January 30th, 2008
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...Bloomberg Links for January 30th
- Bloomberg Goes to Super Bowl -
- Bloomberg on Rudy’s travails - SILive: Island Politics -
- Rasmussen Reports?: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a mid-term election. -
- Rumors Surround Bloomberg Presidential Bid -
- What Would Bloomberg’s Platform Look Like? -
See UniteForMike’s delicious profile for more.
January 30th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Does anyone else feel that you can’t gauge a Bloomberg run on polls? Outside of the New York metro area and California, most people don’t know who he is or what he’s done. Of course someone in middle America isn’t going to give him much of a shot. I’m sure Bloomberg’s polling data is much more reliable, probably looking at issues, positions, and experience, rather than recognizable names. We need Bloomberg to get out there and state his message, standing alongside his supportive team of well-known R’s and D’s, perhaps at the Rose Bowl, perhaps in a Super Bowl commercial… he just need to spread the word and make the American people BELIEVE there is hope for a better United States…
January 30th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Forget the polls for now. The average voter is still holding the (intentional) perception that he’s not running.
Money in politics is used to get one’s name out and what they stand for. Ron Paul, for example, was totally unknown. But in areas where his supporters had money and time and get his name out, he did respectably well (considering he’s a hard sell for Republicans to begin with).
In Bloomberg’s case he can run a 50-state ad campaign to get his message out. He then makes the rounds just as the other candidates do. That’s when his ratings will rise.
It’s amazing to me that he polls 5% at all, considering that almost everyone I meet who asks about my Bloomberg bumpersticker and button thinks he’s not running.
What’s important is that they do actually know his name. And that’s all that’s intended at this stage in the game…
January 31st, 2008 at 12:04 am
I don’t think it matters anymore….if Governor Arnold is endorsing McCain…that is a good signal that Bloomberg is not going to run
January 31st, 2008 at 2:34 am
I agree.
January 31st, 2008 at 8:13 am
I agree as well, hopefully his endorsement isn’t made official…
January 31st, 2008 at 10:15 am
I think both candidates leading in the 2 parties after 2/12 will probably win the nom. Then it will be a mad dash for the center in the following months as both demonstrate they have broad support. So if Bloomberg is going to be a player at all this go-around he will have to solidify himself in that middle ground by announcing shortly after the 2/12 contests and doing an ad blitz or something for 3 weeks. Otherwise Bloomie should look for a veep possibility with someone like Obama maybe - and that might have been his plan all along. If it is Hillary on the Dem side Bloomie might have some space to run with the right veep choice. But if it is Obama vs McCain, Bloomie’s Centrist-Indy space is pretty slim IMHO. Arnie’s endosement is an indicator of that.
January 31st, 2008 at 12:27 pm
The presidential race may boil down to our weak economy and climbing unemployment rate and that gives Bloomberg a hugh issue to campaign on. He is not out in my humble opinion.
January 31st, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Can’t help but notice that Bloomberg will be in Phoenix also when the Concord Coalition Fiscal wake up tour will be there…hmmmm????
Maybe Bloomie could hook up with the Concord Coalition’s Fiscal Wake-Up Tour and take the issue of Fiscal Responsibility on the road to pressure the 2 parties and their respective candidates. See:
http://www.concordcoalition.com/events/fiscal-wake-up/index.html
Monday, February 4: Phoenix, AZ
Wednesday, February 27: Madison, WI
Wednesday, March 5: Berkeley, CA
Thursday, March 6: Fresno, CA
Tuesday, March 25: Pittsburgh, PA
Monday, April 28: St. Louis, MO
January 31st, 2008 at 2:01 pm
I thought the same about McCain, but Kevin Sheekey had made some comment the day before about “being able to change one’s mind” which didn’t make sense at the time.
Hard to know. It’s certainly a complex game of chess here. If he doesn’t run, I hope to all heck that Obama wins the nom. I really don’t want to choose between Hillary and “100 years in Iraq” McCain.
I think the game is still on though. Let’s not lose hope just yet. Mike is still touring nationally. The Concord thing John mentions seems all too coincidental too.
Hopefully things will be more clear by SuperTuesday.
January 31st, 2008 at 2:14 pm
I agree that Obama would bring the integrity and openess to constructive dialogue in Washington better than either Clinton or McCain. Should Bloomberg decide not to run, I believe he can bring some innovation and experience to an Obama run (Hopefully as a Veep).
January 31st, 2008 at 3:08 pm
I don’t see Bloomberg’s ego allowing him to accept a VP position. I read the Sheekey article too… he’s in it to win it, not be someone’s right hand man. The part that confuses me is that in the past week, I feel the situation has become even more appropriate for a Bloomberg run. Dems and Reps are completely torn apart right now by their candidates… Maybe Schwarzenegger just needed to support someone from his own party, for political reasons…
McCain is too old to be president (and he reminds me of an umpa lumpa). I like Obama’s conviction, but I’m not sure he’s got what it takes. If Hillary wins, I may move to Canada…
January 31st, 2008 at 3:23 pm
I agree with you there, Sean. I think those of us who use a rational mindset to examine the candidates without too much emotion, can see what makes Mike a great candidate. The problem, of course, is if the average voter, who goes with emotion can be unplugged from emotion. Will they be able to consider a new candidate after being set on one of the current ones.
My assertion remains that “disgruntled Obama supporters” (assuming he loses the nomination) would be the nucleus of the entire Bloomberg run. People that choose Hillary and McCain, from what I can divine, do so in a hope to beat “the other side’s candidate.” Not much genuine passion there.
McCain is not only too old, but seems to be a last resort in a field of highly-flawed candidates. There’s little passion from what I can see. Choosing McCain is a decision analogous to choosing what day of the week one will get a colonoscopy; it’s a downer no matter which option what one chooses.
January 31st, 2008 at 3:59 pm
If McCain wins the Republican nod, and it seems he will, I see many of the very conservative staying home.
I suspect that Bloomberg may consider an active VP role. If the request is made to help rescue the country, I am positive ego can be set aside.
January 31st, 2008 at 5:29 pm
I agree with GP on the “disgruntled Obama supporters” thingy. That would be a base to build on and a Bloomie-Obama alternative to Hillary vs. McCain would be viable/winable IMHO. Hillary will have some more “ghosts” in her closet (that the Repubs are probably holding back on). here only hope is if she can coax Obama onto the ticket.
And also a couple of faux pauxs by McCain or cardiac eposode will give people pause on McCain and cause people to scan the horizon for doable viable alternatives if there are any. But McCain is a good decent guy and man of true political intregrity/courage IMO. But the question is can he run anything and keep up!
January 31st, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Comment by Bloomberg at the NY Google office:
“He added that he was “a bit too old” to consider being a running mate.”
There goes the VP idea…
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/bloomberggoogle-where-lunch-is-free/?ex=1202446800&en=f6260a52975e4fa9&ei=5070&emc=eta1
February 1st, 2008 at 11:02 am
Not so sure on that. Under the right circumstances it might be a viable possibility for him to promote his agenda. I particularly liked his comments at Google:
“One of the sad things in our country is people have become xenophobic and new things are scaring people,” he said. “That’s the single biggest danger I think our country faces. If we turn our backs on the rest of the world while at the same time the rest of the world is trying to get the best and the brightest to go and work there, then we aren’t going to have the future that we want.”
and
“he drew laughs when he reminded employees at one point that better government would require sacrifice on the part of it citizens “because in the end, there is no free lunch.”
So I disagree Sean…Under the right circumstances Mike could synch quite well with change agent Obama to give Barack some needed governing traction and to advance Mike’s agenda and the national interest as well.
February 1st, 2008 at 11:26 am
Well, Bloomberg also said he wouldn’t publicly support a presidential candidate… which, at face value, is what he would be doing if he ran as VP. I just don’t think he’d have all of his people do this nationwide research about a run for pres and just settle for VP (he would be settling). Everything we’ve been talking about in this blog for weeks now and all the articles that have been written about him and his work revolves around the fact that he’s a great leader… not a great right-hand man…
February 1st, 2008 at 11:36 am
The role of the VP is what the Ticket team make it! A VP can do all the things that Mike is well suited to handle on the right ticket. I am sure Mike would not blindly accept a running mate request but would only do it with the right person under the right circumstances. Such an arrangement would obviously be discussed behind closed doors.
February 1st, 2008 at 11:44 am
And Bloomie says publicly he is not running for Prez. So I would not go by what he says on the Veep thing as well. Everything on this blog shows that Mike is a great leader for sure but also a great manager and uniter. And being a smart bussinessman Bloomie knows when to hold ‘em and when to fold ‘em to advance his agenda. And Veep is one plausible way to do that and that Veep would not be selected until mid-August anyway if Barack is the winner. If Hillary is the winner it will probably be Hill-Barack IMHO - her only way at being electable.