There is a ton of time to get on the ballot for the general election. You’re thinking of the deadlines for primaries.
ok. I’m not very familiar with third party candidates. The primary process, deadlines and elections as so ingrained in our culture. These third party runs are hard to fathom.
Bloomberg certainly has enough money to spend if he wants to pursue this. But unlike Trump he will have to defend his somewhat uneven record as Mayor of NY.
Why isn’t Sanders “an option”?
So how do you feel about Bill Clinton’s Penis?
That it made too many decisions.
I only meant that I don’t think it’s realistic to think he could get the nomination over Hillary, whereas Biden probably could have. I’d love to be proven wrong about Sanders, because he’s a good man with good ideas, but at the present time the center of American politics is far to the right of where he is. Whereas Hillary is smack in the middle of the mainstream road, almost as if it had been a deliberate calculation done with survey equipment!
Bernie’s got momentum, and the spread isn’t that much. I think it’s a long shot, but I wouldn’t rule it out at this point. He’s doing WAY better than I thought he would be doing 6 months ago.
In a race between Sanders and Trump, the middle is WIDE open and I surmised someone would like to jump in that hole. Bloomberg is likely better than many others there - in that he has significant personal wealth, has some executive experience in running NYC, and has relatively moderate positions (esp compared to Sanders and Trump). He could actually make quite a dent in many states.
Letting the banksters screw over the Republic while grabbing your guns and sodas is the sort of “moderation” unpopular among healthy, patriotic Americans.
Bloomberg may be an independent, but he’s a centrist and has had past relationships with both parties. I imagine that if Bloomberg was to win, he’d govern just fine and tailor his priorities to whichever party controlled Congress. If Democrats were in charge, he’d focus on gun control, if Republicans were in charge he’d focus on balancing the budget.
It is an interesting thought, now that you put it that way.
I would support Sanders over Trump, no question about it–I’d support Sanders over any Republican candidate, though more and more I doubt that he would be able to beat any of them in a general election. I’ve never been drawn to third party candidates at all, but if there were ever a situation where I could see backing one, it would be something like the situation you describe–given that I am not exactly drawn to Sanders either.
Well, I’d probably still vote for Sanders. It would certainly be ironic, though, if the man who has consistently run as an independent lost the presidency, while representing one of the two major parties, to someone running as an independent.
Having a Bloomberg administration is the best way to cause fascist or Stalinist dictatorship in this country.
You’ve said about three times in this thread that no one supports him.* How exactly is he going to establish a dictatorship of any kind with no support?
*true, several people in the thread, including me, have said they might consider voting for Bloomberg if the other choices were Trump and Sanders. I rather doubt we represent a groundswell of opinion, however; or have we changed your mind? 
Bloomberg is a nanny stater, not a fascist. He’d be nowhere near as ambitious about expanding executive power as Bush was. Bloomberg isn’t interested in tapping our phones, he wants to keep us from drinking sugary sodas.
What I mean is that if he becomes President, his policies will be so disastrous as to encourage the popularity of totalitarian ideologies-as seen in Weimar Germany and present-day Greece. If you asked a group of neo-Nazis and a group of Communists to design their ideal villain, they’d both come up with a profile not dissimilar from that of Bloomberg’s.
And you evidence from his tenure as NYC mayer is…?
The value of a balanced budget is not so much a political idea as it is a stupid idea. Debt can be a very good thing, if we had gone into debt for a serious stimulus package to fix our roads, bridges and tracks, we would have been much better off much sooner. The materials will not be that cheap again, our credit was good, and we had people who needed to work.
But instead, decisions were made by morons who truly believe that the economy of a nation is somehow very much like a family sitting around the kitchen table working out next weeks grocery budget. Or worse, decisions made by people smart enough to know that’s bullshit but afraid to say it.
Huge opportunity, pissed away. And now we still have to fix the shit, but it will cost us much more. Morons.
Debt is a very bad idea when there is no recession. Do you know how many Democratic priorities could be fulfilled if not for paying interest on the debt being such a large part of the budget?
Remainder that Bloomberg looks like Governor Joseph Santini of New York in 2022 who helps cover up the fact that Soylent Green IS MADE OF PEOPLE.
In a Bloomberg/Sanders/Trump scenario the likelihood of no candidate getting a majority of the electoral college would be significant in which case the House gets to vote for the President with each state delegation getting a vote. Bernie would have no chance but you have to wonder how the House will vote between Bloomberg and Trump. My guess is that enough Republicans will combine with the Democrats to deliver a win to Bloomberg.