The Candidates
Featured Archives
Just reported by Brit Hume sourced through the AP.
Will update with details when they are released. Some are already up here:
In a move that’s all but certain to bump up speculation that he’s running for for president as an independent, Bloomberg has changed his party registration to become “unaffiliated with any party.” The mayor announced the move in a statement released by City Hall this afternoon and he was once again coy about his future plans. His statement:
“I have filed papers with the New York City Board of Elections to change my status as a voter and register as unaffiliated with any political party. Although my plans for the future haven’t changed, I believe this brings my affiliation into alignment with how I have led and will continue to lead our City.
“A nonpartisan approach has worked wonders in New York: we’ve balanced budgets, grown our economy, improved public health, reformed the school system and made the nation’s safest city even safer.
“We have achieved real progress by overcoming the partisanship that too often puts narrow interests above the common good. As a political independent, I will continue to work with those in all political parties to find common ground, to put partisanship aside and to achieve real solutions to the challenges we face.
“Any successful elected executive knows that real results are more important than partisan battles and that good ideas should take precedence over rigid adherence to any particular political ideology. Working together, there’s no limit to what we can do.”
Update: This is now confirmed by the New York Times.
In somewhat unrelated news: Ralph Nader must be mad that Bloomberg might still his thunder and is again contemplating a run for the 08 White House, according to Hume.
June 19th, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Welcome to the race, Bloomberg/Hagel…
June 19th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
Sorry for being a bit off topic, but what do some of you think the chances are for McCain to run as an independent once he loses the Republican nomination? I think he clearly believes he can win a general election, but can’t get over the hump of getting the nomination.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
This can’t be good news for the Rudy camp. I think Bloomie will be running as an Independent.
If not, then what are his reasons for the party switch at this time? If he as been successful as a Republican doing:
“we’ve balanced budgets, grown our economy, improved public health, reformed the school system and made the nation’s safest city even safer.
“We have achieved real progress by overcoming the partisanship that too often puts narrow interests above the common good.”
…then one should not need to be an Independent to do these things.
He’s doing this because he wants to run. Watch the Rudy numbers tank quickly if that happens.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
cwpete: He runs if Rudy is not the nominee.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
JB: I have always worried about that.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
I have always been surprised that McCain is not an Independent. If he has enough money, I bet he would consider a third party run.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
Maybe the two of them will duke it out for the Unity08 nomination.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
David B,
If Bloomie wants to run, he will regardless of who gets the Republican nomination. Being an independent allows him to do just that – Run against Rudy or whomever.
He knows that he could not get the nomination as a Republican, so he’ll run as an Independent.
What makes you think that he’d not run against Rudy in the general?
June 19th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
cwpete,
because they just spent the last thirty minutes talking about the precise situation in which he’ll run on the newschannels.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Tommy Oliver,
Take them all with a grain of salt. I think if Bloomie has presidential aspirations, he’ll run regardless.
I’ll have to check this out on the news to see what they are saying about that..
June 19th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
cwpete, Because I’ve been following the Bloomie gossip… no links for you at the moment sorry.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Bloomie runs if it’s a liberal vs. a traditional conservative, as a solution to the divisive red-blue urban-rural divide.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
David B,
OK, let us know if you have anything about some sort of a mutual understanding between the two. Right now, I think it is clear that he’ll be entering.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
Just curious, Does anyone think Bloomie will be attacked for flip / flopping on parties?
Really, first he was a lifelong Dem till 2001 when he changed party to Republican to become mayor of NYC, now he bails on the Republicans to become an Independent for a potential presidential run.
Somehow, I doubt that will become an issue.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Well, what do ya know? I was pretty agnostic on a Bloomberg run up until yesterday, but doesn’t this party switch virtually make a Bloomberg run all but certain?
This wouldn’t be my ideal scenario (for obvious reasons) but a Hillary vs. Rudy vs. Bloomberg race would be extraordinary once-in-a-lifetime situation.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
He is a turncoat. He used the Republicans to get elected mayor of NY and then when he doesn’t need the party he jumps ship. Let him go. Who needs him.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
Based on what little I know of Bloomberg (I was leaving NY as he was coming in), I’d think he would pull more from liberals than from conservatives. That’s ok by me.
Now (at the very least) we face a few months of rumors that Bloomie will run…and I can’t imagine those rumors pulling primary poll support from any GOP candidate but Rudy.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
LJ…as appealing as it is to witness a once-in-a-lifetime event, a triple subway series is something I could do without.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
IMO
Bloomberg is a savvy businessman, and he won’t throw $500m into a race he can’t win. For him to win he needs to collect NY’s electoral college votes. So he’ll only run if Hillary isn’t the nominee. (Bloomberg would possibly defeat Giuliani if against Obama, say).
This doesn’t help Rudy, cos it negates his advantage of “win Republican and NY, NJ, etc)”
June 19th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
murphy: It’s the reverse. Bloomie only runs if Rudy isn’t the nominee. It’s a primary threat to all the non-Rudy candidates.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
And if Hillary isn’t the nominee.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
[...] current Mayor of New York has announced today that he is changing his affiliation from Republican to “”unaffiliated with any [...]
June 19th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
DavidB,
I can see why Bloomie would opt out if Rudy was the nominee. There’s simply no room for 3 pro-abortion New Yorkers.
But Bloomie is no primary threat to anyone but Rudy. Romney, McCain, and Fred are not counting on Bloomie supporters for victory. If Bloomie starts getting his name in polls, it will pull from Rudy. And given that Rudy’s perceived electability is one of his greatest strengths, any perceived loss in polls is a very real hit.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:28 pm
…and by polls, I’m refering to general election polls, obviously not primary polls.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:28 pm
Perhaps CBS’ Bob Schieffer knew something about Bloomberg’s motivation when, two days ago, he closed out his Sunday morning show Face the Nation with this:
“I have never been much for third parties and independent candidates.
For all of its flaws, the old two-party system has brought us a long way in this country, and I’m slow to change. But as I watch the Senate fumble around with the immigration bill, it made me wonder: Has our two-party system lost the ability to get anything done?
We keep hearing that both parties are playing to their base.
Republicans don’t want to offend conservatives so they block real immigration reform.
Democrats fear the liberal left, so they don’t want reform.
Result: Nothing gets done on that or anything else.
Yet polls show a majority of Americans want reform, want a guest worker program for illegal immigrants in this country, favor a way to make their status legal. Who speaks for that segment of the electorate? Certainly, not Democratic and Republican leaders, who are so busy pacifying those so-called base voters.
I hope we do see a third-party candidate in the presidential race next year, not because I favor anyone who might run as an independent, but because a third choice would force both the Republicans and the Democrats to move more to the center to stop an independent from siphoning off moderate voters.
If both parties are forced to shift their hunt for votes to the center rather than the edges of their parties, who knows? They may find some common ground every once in a while and actually get something done.”
June 19th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
murphy: I think it’s possibly Bloomie may be helping Rudy with what turns into an open threat: If it’s Rudy vs. Hillary, he will not run. If it’s Thompson or Romney vs. Obama, he runs.
That helps Rudy.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
David B,
I agree that Bloomberg doesn’t run if Rudy is in the race, but I disagree about the significance of that. The GOP wants Bloomberg in the race because he hurts the Dems 100 times more than he hurts the GOP. Bloomberg could siphon off enough votes for Romney or Thompson to win PA along with just about any other purple state.
This isn’t bad news for Rudy, other than the fact it is great news for Fred and Mitt.
Since name id rules the polls right now, I doubt we will see these results in polling that will be done to include Bloomberg. However I could see PA going to Mitt or Fred in a 47%, 45%, 7% result. The same could be true in many other purple states where even 2 or 3% for Bloomberg could swing it to the GOP.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
Bloomberg is even more socially liberal, he is a tax-raiser and he is a dove on the war. That eliminates the entire GOP right there. He would run on a competence platform that on issues would line up almost 100% with the Dem nominee.
We want Bloomberg to run, and the fact that he probably won’t run against Rudy is a weakness for Rudy.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Here are two of the questions asked of New Yorkers in a newly released Quinnipiac poll:
The Bloomberg administration has suggested using congestion pricing to reduce traffic in New York City by charging a fee for vehicles that drive south of 86th Street in Manhattan. Do you support or oppose the Bloomberg administration’s congestion pricing plan?
Support 31%
Oppose 52%
The deep blue state of New York doesn’t even align itself with pro-gay marriage Mayor Bloomberg.
Do you think same-sex couples should be allowed legally to marry, should be allowed legally to form civil unions but not marry, or should not be allowed to obtain legal recognition of their relationships?
Marry 35%
Civil Unions 35%
No recognition 22%
Among independents, Bloomberg’s new “party”, the results of this question were as follows:
Marry 34%
Civil Unions 41%
No recognition 18%
June 19th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Rasmussen has shown Bloomberg pulls more from the R than the D. His change of party affiliation may alter that a bit.
Bear in mind swing voters who vote for an independent are not ideological and many of them don’t even know what is left vs. right. They simply seem him as a successful guy who is a self-made billionaire who succeeded Rudy as a Republican Mayor of NYC. The same kind of swing voter who’d tend GOP but voted for Perot– even though he was a protectionist– are the type to vote for Bloomie.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
I think the poll Aron referenced ads the the idea that we want Bloomberg to run.
Ironically, Bloomberg could become the savior of the GOP that FDT is supposed to be.
June 19th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/bloomberg_reaches_23_as_third_party_hopeful_in_nj
June 19th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
This one’s more recent: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/new_jersey_obama_32_bloomberg_32_thompson_20
June 19th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Ummmm…I can see a scenario where no one gets enough electoral votes to win the presidency. We can see the House of Rep’s pick the President and the Senate pick the Vice President.
June 19th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Yes, but only one vote per state. The result? Could be President Bloomberg. It’s explained here:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/electoral_chaos_how_michael_bloomberg_could_deadlock_both_the_electoral_college_and_the_house_of_representatives
June 19th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Alright guys, I am talking a break for the next week. I have a big test for medical school next week and the rest of my time will be spent cramming/studying.
I hope I don’t miss anything too big.
June 19th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
David B,
When’s the last time a R won in Jersey? What those polls are missing is that Bloomberg basically puts Democrat strongholds at risk. Bloomberg possibly takes electoral votes away from the states where he’s known, such as NJ, NY, MA, etc.. The guy doesn’t play in the heartland. People either don’t know who he is, or my guess is that they will see him as a more liberal Giuliani clone- minus the 9/11 credentials, guts, heart, and appeal. That splits the Dem electoral vote in the north, while a Thompson ticket would win even more decisively in Red States.
June 19th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
He’s definitely running…
June 19th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
Personally, it would be nice to make a Bloomberg run unnecessary because the two parties are working together and getting results, rather than doing nothing but talk and demonise the other.
The fact that Bloomberg has got any traction at all shows how bad things are in Washington at the moment.
June 19th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Bloomberg/Arnold?
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3296215&page=1
And the last time a Republican won NJ is in 1988. NJ was actually a GOP stronghold throughout the 70s and 80s. We tend to change our minds every 15-25 years and stick to it. But NJ was never really a Reagan state, in fact, although Reagan carried the state twice, the state’s politics were still more Tom Kean Sr. or Clifford Case northeastern republicanism. Marge Roukema is another perfect example, which is why George HW Bush resonated well here.
…
or Mike Bloomberg.
It’s worth noting.
June 19th, 2007 at 10:49 pm
Could Arnold be VP, given he can’t be President? I think the Constitution is unclear on that point. Still it would be bizarre, as he’d be unable to be Acting President. So if anything happened to Bloomberg, Pelosi would become Acting President – Repubs might be able to make something of that!
June 19th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
A Bloom/Schwartz ticket would have a good chance of carrying CA though, which would be a big boost on the way to 270, not to mention a big blow to Dems.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:49 am
JayPe,
Arnold, because he was born in Austria, cannot be Vice President and the 12th Amendment in the US Constitution makes that explicitly clear as it states “no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”
This excludes people under 35 years of age, those who have not inhabited the United States for at least fourteen years, and those who are not natural-born citizens.