Bloomberg scraps nascent presidential bid
Last month, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg led a group discussion in Oklahoma with elders from the Democratic and Republican parties. The whole thing was going to be awesome — everyone would recognize what a visionary Bloomberg is and how he (and only he) has the unique independent skills to lead the nation during these challenging times.
Except no one really cared. The discussion was a bust, and even hand-picked participants said they had no interest in supporting an independent Bloomberg bid. Outside of Unity08’s leadership, David Broder, and Bloomberg’s immediate family, it quickly became apparent that no one actually wanted to see the NYC mayor run for president. His “movement” — I use the word loosely — was premised entirely on a tactic: governing without regard for partisanship. Tens of people across the country rallied to the cause.
Today, in a New York Times op-ed, Bloomberg officially scrapped the idea.
I believe that an independent approach to these issues is essential to governing our nation — and that an independent can win the presidency. I listened carefully to those who encouraged me to run, but I am not — and will not be — a candidate for president. I have watched this campaign unfold, and I am hopeful that the current campaigns can rise to the challenge by offering truly independent leadership. The most productive role that I can serve is to push them forward, by using the means at my disposal to promote a real and honest debate.
In the weeks and months ahead, I will continue to work to steer the national conversation away from partisanship and toward unity; away from ideology and toward common sense; away from sound bites and toward substance.
The irony, of course, is that the most glaring omission of Bloomberg’s initiative was even a hint of substance. He would identify serious challenges, but refuse to offer policy specifics of any kind. It was an ego-driven political party that offered literally nothing in the way of ideas, as if “independent solutions” was a serious answer to pressing issues. It wasn’t.
Good news. Now (with HRC almost out of the way...) we can focus on the Republican Party and what a disaster it has been and will continue to be. *They* are the real enemy.
An independent cannot and will never win the presidency. A third party candidate cannot and never will win the presidency. We're too far gone. The best we can hope for is the threat of "spoiler votes" (a term I don't personally appreciate) influencing the direction of the parties in a positive way.
At least he was smart enough to see his running would be useless, unlike another candidate we know.
Steve,
What a well written segment!
Got his bloomers in a twist, huh?
didn't think you could hack it, huh bloomy?
These Pancakes Don't Run!
[Deleted]
He actually gave up because the reslugs have already backed their make believe 'third party' pain in the ass. The position has been filled.
I think the only people that want a Bloomberg and Nader run are the networks and radio stations. More $$ in advertising revenue.
pissed off patricia @ 3:
Take a look at this Mike Luckovich cartoon, 3rd down, dated Feb 26 2008.
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/
I attended the Bloomberg-Boren panel at the University of Oklahoma and Bloomberg was stunningly underwhelming as a speaker. He hardly said a word, looked bored and it was clear that this wasn't going to go anywhere. After a lot of back and forth I'm glad Bloomberg has finally put this issue to rest.
pissed off patricia @ 3:
Jay Severin Has a Small Pen1s @ 8:
A Nader run has no value in getting the potential Democratic candidate to address more progressive issues? Do you think he would even be in the equation right now if, say, Kucinich was still in the race? Sorry I can't get into this more, gotta get to work.
Bloomberg just didn't want to be yet another candidate to lose to Obama.
Bloomberg is an opportunist little p***k. His style of bi-partisanship is to raise millions for George W. Bush for the 2004 election, arrest peaceful and lawful demonstrators during the Republican Convention in NYC and deny them due process by holding them in a bus depot (people had to sleep on oil slicks) without benefit of meeting with any counsel, in defiance of a court order. This guy is worse than Joe Lieberman.
Mr. Bloomberg was apparently counting on Hillary vs. Huckabee. With Obama vs. McCain, his "non-partisan" approach ran aground on the shoals of Obama's "post-partisan" ideals and McCain's "maverick" image.
It'll still be a bitterly partisan campaign, but the media coverage will cover its eyes, plug its ears, and hum real loud until after the election.
I didn't even know this guy existed until he started making sounds of running for the highest office in the land. I have seen him on the tube, but he was never addressing a crowd and he never said what he would do. What is his agenda? Does he have one?
Anonymous Source @ 2:
A third party can win the presidency, but there has to actually BE a third party. Where are the third party congressmen? where are the third party senators? mayors? governors? anybody? Oh there arn't any other then like 2. So a guy thinks he is gonna win the presidency with the support from only 2 politicians in Washington?
These wanna-be politicians want the top spot, but they have not created any base to help them along, and there is no 3rd political party to speak of.
Now let's put post-partisanship to bed too.
And ditto bipartisanship. If Republicans want to join our side regarding policies and particular policies, fine. They'll need to do that, frankly, to save their seats in ever larger parts of the country. But bipartisanship--and the fetishization of bipartisanship--is the way for Broder and those he shills for to erect a firewall against progressive change.
One vanity campaign down, one to go.
there's a mention on fok news in the uk that it's going to be an obama/bloomberg ticket. tell me it ain't true.
Doesn't anyone understand? The guy wasn't testing the waters for a presidential bid. He's running for Vice President. McCain-Bloomberg, and all that kind of thing.
seele @ 16:
Here is a DATA BASE of all Green Party Members holding elected office in the US.
Sigh. Don't people get it? Bloomberg left the Democratic Party so that he could run as a Republican and thereby hand the city over to the developers. The other main upside was that he would never in his term seek out justice for the firefighters killed on 9/11 because of Giuliani's sweetheart deal for inoperative radios with his political contributors.
Now he leaves the Republican party and the press acts like the above is moot. Just like in Washington, we're being told to give a pass to all the criminals. NO. Fuck no.
Andy Buck @ 21:
Bloomberg may end up on Obama's short list, but not on any list with McCrazy. The rightwing part of the repug party is already having a hard time with McCrazy, and their heads would explode if Bloomberg was on the ticket.
I will say it again - Mayor of New York is a dead-end political track. It ends with Gracie Mansion and City Hall. It never leads to bigger political offices. Both Rudy and Bloomy have proven this in the last few months.
Green Party members holding elected office in the United States:
At least 226 Greens in 28 states
and the District of Columbia
hold elected office as of June 2007
'Cash Rebates Like Booze For Alcoholics'
U.S.Resembling A 'Third-World Country'
Michael Bloomberg
It is a beginning. I will probably rejoin the Green Party when they tighten up their act a bit.
I feel sorry for the next president. Even as he takes his oath of office, the nation will be flying apart like a seized-up engine.
Maybe Bloomberg didn't meet the minimum height requirement.
Why the hell did 'Green' become the secondary progressive ticket? They lack an ideology altogether, for Chrissakes, aside from a vague sort of environmentalism. Is it altogether inconceivable that environmental issues might be tackled better by a labor-oriented programme?
FUCK Bloomberg, Naderand any other piece of shit that thinks they can buy the Presidency. They should just rigg it like regular Republicans.
Who?
and LA check this out http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080228/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/economy
where are you going to be on november 08 when diebold announces the winner is!!!!tah tah! john mclust? tha thaaaaa!
RueMorgue @ 31:
There is no doubt that the Green Party is floundering. My desire to be a member of it is tempered by the fact that there is no "there" there, at least not yet.
The staggering arrogance of people . . . Bloomberg has no vision, no plan, no concept of what America needs. Frankly very few of the Presidential candidates of this cycle have. You really do have to be a massive narcissist to think about running for President. It's a wonder this system occasional produces leaders at all.
slippytoad @ 36:
Name a few. I am having a hard time.
xoites defends Constitution @ 35:
I, and I think most members of the working-class, would be more supportive of them if they paid a bit more attention to labor concerns. I understand that progressive politics is generally understood as a 'middle-class' sort of thing, but the truth is that most of the workers that I know - myself included - are rather leery with what we view as doing nothing more than beautifying capitalism. I certainly understand the gravity of our environmental situation, but our human situation is just as dire. I also know that this is just a generalization, but we tend to see members of Green and other environmentalist parties as rather 'out of touch' with our economic needs.
Maybe it's just because 'socialism' is regarded as a naughty word in American politics, but I'd like to see more parties advocating a sort of democratic, European-style socialism. There's no reason that environmental concerns can't be fixed through labor reform.
xoites defends Constitution @ 26:
hey, greens are on a school board and coroner! It's WAY not enough, you need a party that can fill a room, not a 7/11. Who is the green Presidential Pick for 2008 by the way? any name recognition? Bloomberg? Nah, he is an Independent.
28 states? Running for National office requires National presence. Still 22 states in the Union with no Greens. But don't blame me, blame the Greens.
Awwww, I guess Bloomy, the union-busting corporatist, has to keep his BILLION dollars in his pants.
Lord knows, there's enough room in there...
a third party would have to start from the ground up. that is, one that wins local, then state, then maybe they look towards the presidency.
seele @ 39:
Unfortunately it is Nader which is another reason why the Green Party has its head up its ass.
ysbaddaden @ 9:
Til I saw ysbaddaden's reply, I assumed pissed of patricia was talking about HRC. lol
FYI the prez is going to have a press conference at I believe 10:00am (eastern standard time)
pissed off patricia @ 45:
ya, going to whine about congress not passing his immunity for telco's bill.
pissed off patricia @ 45:
If he is announcing his resignation i will tune in.
I don't understand where all this hate for Bloomberg is coming from??!?!?! The guy wanted to test the waters of a presedential run and decided now wasn't the time.. Jesus fucking christ, you guys are acting like he personally sodomized your dog with a broomstick. RELAX
ReagenSMASH @ 48:
Here in Texas we call that a corny-dog.
I had two last night.
Ralph Nader beat him to the punch. At least Ralph'll get less votes than Bloomberg would have.
Obama - Bloomberg '08
Bloomberg would be a great president and I would like to see a Obama/Bloombergor a Obama / Webb ticket
Bloomberg not running is very bad news for the Dems. We need him in the race to offset the damage Nader will do. Nader (and the idiots who voted for him instead of Gore) is the reason we've descended into fascist plutocratic hell for almost 8 years now.
"His 'movement' — I use the word loosely — was premised entirely on a tactic: governing without regard for partisanship. Tens of people across the country rallied to the cause."
Isn't this exactly what Obama is campaigning on? His "unity" and "change"?
Dang! I was looking forward to Bloomberg's exciting campaign and a couple of those corny dogs. I guess I just have to wait.
The "Independent bi-partisan" meme that Bloomberg and the Unity '08 supporters put forward is nothing more than a warning shot across the Democrat's bow by the advocates of elite Washington consensus to frighten them into caving into right wing domestic, economic and foreign policy. You never heard them talking about bi-partisanship when the Republicans were impeaching Clinton for a BJ. They only pop up now that Republican party political fortunes are in the ditch.
David Broder and Richard Cohen will be so sad!
ysbaddaden @ 9:
I liked the one at the bottom of the page about McCain.
RueMorgue @ 31:
Lack an ideology? Have you ever looked into Green ideology?
Here is a website with the 10 key principles (it actually compares the international Green movement and the Green Party USA, but they both have the same 10):
http://www.progress.org/green1.htm
Why should environmental protections come from labor protection? Labor consideration can just as easily come from environmental protection. By the way, the 10 key principles include "Ecological Wisdom" as just one of the ten planks of the Green platform. If the name makes you think that its all about the environment, you've been mislead.
BLOOMBERG AND CORZINE are just rich arrogant pricks who think they know whats best for their constituents. Every plan they hatch is always balanced on the backs of the poor and middle-class.
Way to go Bloomie... Finally woke up and smelled the coffee ehh..JD
Look, we all shill for somebody, but the language and tone of what people are saying about Ralph Nader is deplorable. You call yourselves "progressives", yet when someone other than a Democrat campaigns on a "progressive" platform he is vilified. Can I remind you that he is the only one tackling important issues about military spending, corporate influence, the environment in a meaningful way. If you don't like him, or don't want him to run--fine, but please quit the following talking points: blaming him for Gore's loss, and saying his presidential run is "ego driven".
You can never tell what will happen for a candidate once their name gets on the ballot and or get on televised debates...(Ross Perot for example, didnt win, but at one time was leading the national polls...I guess it was his "fault" Bush I lost).
nader is the nadir.
Comments are closed on this entry