2008: Paul vs. Kucinich

[Dr. MB]

What would this look like?

[NewYorkExpress]

Turnout would be less than 5%...but given what the economy looked like in 2008, Kucinich would win.

I want know who they'd pick for running mates, though.

[Lord Admirale]

Michael Bloomberg launches (and wins) an independent bid for President with 288 EVs

[NewYorkExpress]

Michael Bloomberg launches (and wins) an independent bid for President with 288 EVs

I think if Bloomberg is running as an Independent he's also winning New Mexico, Michigan, Washington, Oregon and Illinois.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Michael Bloomberg launches (and wins) an independent bid for President with 288 EVs

I think if Bloomberg is running as an Independent he's also winning New Mexico, Michigan, Washington, Oregon and Illinois.

Also maybe Montana or one of the Plains states, as they've always been very favorable to third parties.

[The Govanah Jake]

One on one, I'd think Kucinich could have the upper hand. Paul would win western states like Nevada with the possibility of Colorado and Oregon. However he'd have trouble in the midwestern and southern swing states. He could do well in Upper New England though. Now if Bloomberg ran I'd say he gets 10-15% of the vote and win no states. But he probably takes more Democratic support and allow a Paul victory.

[Thunderbird is the word]

Bloomberg would be slightly in the lead throughout the summer but his support would unravel after the financial collapse and Kucinich would win narrowly.

[NewYorkExpress]

Bloomberg would be slightly in the lead throughout the summer but his support would unravel after the financial collapse and Kucinich would win narrowly.

I disagree with that. Since Paul represents the party in power, it's more likely Paul's support collapses because of the financial collapse.

[bagelman]

snip

Michael Bloomberg launches (and wins) an independent bid for President with 288 EVs

I think if Bloomberg is running as an Independent he's also winning New Mexico, Michigan, Washington, Oregon and Illinois.

Also maybe Montana or one of the Plains states, as they've always been very favorable to third parties.

Also maybe no states at all because screw that groaning rich boy bankster.

Maybe a third party muh moderate hero runs but - at best - s/he ends up like Perot '96, winning votes  but no states. A better third party candidate would be some moderate with the ability to market himself as a populist. Such a candidate could win southern support.

This map isn't perfect, but it's easily better than a Bloomberg win. Best case scenario for Bloomberg is what Thunderbird posted. Yes, Paul would be hurt to, but Bloomberg is obviously easy to tie to Wall St. Note this map doesn't have Bloomberg, it has a southern populist sounding moderate (an indie in the mold of Bill Clinton) instead.

[TheLeftwardTide]

Bloomberg would be slightly in the lead throughout the summer but his support would unravel after the financial collapse and Kucinich would win narrowly.

I disagree with that. Since Paul represents the party in power, it's more likely Paul's support collapses because of the financial collapse.

Bloomberg was a Republican until 2007, and even then he only switched his party affiliation to Independent. He was also very closely tied to Wall Street. Honestly, I think that Bloomberg's polling numbers would drop much harder than Paul's, and Kucinich would win by a very wide margin due to Republicans splitting the vote.

I think the map would look something like this:

[Lord Admirale]

snip

Michael Bloomberg launches (and wins) an independent bid for President with 288 EVs

I think if Bloomberg is running as an Independent he's also winning New Mexico, Michigan, Washington, Oregon and Illinois.

Also maybe Montana or one of the Plains states, as they've always been very favorable to third parties.

Also maybe no states at all because screw that groaning rich boy bankster.

This sounds more like a personal dislike for Bloomberg than an actual argument.