Bloomberg, key moderates to brainstorm on third-party Presidential bid

NY Daily News ^ | 12/31/07 | ADAM LISBERG

[kipita]

I’ve watched a Global business video by business leaders and Bloomberg made a good case for a meritocracy. His offices have no walls or barriers and he seems to think no one is smart enough to be the absolute decider. I like his approach in business, but I don’t know if it would work in Washington.

[jimbo123]

The anti-Hillary democrats have 4 choices if they can’t bring themselves to vote for Hillary.

1. stay home (bad for GOP, bad for Democrats)

2. vote democrat for congress, boycott president (bad for GOP)

3. vote democrat for congress, hold nose and vote GOP for president (good for GOP)

4. vote democrat for congress and vote Bloomberg/Nunn for president (bad for GOP)

We need #3 in order to win in the swing states. #4 dooms us to a Hillary presidency.

[Alberta's Child]

Keep in mind that Bloomberg's strongest appeal would be in states where the Democrats already have their strongest appeal. Even if that ticket manages to get 30% of the "anti-Hillary" vote, almost all of those votes will come from states in the Northeast . . . which only means a bunch of "blue" states turn "dark blue."

I can't think of a single "red" state that will suddenly turn blue just because some nanny-state billionaire from New York City is in the race.

[samtheman]

Anti-Hillary democrats.

Do you realize what you’re saying?

You’re talking about people who would NEVER EVER EVER EVER vote Republican.

So them staying home doesn’t hurt Republicans, only Democrats.

And them voting Democrat in any race doesn’t change anything, since that’s the only thing they ever were going to do.

The only variable becomes Bloomberg.

If Dems vote for Bloomberg that votes the Dems will never get (and votes the Repubs were never GOING to get, ever, ever, ever).

I am mystified you how don’t understand that.

[samtheman]

I can't think of a single "red" state that will suddenly turn blue just because some nanny-state billionaire from New York City is in the race.

Thank you!

[weegee]

Anderson got 5,719,850 votes (6.61%)

(1980 Presidential Election Results)

http://uselectionatlas.org/

And this map is BLUE for Republicans as it was in the MSM until the recent 2 elections. The operator of the site didn’t want to regenerate all of his maps to suit the whims of the MSM house organ of the DNC.

[commish]

And the next chapter of the CLINTON PLAYBOOK is opened.

They know Hillary will be lucky to get 45% of the vote, so the plan is to get a 2008 PEROT team together to siphon just enough votes.

Let's not kid ourselves people, Conservatives are a minority in this country -- My guess is 35% Liberal, 30% Conservative, 35% Moderate. We have to have a portion of thos moderates to win, They won;t vote for Hillary so the Clinton's will give them someone to vote for.

Hillary will get 40-45%, Republican will get 38-42%, Blooomers will get the rest and it will be just enough to give Hillary the WH.

It worked in 1992, and it will work in 2008.

[Postman]

What a bland melange of former nothings who are currently nowhere and are barely remembered and not missed in the slightest

[jimbo123]

It’s all about New York City. Bloomberg needs a democrat congress and a democrat president. It’s not surprising that Bloomberg is crying about gridlock...

[Mr. Mojo]

America needs a President to bring the country together

Gungrabbers don't qualify. ....and Bloomy out-does even Rudy in this regard.

[CitizenUSA]

Oh, my! Bloomberg is absolutely abysmal. How he claims to be Republican is beyond me, since he shares almost none of the traditional Republican values. If big government socialism is considered “moderate” these days, we’re in deep trouble.

[freespirited]

Ras has actually polled on this several times. His results show Bloomie taking more from the GOP than the RATS and giving Hillary the election.

[jimbo123]

Flashback to Perot’s 1992 impact on state-by-state results:

http://www.presidentelect.org/e1992.html

Interesting how Bloomberg’s coalition of DRAINOS matches up with this map.

[freespirited]

He doesnt claim to be Republican anymore (if only he would admit that he just called himself that so he could run for mayor). He’s an independent now.

He does whatever serves his purpose. Proves that nannies can be sleazy too.

[jimbo123]

Flashback to Perot’s impact on 1996 state-by-state results:

http://www.presidentelect.org/e1996.html

[boomop1]

Heavy losers.

[nj26]

“I can’t think of a single “red” state that will suddenly turn blue just because some nanny-state billionaire from New York City is in the race.”

Florida comes to mind for me. Bloomberg has the potential to be very popular in Boca Raton and Broward County. Those fiscally-conservative, socially-liberal, mostly-Jewish voters proved to be a very important swing factor in recent elections (with many voting Gore/Lieberman in 2000, and then switching to W in 2004).

[PapaBear3625]

“Today, we are a house divided,” Yes, and a third party run by Bloomberg would further divide it.

Bloomberg is a stealth Dem. Only by New York standards would he be considered a conservative. The Dems want somebody who will split the Republican vote in 2008, as Perot split it earlier, so that the Dem candidate can be elected

[jimbo123]

Exactly. Bloomberg’s job is to siphon off enough Florida independent/hillary-averse voters to get Hillary elected.

It’s all about New York. And it’s all about Florida..

[nj26]

“Bloomberg is a stealth Dem. Only by New York standards would he be considered a conservative. The Dems want somebody who will split the Republican vote in 2008, as Perot split it earlier, so that the Dem candidate can be elected”

I personally know several Obama-supporting Democrats who say that they “can’t vote” for Hillary in the general election (given concerns about her honesty, etc). Bloomberg will provide them with an alternative short of voting GOP.