992 Perot = viable. 2000 Nader + no viable.
Why do you think that? He is from NY which always goes to the Dems. but he may take enough votes from Hillary to make it go Rep. I heard someone talking about this and thats the only point I can remember but he made several which I could see hurting the Dems.