Posted on 12/31/2007 8:22:52 AM PST by jimbo123
Mayor Bloomberg will join a group of fed-up bipartisan bigwigs in Oklahoma next week to urge that our next President rise above partisan gridlock - giving Bloomberg a potential launching pad for a presidential bid.
The two former senators who started the group told the Daily News that America needs a President to bring the country together - and if the Republicans or Democrats can't do it, they're prepared to back Bloomberg.
"He's shown the ability to bring people together," said one of the hosts, former Sen. David Boren (D-Okla.), now president of the University of Oklahoma. "He brings to the table a tremendous wealth of personal experience, and his commitment to bipartisanship is very strong."
Boren and former Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) told The News that the meeting is a serious gathering of moderates, not a Bloomberg-for-President meeting in disguise - but he wouldn't rule out backing Bloomberg if he runs.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Just what we need, Another Ross Perot.
Yeah, I’ve been wondering about that too. However, since some Rs are still supporting candidates like McCain—well, Bloomberg might just siphon off some votes.
Bloomberg/Nunn will be another Perot/Stockdale for the GOP. This is very bad.
"Brings to the table tremendous wealth" would be more like it.
And frankly, I'd like to see more gridlock, rather than more "bipartisan" abominations like McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, "No Child Left Behind," etc.
This shows that their are those who believe that none of the Democrat candidates are worthy to be president.
Many have wanted a new political party and I say let it happen.
The Republicans have been blindsided by third party runs and now it is the Democrats turn in the Third Party Barrel.
“He brings to the table a tremendous wealth ...”
No shiite !
Heavy Hitters? I think they left off an ‘S’ on that title somewhere. Most of those guys have dumped on Republicans in the past making the term RINO look go.
Run! Bloomie! Run!
The Ross Perot of the Democrat Party.
“And frankly, I’d like to see more gridlock, rather than more “bipartisan” abominations like McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, “No Child Left Behind,” etc.”
Thanks for saying this. The best congress is a gridlock Congress. I would prefer that they show up for work at least 5 days a week, argue like hell, get nothing passed (except budgets) and go home. Well, there might be exceptions, but not many.
Bloomberg-Nunn will NOT take votes from the Democrats. It will take them from us.
- pro-choice ("Reproductive choice is a fundamental human right and we can never take it for granted, on this issue, you're either with us or against us.")
- pro-gay-marriage (“I think anybody should be allowed to marry anybody")
- avid supporter of gun control ("I don't know why people carry guns. Guns kill people.")
- is fully engaged in the global warming scam
- supporter of McCain-Kennedy shamnesty
- extended the city's smoking ban to all commercial establishments and implemented a trans fat ban in restaurants
- launched a program called Opportunity NYC which is the nation's first-ever cash transfer pilot program (oooh, "cash transfer", wonder what that is, LOL) designed to help New Yorkers "break the cycle of poverty"
- instituted a $7.5 billion municipal affordable housing plan
- Bloomberg is concerned about poverty and growing 'class divisions' stating, "This society cannot go forward, the way we have been going forward, where the gap between the rich and the poor keeps growing."
- talks about "hating taxes" while raising them, making him a clear fiscal conservative (LOL)
Apparently, the following are "right-wing", and are sufficient to balance him out:
- supports the WOD
- supports "targeted" tax breaks for corporations (gotta dance to the government tune to get them)
- supports an ID database that uses RFID, DNA and fingerprint technology to keep track of everyone
- STAUNCH supporter of the USA PATRIOT Act
- supports the war in Iraq
NO THANKS.
These are people that are upset that the Democratic party has moved too far left and looking for a place to go. I cannot see how this hurts the Republicans.
This is the greatest group of wishy washy has beens assembled in history. The Dems will never win with a majority. Bill won with 42% because of Perot.
No one is seriously going to vote for this guy in any numbers, but Hillary can’t afford to lose NY to Giuliani. It would not only lose her this election, but poison her as a candidate forever. She can escape the stigma of losing the red state of Arkansas because it’s really not her home, but she would never shake the stigma of not winning her “home” state NY.
Bloomberg would not touch Hillary’s socialist supporters, but would siphon off some of the “moderate” Democrats that would vote for Rudy.
If Rudy looks like he won’t get the nomination, then these guys will melt away. Bloomy didn’t get rich by pouring money down the drain. For this reason, I propose we call them Democrat/ Republicans Alligned in Name Only (DRAINO’s)
"Great Moderates in World History"
This is all about keeping independents/Reagan democrats from voting GOP when faced with Hillary as the other candidate.
It’s all about splitting the anti-Hillary independent/democrat vote.
If the anti-Hillary independent/democrat vote goes 70% GOP/30% Bloomberg/Nunn, we lose.
Possibly, but he might also pull votes of those who can't stand Hill but refuse to vote GOP.
It’s about turning the “Purple States” blue and getting Hillary elected by splitting the “Anyone But Hillary Vote”. If the anti-Hillary vote is split by Bloomberg/Hagel, Hillary wins and America loses.I disagree that this helps Hillary.
First of all, forget the part about Bloomberg doing this in order to "turn purple states blue". He's not doing anything for anybody but himself.
Second, picture this voter in your mind:
"I really don't like Hillary, but there's no way I'm EVER going to vote Republican, so it looks like I have to vote for Hillary."
But with Bloomberg in the race --->>>> "I really don't like don't like Hillary, but there's no way I'm EVER going to vote Republican... maybe I'll vote Bloomberg!"
I think there are a LOT of voters who will fit that mold.
Right. I’ve long said that this ugly little statist would have a hard time getting more than 1% of the vote in any state west of the Delaware River (except maybe California).
No, that would not be the shortest book. The shortest would be “Britney Spears Underwear Collection—A pictorial”. ;-)
What, Perot isn’t available to queer it again for the Clintons?
Not necessarily - It may mean that the dems do not take NY state, as the vote there would be split in a Rudy, clinton and bloomberg race. w/o NY, ahrd to see the dems winning.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.