Comments on: More Buzzing About Bloomberg http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/ Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:07:11 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Brian Shapiro http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/comment-page-1/#comment-330251 Brian Shapiro Wed, 16 May 2007 23:17:12 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/#comment-330251 grognard, I'm critical of anyone who wants to run as an Independent instead of starting a third party. Perot made this mistake the first time he ran, he realized it was a mistake, which is why he tried to start the Reform Party later, because his issues died when his campaign died, but it was too late. In the case that Bloomberg does start a third party, I think he really needs to caucus with existing third parties, without pandering to them, because the platform can't be a willy nilly unmotivated thing, but something that can form a strong foundation and unite people. grognard,

I’m critical of anyone who wants to run as an Independent instead of starting a third party. Perot made this mistake the first time he ran, he realized it was a mistake, which is why he tried to start the Reform Party later, because his issues died when his campaign died, but it was too late. In the case that Bloomberg does start a third party, I think he really needs to caucus with existing third parties, without pandering to them, because the platform can’t be a willy nilly unmotivated thing, but something that can form a strong foundation and unite people.

]]> By: confused http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/comment-page-1/#comment-330070 confused Wed, 16 May 2007 17:55:25 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/#comment-330070 "he’s not beholden to any special interest but his own and the ideas around him that make the most sense" . in regards to this statement, this may be true; nevertheless, Congress is beholden to other interesta and it takes Congress to pass bills. To be effective, a third party needs seats in Congress as well as the Presidency. “he’s not beholden to any special interest but his own and the ideas around him that make the most sense” . in regards to this statement, this may be true; nevertheless, Congress is beholden to other interesta and it takes Congress to pass bills. To be effective, a third party needs seats in Congress as well as the Presidency.

]]> By: grognard http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/comment-page-1/#comment-329896 grognard Wed, 16 May 2007 14:32:11 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/#comment-329896 My question is would his candidacy be for president only or would he have the inclination to start an entire third party? Looks like unity 08 might have a candidate. This could be a very interesting election indeed. My question is would his candidacy be for president only or would he have the inclination to start an entire third party? Looks like unity 08 might have a candidate. This could be a very interesting election indeed.

]]> By: Brian Shapiro http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/comment-page-1/#comment-329541 Brian Shapiro Wed, 16 May 2007 07:40:20 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2007/05/15/more-buzzing-about-bloomberg/#comment-329541 There is a negative for Bloomberg, in that like a lot of Democrats and Republicans that consider themselves mavericks and independents, he's pretty much a mainstream product of politics, and it will be hard to argue that he's much different from the candidates from the two parties except his party ticket, or lack thereof. Bloomberg has been mayor of New York and while you could say he's accomplished somethings, nothing revolutionary. Say what you will about the personality quirks of Ross Perot, but he understood a lot of the fundamental issues and problems in national politics, and would have been ready to do whatever it took to push through a strong agenda of government reform that people desired. Perot was a populist, and he would have probably no doubt had constant communication and broadcasts to the public to explain legislative fights. What happened in 1996 is that whenever people actually heard Perot speak, his poll numbers went up, because he sounded a lot less like his paranoid image and more like someone speaking common sense. Wasn't that the other side of Perot, that was hard for people to reconcile, that as much as some comments seemed crazy, he also seemed like a very pragmatic, common sense guy? In any rate, this is just to point out saying Bloomberg is a "sane Perot" has its own issues, because apparently a sane Perot also means a politically neutered Perot. What makes Bloomberg different from the other candidates? His source of money is one thing. And hopefully he will use that to rise to the occasion. His run as an Independent could also pave the way for future Independents, which can be important. But I'm just waiting for all of this to develop. One hope, though not likely, that if Newt Gingrich is the Republican nominee, he believes in open Presidential debates that include third party candidates (http://www.opendebates.org/), which could help Bloomberg, but Newt is ready to take a strong Reformist stance if he does run, and can draw people from the reform-minded 'radical middle' that Perot appealed to. The election can be a lot more interesting than it currently is, thats for sure. There is a negative for Bloomberg, in that like a lot of Democrats and Republicans that consider themselves mavericks and independents, he’s pretty much a mainstream product of politics, and it will be hard to argue that he’s much different from the candidates from the two parties except his party ticket, or lack thereof. Bloomberg has been mayor of New York and while you could say he’s accomplished somethings, nothing revolutionary. Say what you will about the personality quirks of Ross Perot, but he understood a lot of the fundamental issues and problems in national politics, and would have been ready to do whatever it took to push through a strong agenda of government reform that people desired. Perot was a populist, and he would have probably no doubt had constant communication and broadcasts to the public to explain legislative fights. What happened in 1996 is that whenever people actually heard Perot speak, his poll numbers went up, because he sounded a lot less like his paranoid image and more like someone speaking common sense. Wasn’t that the other side of Perot, that was hard for people to reconcile, that as much as some comments seemed crazy, he also seemed like a very pragmatic, common sense guy? In any rate, this is just to point out saying Bloomberg is a “sane Perot” has its own issues, because apparently a sane Perot also means a politically neutered Perot. What makes Bloomberg different from the other candidates? His source of money is one thing. And hopefully he will use that to rise to the occasion. His run as an Independent could also pave the way for future Independents, which can be important. But I’m just waiting for all of this to develop. One hope, though not likely, that if Newt Gingrich is the Republican nominee, he believes in open Presidential debates that include third party candidates (http://www.opendebates.org/), which could help Bloomberg, but Newt is ready to take a strong Reformist stance if he does run, and can draw people from the reform-minded ‘radical middle’ that Perot appealed to. The election can be a lot more interesting than it currently is, thats for sure.

]]>