He’s liberal so that would only help Trump or Cruz
If Sanders somehow manages to win the nomination, I think Bloomberg will run. If it’s a race between him,Sanders and Trump/Cruz I think he has a serious shot.
An independent might be able to take the White House, but he’d NEVER be able to govern. Remember how the Republicans were on Obama from day one. An independent would face that kind of treatment from BOTH parties.
Who would he bleed from more?
The problem is, Bloomberg isn’t much younger than Sanders. At their age, trusting them with the nuclear suitcase is scary. I wouldn’t trust them with the TV remote much less the nuclear suitcase.
Bloomberg might favor (some) liberal policies, but in terms of governance style, he is a fascist. He has a grating personality. He’s not going to take many votes from a Democratic nominee. He wouldn’t hurt Clinton at all.
Your opinions about “older” candidates have been strongly expressed not just here. Given that the spread from Clinton to Trump to Bloomberg to Sanders is in grand total about 6 years, where exactly do you draw the line of senile old fart? And would prefer a demented “younger” candidate to a sharp “older” one?
I predict that he will ultimately not run when it comes to his March deadline. Michael Bloomberg has no shot at winning regardless who is the democratic and republican nominee. In a three way race between Trump, Sanders and Bloomberg, he has the least chance of taking the White House.
Bloomberg is EXTREMELY short. Rest-your-beer-on-his-head short.
Present-day America could possibly elect a Jewish banker from NYC who hates guns and loves abortions, but not a short one.
I disagree; I think Bloomberg will have an excellent chance against Sanders and Trump.
- Bloomberg looks and talks like the average American’s idea of a President more than either of them.
- Money will be a non-issue. He can afford more than has ever been spent on a campaign. Money could be a serious problem for Sanders ; he will have very little corporate money and it’s an open question whether his small-donations strategy can scale up to a general election.
- Most of the mainstream media will support Bloomberg. They loathe Trump and consider Sanders too radical.
- Bloomberg will probably run a smarter and more disciplined campaign than either Sanders or Trump.
Bloomberg would do well in New York, New Jersey, and the Northeast. He is a centrist, and could do well with moderate Republicans, like Pennsylvania Rep. Charlie Dent. Bloomberg could be the next president, in a spoiler.
Jesus Christ. He’s 5’8"! Totally unqualified to be president! What if the nuclear codes were kept on a very high shelf or something!
He does not. He looks and talks like a short rich elitist. New Yorkers cityites (citians?)may like that but it won’t fly in a lot of places.
The mainstream leaves their opinions behind as the process goes on, they will promote the entertainment aspect and back the leading candidate. They try their best to influence the primary process but they have little effect once the candidates are selected. The commie and clown characterizations of Sanders and Trump haven’t stuck, but once both those sides tell the public Bloomberg won’t allow them to buy Big Gulps anymore the media will ridicule Bloomberg mercilessly. Guns and taxes are minor issues compared to the bipartisan desire to kill ourselves through unmitigated indulgence. You cannot win an election with a candidate that hates both Coke and Pepsi.
He has no edge over Trump in that category, and Bernie is picking up a lot of the smart campaign staff that helped Obama win. It’s the reason I’m beginning to think Bernie has a chance here, not just to put away Clinton, but he could actually outdo Trump in a populist campaign.
Sharper older ones? Actually, I’d prefer they not use the word “running,” substituting “hoverounding” instead when a candidate is older than Regan was.
To be fair, it’s hard for me to see how either Trump or Sanders (both mentioned earlier in the thread) are going to be able to govern either. Neither is especially popular among the rank and file members of the party, neither has a reputation for being history of being a consensus builder, and both are talking about doing things that realistically are going to be extremely difficult to carry out. I’m not clear that Bloomberg would be at much of a disadvantage in this regard compared to those two.
Nobody is going to vote for a plutocratic, gun-grabbing, soda-taxing loser like Bloomberg-I’d be surprised if he wins more votes then the candidates of the Green or the Libertarian parties.
Just who does Bloomberg imagine is dying to vote for him? He has no natural constituency, no charisma, and no hot button issue.
He claims to be 5’8"? I call baloney. I’ve met the guy; unless he was standing in a hole, he needs to go en pointe to hit 5’4".
Bloomberg running as an independent in a Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump or Ted Cruz hypothetical? Yea, I can see myself voting for him. There’s a lot I don’t agree with him about, but I am not sure there could be a final four of worse possible candidates than what we’re potentially going to be faced with. The only one of those that I personally like is Bernie Sanders, but he’s also the one I disagree with the most. This is shaping up to be just unimaginably bad of a choice.
Even LESS qualified to be president then. For some reason.
We have exactly the government we deserve as a people if this is an issue.
Also, while reports of his height vary, the shortest anyone anywhere has him as is 5’6". He’s listed between 5’6" and 5’10". No one says he is nearly as short as you are claiming.