I've been trying to think of an organized way to start discussing the impending presidential election but the closer we get, the more opaque it seems. As I've already mentioned a couple of times, I can't imagine who would be the GOP favorite at the moment. Add to that the historically anomalous presence of three strong, well-financed Democrats and the whole thing looks like a toss-up. But I know one thing for sure, and it is that Michael Bloomberg is the 900-pound gorilla in 2008.
Back in 1992, H. Ross Perot took advantage of a very similar situation – a struggling GOP, a toss-up Democratic field, and a deeply unhappy electorate. And Mr. Perot was leading that race until he started the nonsense about quitting/re-entering the race. Even with that bit of flakiness the man got 19% of the popular vote. Given the ways in which the deck is stacked against everyone but the two major parties, I consider that to be one of the most amazing feats in our electoral history. He got 19% of the vote even though he had no organization, no ballot access, and no name recognition. Not to mention that he is absolutely pickin'-corn-out-of-his-crap crazy. But 1 of 5 voters liked him anyway. He sampled from a pool of populist Democratic voters (the rural kind who tend to be socially conservative) and disaffected Republicans. And he very nearly turned the election into a circus.
Michael Bloomberg has made noise about running. There is no doubt that he has considered it and is considering it, even though he now denies it. After he recently changed his voting registration from Republican to Independent, it's clear that he understands his where his potential appeal lies.
He has a lot going for him. He's well-known. He has approximately ten shitloads of money. He sincerely portrays the kind of fiscal conservative, social liberal appeal that made Giuliani attractive a few years ago. While he'd face the same organizational and ballot access obstacles that have slain so many independent candidates in the past, a man worth $5 billion can get around them pretty quickly. Ask Perot.
While this is far from a prediction, consider this hypothetical scenario. Keep in mind that the primaries are ridiculously front-loaded this year and the nominations will be decided for all intents and purposes by early February. Hillary Clinton uses her name recognition and resources to batter the rest of the Democratic field into submission.
buy wellbutrin online buy wellbutrin no prescription
The GOP cage match produces either the candidate who best motivates the hardcore base (say, Huckabee) or a Kerry-esque default victor who excites no one and dissatisfies many (Romney, Giuliani).
The only thing as impressive as Hillary Clinton's legions of worshippers are the legions of people who loathe her. So let's say there are some swing voters who are leaning towards the Democratic side in 2008 but detest the idea of voting for HRC. Let's also say that there are a ton of Republican voters who are tired of the war and, for some reason, don't think that abortion and gay marriage are the most important (if not only) issues on Earth.
Bloomberg calls a press conference on Feb. 15th and formally declares. He picks someone representative of the voters he's targeting as a running mate – Chuck Hagel?
buy azithromycin online buy azithromycin no prescription
A casual analysis would suggest that a moderate Republican like Bloomberg would cost the GOP more votes than the Democrats, and the odds of Bloomberg actually winning are small if history is any judge. What delicious irony it will be if we elect another Clinton with something on the order of 41% of the popular vote.
I think I just heard Rush's head explode.