A Sam Nunn/Michael Bloomberg candidacy?

[Spoke]

Some weeks ago we discussed the repercussions of a possible independent run for the presidency by Michael Bloomberg: Which party would a Bloomberg independent bid hurt most?

Now it seems that Sam Nunn may be coming to the party: Former Sen. Sam Nunn weighs run for White House

The 68-year-old former senator, still considered one of the foremost experts on national security, confirmed that he’s discussed a presidential run as part of several conversations with Michael Bloomberg, the New York mayor.

More important, Nunn said he’s been in touch with Unity '08, a group with a goal of fielding a bipartisan or independent ticket for president. Initial talks began with Hamilton Jordan, a co-founder of Unity '08 and former chief of staff to President Jimmy Carter.

Doug Bailey, a Republican strategist and another co-founder, said Nunn was given “a more detailed briefing” from the group this summer.

This raises several questions:

Who would be at the top of the ticket?

Would a Nunn/Bloomberg candidacy stand any chance of winning?

If not, who would a Nunn/Bloomberg ticket hurt more, the Democrats or the Republicans? Could it win any states?

I have a lot of respect for Sam Nunn. He has been a loyal Democrat to this point, and he is very well-versed and well-respected in foreign policy.

If Nunn is at the top of the ticket, and if both major parties run New Yorkers (as seems a very real possibilty), I can imagine Nunn doing pretty well in the South, maybe even winning Georgia (and who knows, maybe another state or two).

In that scenario, I can see this ticket hurting Republicans.

If Bloomberg is at the top of the ticket, I’m not so sure of the outcome.

Your thoughts?

[Little_Nemo]

I like Nunn. But I don’t see how he can jump in at this point and have any credibility. He’ll be in fifth place behind four other non-candidates.

[GLWasteful]

Frankly, I always wanted to see a Nunn-Bush ticket.

And I really don’t think that now is the time to be stepping into what has become a near-perpetual presidential race. I happen to think that Nunn would bring a great deal with his national security bonafides, but this seems too little, too late.

[Spoke]

@Little Nemo

I like Nunn. But I don’t see how he can jump in at this point and have any credibility. He’ll be in fifth place behind four other non-candidates.

Yeah, but those other “non-candidates” are talked about as entering the Republican or Democratic primaries.

Nunn is talking about an independent run. (With Bloomberg?) Different kettle of fish. He would instantly be in third position in the race, and the question would be whether he could pull enough votes to affect the election.

I think a Nunn candidacy could possibly swing the elction to the Democrats (even with Hillary at the top of the Democratic ticket) by drawing off Hillary haters who might otherwise reluctantly vote for Giulliani or Romney.

But I don’t want to belittle Nunn’s candidacy by focusing solely on how it would affect the D-R divide. Nunn has some interesting perspectives.

In the interview Nunn also admitted he is tempted by the fact that a presidential run would offer him a world stage to press for a revolutionary shift in U.S. defense and foreign policy.

In January, Nunn joined with a coterie of defense and diplomatic experts that include Henry Kissinger and George Shultz to argue that the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of terrorism have forever altered the calculus of war.

In a new era in which the chief concern is Islamic jihadism, a world security system built around a nuclear stand-off between the United States and Russia has become “obsolete,” Nunn says.

Ultimately, he said, if there’s to be any chance of persuading smaller countries to give up nuclear weapons technology — and keep it out of the hands of increasingly sophisticated terrorists — world powers will have to put themselves on a gradual, verifiable path toward total nuclear disarmament. That includes the United States.

“I do not see tough calls willing to be made by the body politic,” he said.

Nunn singled out the debate over energy and global warming. Those most concerned with global warming won’t consider nuclear energy as an alternative, he said. Those who advocate energy independence ignore the fact that there is “no analysis whatsoever that could lead you to believe we’re going to be independent in this country on energy,” Nunn said. “We’ll have interdependence and security in energy, but people aren’t talking about that.”

Though he has said little publicly, his frustration over Iraq — he opposed the first Gulf War in '91 — can barely be contained. “A fiasco, which we’ve basically mishandled in all directions. We’ll get over it, because we’re a strong country, and we’re indispensable in the sense that we’re the [world] leader. But right now, it’s going to take at least 10 years to rebuild U.S. credibility.”

[Ludovic]

At least he has a readily made slogan: “Which party are you going to vote for this time? NUNN!”

[Elendil_s_Heir]

I think it’s very unlikely, and even if it happened, I doubt that such a ticket - in either order - would get much traction. I can remember what-if scenarios as long ago as 1988 in which Nunn rode in to save the day from a field of (as perceived by some, at least) meh candidates. Frankly, Nunn’s not the most exciting candidate himself, and has been out of the public eye long enough that I doubt he’d make much of a splash. If Bloomberg picked Nunn to be his running mate, he might give Bloomberg a little boost at the edges, adding some foreign policy/national security credibility, I suppose. Geographical appeal? Not so much. Georgia has been trending Republican in recent years, and I doubt Nunn could even help him win there, let alone elsewhere in the South.

The two big things Bloomberg has going for him are $$$$$ and a pretty good record building on Giuliani’s acomplishments in NYC. Not sure that’s enough to get him to the White House.

If they ran as independents, and if Bloomberg spent big big BIG bucks, it would tend to hurt the Democrats, I think, as it would split the “time for a change”/anti-Iraq War vote.

[BrainGlutton]

@GLWasteful

And I really don’t think that now is the time to be stepping into what has become a near-perpetual presidential race.

Don’t listen to that, Al!

[Spoke]

I missed this earlier, but he seems to have ruled out being a VP candidate:

The only certainty, he said, is that he won’t be anybody’s candidate for vice president.

So I guess if he runs with Bloomberg, it would be as Nunn/Bloomberg.

[Marley23]

@spoke-

So I guess if he runs with Bloomberg, it would be as Nunn/Bloomberg.

I have trouble imagining Bloomberg spending tons of his own money to run for Vice President, especially since he’s done pretty well with his testing of the waters lately and, unlike Nunn, is actually politically active now. But maybe I don’t know Bloomberg.

[Spoke]

@Marley23

I have trouble imagining Bloomberg spending tons of his own money to run for Vice President, especially since he’s done pretty well with his testing of the waters lately and, unlike Nunn, is actually politically active now. But maybe I don’t know Bloomberg.

Yeah, I would think that might be a dealbreaker for Bloomberg.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

Aw, c’mon. Who wouldn’t jump at the chance to spend tens or hundreds of millions of his own money to serve as someone else’s Vice President?

Oh, yes. That’s right. No one would.

[Spoke]

And yet, Nunn met with Bloomberg, and is still talking of a run at the top of the ticket. So who knows what’s going on?

[Marley23]

@spoke-

And yet, Nunn met with Bloomberg, and is still talking of a run at the top of the ticket. So who knows what’s going on?

I’d say the most likely reading is that they won’t run together, but there’s no way to know at this point.

[Spoke]

@Marley23

I’d say the most likely reading is that they won’t run together, but there’s no way to know at this point.

Possible. It could be that they are both planning to participate in the online nomination process of Unity '08, the organization mentioned in the Nunn article. From their website:

Unity08 will host a secure, web-based nominating convention in which all American voters who registered with Unity08 will be qualified to vote for one of the Unity Tickets nominated. Sign up today to become a delegate in this first-ever online convention.

[GLWasteful]

I suppose it’s possible that they’ll both participate, but Nunn’s smart enough to know that Bloomberg’s money would make for a decidedly good thing, and Bloomberg’s not gonna (from my read) play second fiddle. If so, it’ll be fun to watch and see who blinks first.

Plus, it’ll be interesting to see someone nominated with what appears to be precious little support.

[Spoke]

@GLWasteful

I suppose it’s possible that they’ll both participate, but Nunn’s smart enough to know that Bloomberg’s money would make for a decidedly good thing, and Bloomberg’s not gonna (from my read) play second fiddle. If so, it’ll be fun to watch and see who blinks first.

Plus, it’ll be interesting to see someone nominated with what appears to be precious little support.

The cynic in me thinks you’ll be surprised how much money winds up behind the Unity '08 nominee, no matter who is nominated-- not because of actual support for the candidate, but because of how the candidacy could swing the '08 election. For example, a Nunn candidacy on a third-party ticket could be a big boost to the Democrats. It wouldn’t have to win any states to do that. It could draw off enough Republican votes in a few Southern states to allow the Democrat to pick them up (a la the Perot candidacy in '92).

[Frostillicus]

Sam Nunn is yesterday’s news. He is not the type to stir one’s soul.

[GLWasteful]

@spoke-

The cynic in me thinks you’ll be surprised how much money winds up behind the Unity '08 nominee, no matter who is nominated-- not because of actual support for the candidate, but because of how the candidacy could swing the '08 election. For example, a Nunn candidacy on a third-party ticket could be a big boost to the Democrats. It wouldn’t have to win any states to do that. It could draw off enough Republican votes in a few Southern states to allow the Democrat to pick them up (a la the Perot candidacy in '92).

Oh, I don’t doubt for a moment that a great deal of money will be thrown at third party candidates, but Bloomberg has his own built-in source, which I think will be avidly viewed by anyone.

And I also think that the Republicans will do whatever they have to do in order to keep from losing any states. In the interests of fairness, I think that the Democrats will do the same.

[Spoke]

@GLWasteful

Oh, I don’t doubt for a moment that a great deal of money will be thrown at third party candidates, but Bloomberg has his own built-in source, which I think will be avidly viewed by anyone.

True, but what he doesn’t have is ballot access. He needs an organization like Unity '08 to get that.

[GLWasteful]

@spoke-

True, but what he doesn’t have is ballot access. He needs an organization like Unity '08 to get that.

And Unity '08 doesn’t have a fortune. I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

As I said, it’ll make for entertaining viewing.