Michael Bloomberg Tells FT He’s Considering Run for President

[jaichind]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b6d1fc34-ce9f-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377.html#axzz3zc74mh2O

[°Leprechaun]

He would never win.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Lol

[jaichind]

Perhaps he thinks the chances of a Sander's win is pretty high so it is best to start hedging his bets. 

[Angel of Death]

Transparent blackmail is transparent.

[Simfan34]

He probably has my vote.

[Lincoln Republican]

He could finance his campaign with unlimited personal funds.

[Asian Nazi]

The only good things about a Bloomberg run would be discrediting the "lol us moderate heroes are oppressed but if we had a real third party we would win" camp as well as increasing the chance that someone assassinates him.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

We get it, Bloomberg is sad that Bernie and Trump aren't pawns of Wall Street.

[jaichind]

He could finance his campaign with unlimited personal funds.

He did say earlier that he will throw a billion into the race if necessary.  

[Senator-elect Spark]

If Trump loses the nomination he probably will run as well. Don't trust his word at all.

[This account no longer in use.]

The only good things about a Bloomberg run would be discrediting the "lol us moderate heroes are oppressed but if we had a real third party we would win" camp as well as increasing the chance that someone assassinates him.

[Lincoln Republican]

He could finance his campaign with unlimited personal funds.

He did say earlier that he will throw a billion into the race if necessary.  

And to Bloomberg that would be pocket change.

[Simfan34]

Jesus. Some of you deserve to be locked away.

[Ebsy]

The last time an independent candidate ran in an election featuring a Clinton and a Bush, things didn't go quite as well as he thought they would. Does anyone doubt that Bloomberg would be any different?

[Simfan34]

The last time an independent candidate ran in an election featuring a Clinton and a Bush, things didn't go quite as well as he thought they would. Does anyone doubt that Bloomberg would be any different?

I doubt Bloomberg has anywhere near as broad a potential base of support as Perot did.

[Famous Mortimer]

The last time an independent candidate ran in an election featuring a Clinton and a Bush, things didn't go quite as well as he thought they would. Does anyone doubt that Bloomberg would be any different?

I doubt Bloomberg has anywhere near as broad a potential base of support as Perot did.

Perot target voters were lower middle class and poor people, who constitute a majority of the population. Bloomberg's target voters are literally the top 1%.

[The Free North]

I would vote for Bloomberg over any of the other candidates in the race. The American people need a common sense business leader like Mike!

[Ljube]

The last time an independent candidate ran in an election featuring a Clinton and a Bush, things didn't go quite as well as he thought they would. Does anyone doubt that Bloomberg would be any different?

I doubt Bloomberg has anywhere near as broad a potential base of support as Perot did.

Perot target voters were lower middle class and poor people, who constitute a majority of the population. Bloomberg's target voters are literally the top 1%.

Bloomberg would be strong in New York. All he needs is to win one state (preferably New York) and throw the election into the House of Representatives, where he could win.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I would vote for any of the other candidates in the race over Bloomberg.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The last time an independent candidate ran in an election featuring a Clinton and a Bush, things didn't go quite as well as he thought they would. Does anyone doubt that Bloomberg would be any different?

I doubt Bloomberg has anywhere near as broad a potential base of support as Perot did.

Two things:

1.  Perot left the race during the time of the Democratic National Convention, at which time, Bill Clinton zoomed to a big lead.  Prior to that, Perot, Bush and Clinton were all polling around 30% nationally.  Perot left because he believed George Bush would use government resources to sabotage his daughter's wedding.  Or so he said.  When he reentered the race later in the year, he didn't have the credibility he had earlier.

2.  The final numbers in the popular vote was 43-38-19 Clinton-Bush-Perot.  The trend in the polls toward the end was Perot rising, Clinton dropping, and Bush staying the same.  Had the election been in December, 1992, it was possible that all three candidates would have gotten over 30% of the vote in an historic logjam.  How that would have shaken out in the Electoral College I couldn't begin to speculate.

I, for one, would vote for Bloomberg if he ran.  I consider him to be the most capable candidate of all of the folks running.  And I'd vote for him regardless, because I believe that the parties have really slighted us in terms of who they're offering.  I think Bloomberg would do at least as well as Perot.  He'll be more committed to winning.   And I think that if Bloomberg ran as a Democrat he'd cream the Republican candidate, whomever he/she is.