Bloomberg

This post at Libertarian Republican…and its comments…caught my eye this morning.

So, I wonder how many Obama supporters will remember what it was like back in 2000, when many of them were just shocked that America…or at least the Supreme Court…could elect someone like George W. Bush, and in 2004 when those same folks could not believe that he was re-elected.

It remains to be seen whether Obama supporters will work to heal the divide of the past 16 years…or just take the opportunity to start applying the crowbar in the great divide from the other side.

I think Obama will be a remarkable President, but man, I wish we had chosen to go off-axis.  With the economic situation having hit public consciousness this fall, it would have been a perfect opportunity for Bloomberg to have run on a centrist path.

1.  Isn’t the ability to pick good proxies and delegate authority to them the sign of a good President?  Don’t commanders-in-chief who take on every duty tend to burn out (something that may be dangerous for some senior citizens)?

2.  I wonder if Bloomberg is kicking himself for not having run.  It would have been really great to have a Bloomberg, or even a Perot in as a viable candidate considering the developments of the past couple of weeks.

Seen at NY1:

In an interview on “Inside City Hall” Friday night, Deputy Mayor Kevin Sheekey promoted the idea of an Obama-Bloomberg presidential ticket – and revealed that Mayor Michael Bloomberg spoke Thursday with the Democratic presidential frontrunner Barack Obama.

That would certainly one-up McCain on campaigning for the middle of the American political spectrum…but would Bloomberg’s ego permit him to be Veep?

Secretary of Treasury, maybe….perhaps even Secretary of State. But the notion of “Vice President Bloomberg” is difficult to stomach.

I think this was pretty much expected, given McCain being virtually certain to get the GOP nod, and inertia favoring Obama’s change-based campaign among the Dems, but this makes it official. Quoting Political Ticker:

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has publicly flirted with the idea of a run for the White House as an independent, says he will not run for president.

“I listened carefully to those who encouraged me to run, but I am not — and will not be — a candidate for president,” Bloomberg wrote in an op-ed posted on the New York Times Web site Wednesday night in advance of Thursday’s paper.

I would have loved to see a viable candidate run up the middle between polarized parties…but I think the political landscape is shaping up in a way that seems to be depolarized…or at least is seeing the axis of polarity shift.

Seen in a New York Times blog:

But [Senator Hagel] said that Mr. McCain’s centrist views would appeal to the very demographic that Mr. Bloomberg had hoped to attract, including independents and moderates.

His conversation with the mayor, Mr. Hagel said, was predicated on the idea that there would be an opening for an independent Bloomberg candidacy. And the conversation, Mr. Hagel confirmed, included talk about whether Mr. Hagel would run for vice president on a Bloomberg ticket.

Sounds like McCain’s triumph may put an end to that.

That’s about what I was figuring too. Dang it, I was hoping that finally we could have a viable candidate with realistic views unburdened by partisan biases.

Seen on the AP wire:

Michael Bloomberg may soon begin a massive operation to get on the ballot in up to 15 states even though the billionaire mayor may not decide until May whether to run for president, according to associates.

Despite John McCain’s widening lead in the Republican race, an imminent ballot deadline for third-parties in Texas and a recently expanded denial of interest from Bloomberg himself, these associates say the mayor and his operatives are actively laying necessary groundwork for an independent campaign and are in no hurry to decide whether or not to run.

I would comment on the silliness of just how early some of the ballot access deadlines are in this country…but that comment would likely just be lost in the flood of noise surrounding Super Duper Fat Tuesday, yes?

Seen at Politico:

I just now spoke to Ralph Nader, who said the launch of his exploratory Web site wasn’t timed to Edwards’ withdrawal, but that Kucinich’s withdrawal had made space in the race for him.

“We’re testing the waters on the overriding issue of corporate control, of our political economy, and anything else the dogma of commercialism wants to latch on to,” he said.

He also said he’d make third-party ballot access a major issue, after what he sees as a “national conspiracy” by the Democratic Party to deny him a place on the ballot in 2004, subject of a recent lawsuit.

Well, if he enters the race, perhaps Nader could offset some of the benefit Dems would receive should Ron Paul or Bloomberg run and dilute moderate/centrist/libertarian support for the GOP candidate.

Seen at Rasmussen:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that roughly 15% of voters would currently vote for [either Ron Paul or Michael Bloomberg] in general election match-ups.

When the two candidates are mentioned as independent options in match-ups between Mitt Romney and the two Democratic frontrunners, Paul and Bloomberg attract roughly the same level of support. When John McCain is mentioned as the Republican candidate in a match-up with Barack Obama, Ron Paul earns 11% of the vote while Bloomberg attracts 5%.

At this time, the net impact of such third party efforts appears to benefit the Democrats.

Of course, the question still remains—will Dr. Paul launch a third-party or independent bid, and will Bloomberg get in the race.

I don’t know what the answer to the first question is. Ron Paul’s core supporters definitely want him to…however, I haven’t gotten a strong impression of Dr. Paul being quite as enthusiastic about that prospect.

Personally, while I’d like part of the economic responsibility / individual liberty message to get more media play (thus the reason I’ll be holding my nose and voting for Ron Paul in Connecticut’s primary), I sill really wish that message were carried by a more credible messenger….especially when that messenger will need to poll 15% or better to get into the Presidential debates this fall.

As to the second question—presumably we’ll have a better feel for the odds of Bloomberg entering the race after next week. If McCain can break ahead of Romney on Super Tuesday…I’ve got to believe Bloomberg will stay out, due to the likelihood of fracturing the moderate/centrist vote. If Romney turns it around, or if the picture remains clouded…who knows?

One additional thought—personally I doubt that Paul can do much better than low, maybe mid, double digits in national polls, due to his quirks and certain of his definitely non-mainstream views. However, I wonder how much of Bloomberg’s low-polling is simply the result of being unknown.

A bit of advertising should, presumably, at least buy Bloomberg a podium at the Presidential Debates. After all, look at how many votes Romney’s millions have been able to buy.

Obama gets a moderate blogger’s support at Donklephant:

Here’s the thing…if a politician can actually make us feel that there’s hope, that there’s a chance to actually mend our partisan wounds, we shouldn’t ignore it. That’s what Barack brings to the table, and that’s why I’m excited about his candidacy.

I can agree with that sentiment. However, perhaps it’s been too much exposure to politics, combined with my experiences witnessing the sausage-making that takes place in government in this country, which keeps me too cynical about any face the media and conventional wisdom deign to shine a spotlight upon.

I’ve enjoyed listening to Obama, and his talk of working across party lines has a definite appeal to me. However, I’m reminded of the hope and optimism many of us felt when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992. We looked forward to the handoff to a new generation of politics, with the expectation that everything was going to be better.

While Bill definitely chalked up some significant accomplishments during his stint at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, much of what we were optimistic about faded quickly, as the political climate quickly degenerated into the perpetual battle of the Clinton political machine and the Right-Wing’s hatred of “Billary”.

I think I would prefer Obama in office over Hillary…but frankly, I don’t see anyone active in the political arena that I particularly want as President (although Bloomberg, if he would run, might be the exception).

(For whatever it’s worth, I’m still planning to cat my protest vote for Ron Paul on Super Tuesday. He’s flawed as a candidate, and definitely not viable given Connecticut’s winner-take-all status with the GOP, but his running has, at least, gotten the concept of fiscal conservatism and individual liberty as a campaign platform a few minutes of media attention.

Two Bloomberg-oriented articles have caught my eye in the past couple of days.

First, from MSNBC, we see that Bloomberg could very well be a man after my own heart — a politics and stats junkie:

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has quietly been polling and conducting a highly sophisticated voter analysis in all 50 states as he decides whether to launch an independent presidential bid, associates said Wednesday.

The exhaustive data collection started months ago, and when the review begins shortly, it will provide the data-obsessed billionaire businessman with the information he will use to decide whether to make a third-party run for the White House.  [...]

Using the microtargeting model, research firms working for Bloomberg are gathering comprehensive information on voters throughout the country, such has who owns a home, has children in college, where they vacation, type of car or computer and past political support. All the puzzle pieces will then be arranged to create a picture of each individual.

Most of the data already exists in commercial databases that the multibillionaire Bloomberg can simply purchase. It will then be analyzed to determine how each voter fits into several categories: “strong supporter,” “persuadable supporter” or “potential volunteer.”

A data-driven campaign –  I imagine that even Karl Rove would nod in approval.  However, hopefully the folks doing the analysis on the data won’t lose sight of the fact that voters do not always behave rationally or as advertised, which tends to cloud up the analysis a little bit.

Meanwhile, looking at the future of Unity 08, this story can be seen at the New York Daily News:

A source familiar with the Bloomberg for president movement says the bipartisan Unity08 effort is poised to shut down its Web site, reconstitute as a Draft Bloomberg site and launch its own 50-state signature-gathering operation on behalf of the supposedly reluctant would-be independent presidential candidate. [...]

It’s unclear whether this would be some kind of publicity stunt for Unity08, which has been ignored, or even flat-out ridiculed, in some corners, or a real, honest-to-goodness sign that Bloomberg is serious about running for president and not simply trying to maintain relevancy in his lame-duck years.

Another sign of more fun to be found late this winter, perhaps?