“if it’s Hillary vs. Mitt will Bloomberg run? I know I’d consider voting for a 3rd party in that case. In fact, it would be a godsend.” - jg

Justin,
I have routinely been dismissive of your calls for a third party, because of the overwhelming historical evidence that they cannot succeed. They always act as a spoiler with 3rd party supporters having the effect of electing the greater of two evils (from the 3rd party supporter perspective - Perot supporters elected Clinton, Nader supporters elected Bush43). Even Teddy Roosevelt, a wildly popular nationally known populist ex-president, could succeed only in getting a plurality over the candidate of the Republican Party he abandoned, and threw the election to Democrat Woodrow Wilson. Bloomberg is no Teddy Roosevelt.

That said… I may be coming around to your way of thinking, because I think it very well maybe a Hillary - Romney election that will pull Bloomberg in.

If Bloomberg is sincere about offering a real alternative to politics as usual, he can dramatically increase his credibility and the probability of success by driving and funding it from the VP role, and putting a true national figure with more credible qualifications at the top of the ticket. Chuck Hagel comes to mind.

The last historical example of a new party securing the presidency is Abe Lincoln, which is a valid historical precedent (sort of). However, it is instructive to note that the Republican Party did not emerge as a third party. It emerged as a second party, as an alternative to the Democrats, and formed out of the ashes of the Whig party which self-immolated over the issue of slavery. It appears to me that the Republican Party has been dousing itself with gasoline this entire primary season, and all they need to do is nominate a Hucklebee or Romney to light the match. If the Republican party self-destructs, it very well might create room for successful new party.

So, to you all who are doing the “I wont vote for her” thing, as I hear some of her people say “I wont vote for him”, I say you are all not progressives nor friends of progressives, and you are prepared to let the Supreme Court go solidly conservative out of a snit. I dont believe that comports well with your duty as a citizen at this particular time. I find that abdication of responsibility to be part of the problem, not part of the solution.

And for the guy who will vote for McCain because HRC is to “vicious”, you really dont know McCain very well. At least Hillary doesnt erupt into profanity laden expletive bomb dropping explosions of anger in public when opposed (do your research into the way McCain has comported himself in the Senate at times.).

Its been so long since we have had a truly wide open nominating process, I dont think that most people doing political blogging or their commentators, can take it, to be honest.

But if, to you, its an acceptable exercise of your duties as a citizen to sit it out, or vote Repub, so be it. Just be fully aware of the consequences of your actions, because there will be consequences and you wont be able to blame those consequences on anyone named Clinton.

[1] Not another Clinton (that rules out Hillary, whose own character, as revealed in this campaign, hardly helps her case for the nomination),
[2] Not another Bush (luckily Jeb’s not in this race), and
[3] No one that reminds me too much of either Presidents Clinton or Bush the younger (that rules out Edwards on the Dem side and Huckabee on the GOP).

So, in spite of my lingering reservations about Obama, he’s my preferred Dem candidate, albeit only by default.

And while I would still get out and vote for someone it IS becoming “normal” in America to just stay home on Election Day if there are no candidates you like.