Nightmare before Christmas: Bloomberg telling former consultants to keep their calendars open

posted at 1:47 pm on December 18, 2007 by Allahpundit

We might as well start talking about this. Looks like it’s happening.

Mayor Bloomberg’s aides have been reaching out to consultants from his past campaigns about whether they are free for a possible 2008 White House bid – including one who helped make his slick mayoral TV spots, The Post has learned…

The Post has learned that a New York political activist who worked on the mayor’s last campaign had been planning on joining up with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign team and reached out to discuss it first with Bloomberg’s aides.

Bloomberg’s advisers told the politico he should not sign up with another campaign and instead wait and see what happens with the mayor, the sources said.

That’s the second story in five days claiming that he’s thinking seriously of running. The Journal quoted some pals of his a few days ago to the same effect and tried to game out scenarios for what might happen. If it’s polarizer vs. polarizer, i.e. Hillary vs. Rudy, Bloomberg enters as the nonpartisan white knight. If it’s extreme vs. extreme, i.e. Edwards vs. Huck, Bloomberg enters as the center. If it’s unhateable centrist vs. unhateable centrist, i.e. Obama vs. McCain, he probably stays out. Assuming he intends to enter, who’s the optimal nominee for Republicans? If Huckabee wasn’t irritating so many people with his too-cute-by-half religious demagoguery, I’d say he is: He brings the social cons out in droves and neutralizes some of Bloomberg’s appeal to independents with his more centrist domestic policies, and his populism would play well opposite Bloomberg’s grotesque attempt to buy the election with a billion-dollar ad campaign. As it is, Fred’s probably the best bet on paper. He’s on firmer ground with Christian conservatives than Mitt and he’d pick up the same non-religious conservative votes that Romney would. The problem is that he’s much less well funded and we’ll need every penny we can get to counter Bloomy. Besides, evangelicals faced with two pro-choice candidates in the Democratic nominee and Bloomberg may think twice about punishing Mitt by staying home.

Exit question one: Hillary vs. Huck vs. Bloomy — who wins? Exit question two: Obama vs. Mitt vs. Bloomy — who wins? And exit question three: If, come next September, the GOP nominee is floundering with 25% of the vote and Bloomy and the Democrat are within striking distance of each other, would you consider voting Democratic? The big A’s answer: Yes, whatever Rush may think about the ordeals of having to look at aging women.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Where’s the game over video from Aliens? Seems appropriate.

lorien1973 on December 18, 2007 at 1:48 PM

Both Obama and Hillary have meet with bloomberg lately. Got a feeling they have backed him to do this.

With any luck he will ask Ron Paul to be his VP

William Amos on December 18, 2007 at 1:49 PM

Your exit questtions scare me.

infidel on December 18, 2007 at 1:50 PM

Would he be running because he thinks he can win, or for some other reason?

Number 2 on December 18, 2007 at 1:50 PM

I doubt he can swing a state towards Hillary by draining votes from the GOP nominee. He can run all he wants to. Paul/Bloomberg that is a problem.

Theworldisnotenough on December 18, 2007 at 1:51 PM

As a Southerner I just don’t get it so somebody enlighten me here. Outside of the NE where does Bloomberg have any clout (with average voters like me)?

Limerick on December 18, 2007 at 1:52 PM

Hillary v. Rudy Huck v. Bloomy v. Paul
Battle Royale

tommylotto on December 18, 2007 at 1:53 PM

Outside of the NE where does Bloomberg have any clout (with average voters like me)?

He doesn’t. He’s a strictly “none of the above” choice with a billion dollars to spend.

Allahpundit on December 18, 2007 at 1:53 PM

Limerick on December 18, 2007 at 1:52 PM

He doesn’t need to do more than make NY, PA, OH etc unwinnable for the GOP and his job is done.

lorien1973 on December 18, 2007 at 1:53 PM

Ron Paul as an independent ios a problem. He too much money. He can mount a campaign for the general and become the protest vote, and young and dumb and susceptible to peer pressure the youth vote could draw otherwise sane people to vote Paul and sink the GOP, just for spite to show their electoral clout. Should that happen and we get the Glacier the worst thing that could happoen is the GOP becomes the Democrats of the 60′s to present, pandering to the fringe.

Theworldisnotenough on December 18, 2007 at 1:54 PM

I think Bloomberg forgets that NY isn’t all of America (sorry, AP); if he runs, it will be more to the detriment of the left than the right, so on that note, I’d say he should go for it… He can be the next Ralph Nader.

Frozen Tex on December 18, 2007 at 1:56 PM

lord…

*He has too much money.

I’ll ignore my poor sentence structure.

Theworldisnotenough on December 18, 2007 at 1:56 PM

Theworldisnotenough on December 18, 2007 at 1:54 PM

What money? He doesn’t have near enough to do more than be an irritant in the primaries.

lorien1973 on December 18, 2007 at 1:56 PM

Again I get the sense that the dems are puching Bloomy to run as a spoiler. They have made him promises.

All the republicans have to do is make some promises to him to get him to stay seated. Rudy could waltz into NY and yank bloomy’s chains in a heartbeat.

William Amos on December 18, 2007 at 1:56 PM

Allah, lorien…thanks

And the country has the stomach for another spoiler candidate? Both parties, to me, are fed up with that. NY is a lost cause (Rudy or no), PA and OH, I’m not so sure.

Limerick on December 18, 2007 at 1:57 PM

Man this is a wide-open campaign season. Even Hillary on the final ballot is in question.

Spirit of 1776 on December 18, 2007 at 1:58 PM

Ron Paul as an independent ios a problem. He too much money.

You understand we’re talking about a billion-dollar campaign budget with Bloomberg, right? That’s billion with a B.

Allahpundit on December 18, 2007 at 1:58 PM

BTW – Bill Clinton was on the Charlie Rose Show last week.
Charlie Rose studios are at Bloomberg’s Headquarters in New York. Mike Huckabee has been interviewed at Bloomberg in New York recently as well.

RobCon on December 18, 2007 at 1:59 PM

Would he be running because he thinks he can win, or for some other reason?

Number 2 on December 18, 2007 at 1:50 PM

He can’t win. He’s looking for a new hobby, essentially.

amerpundit on December 18, 2007 at 2:00 PM

A major tri-section of the electorate. /s Wonderful./s-

Not voting Dem, wouldn’t vote for Bloomberg, won’t vote for Huck, not sitting out the general……………….
Shite! :(

captivated_dem on December 18, 2007 at 2:02 PM

1.H
2.O
3.no

since when could Barry ever qualify as an unhateable centrist?

I think this would hurt each party equally no matter who’s running. Unfortunitely the Dem is going to get elected regardless of this… that’s what happens when you have an incumbent who can’t communicate to save his soul, or the party’s. “G.W.” has been de-nutted. Bless him and Dick but they’re the last Republicans in charge for a long, long time. It’s just too dam bad we can’t run a conservative… A conservative could win easily.

Griz on December 18, 2007 at 2:02 PM

Clinton vs. Huckabee vs. McCain vs. Bloomy vs. Paul vs. Cynthia McKinney

I think the House of Reps would decide this election.

Jack M. on December 18, 2007 at 2:02 PM

Seriously, though, I understand Bloomberg’s got dough–even more than Mitt does.

What’s his appeal? the only things I’ve heard about him make him sound more likely to steal from the left than the right–he’d be perfect for what’s left of the Leiberman crowd of Dems–the “social libs, but let’s not surrender because we are Americans first” group. There’s still gotta be some of them around, right? And aren’t they all Hillary supporters be default? or Rudy?

Vanceone on December 18, 2007 at 2:03 PM

How is Bloomberg a Republican spoiler and not a Democrat spoiler?

Vizzini on December 18, 2007 at 2:03 PM

He’s waiting to see what happens with Giuliani. If Rudy goes down, expect Bloomberg to get in.

Big S on December 18, 2007 at 2:06 PM

How is Bloomberg a Republican spoiler and not a Democrat spoiler?

He’s essentially a protest vote. How is he so meaningfully different from the Democrats that he’s going to pick up any significant number of Democratic protest votes? Check the polls of Democratic voters and you’ll see that they like their candidates; not so the GOP. Also, Hillary and Obama each have a certain historic pull if they’re the nominee. If you’re torn between her and Bloomy, you can resolve it by saying, “Well, they both suck but it’d be nice to strike a symbolic blow for gender equality by voting for Hillary.”

Allahpundit on December 18, 2007 at 2:06 PM

My answer is that this is one of the worst pick of choices evah! How about I close my eyes and pick any Republican?

The greatest, most powerful nation on Earth and the people that wish to run it are saying just whatever they think will get them elected. There is no real leader in the entire bunch.

Hening on December 18, 2007 at 2:07 PM

Exit question one: Hillary vs. Huck vs. Bloomy — who wins?

HildaBeast.

Exit question two: Obama vs. Mitt vs. Bloomy — who wins?

Probably Obama.

And exit question three: If, come next September, the GOP nominee is floundering with 25% of the vote and Bloomy and the Democrat are within striking distance of each other, would you consider voting Democratic?

Depends on who the nominees are.

MB4 on December 18, 2007 at 2:07 PM

Allahpundit on December 18, 2007 at 1:58 PM

Your point?

Paul as an independent is a problem whether he is spending the rest of his campain funds or he is spending Blommberg’s money.

Theworldisnotenough on December 18, 2007 at 2:09 PM

Also, Hillary and Obama each have a certain historic pull if they’re the nominee.

First Jewish President?

Big S on December 18, 2007 at 2:09 PM

Hmmm. Rudy or Mike B.? I’m just going to have to flip a coin.

Valiant on December 18, 2007 at 2:10 PM

You understand we’re talking about a billion-dollar campaign budget with Bloomberg, right? That’s billion with a B.

Allahpundit on December 18, 2007 at 1:58 PM

There is also the “law” of diminishing returns. Even with money. Even with money beginning with a B.

MB4 on December 18, 2007 at 2:11 PM

Hmmm. Rudy or Mike B.? I’m just going to have to flip a coin.

Valiant on December 18, 2007 at 2:10 PM

Assuming you’re not a hawkish liberal Democrat, that statement betrays your ignorance of both mayors’ histories and policies.

Big S on December 18, 2007 at 2:11 PM

The real question:

Would a Bloomberg entry into the race sap votes from the Democrats, the Republicans, or the Ronulans?

Nethicus on December 18, 2007 at 2:13 PM

Im moving to France. At least they have a conservative president.

amish on December 18, 2007 at 2:14 PM

Bloomberg is an unknown commodity out here in the West.

bnelson44 on December 18, 2007 at 2:14 PM

“Hillary vs. Huck vs. Bloomy — who wins? Exit question two: Obama vs. Mitt vs. Bloomy”

Hillary and Bloomy win.

amend2 on December 18, 2007 at 2:16 PM

You understand we’re talking about a billion-dollar campaign budget with Bloomberg, right? That’s billion with a B.

Allahpundit on December 18, 2007 at 1:58 PM

Money doesn’t have as much say in a primary as momentum. Huck is a good example.

bnelson44 on December 18, 2007 at 2:17 PM

Exit Question 1 – Huck
Exit Question 2 – Obama
Exit Question 3 – I know Allah has a real dislike for our current mayor, but I would vote for him before Huck and any of the Democrats.
Bloomberg is a nightmare scenario for the Clinton Campaign. He will get dirty and he has the money to throw around plenty of mud.

sweeper on December 18, 2007 at 2:17 PM

Bloomberg is unknown to 99% of America and disliked by at least half of the other 1%.

He’s pro choice, pro stem cell research, pro gay marriage, anti death penalty, pro gun control, a believer in global warming, pro amnesty for illegals, favors government restrictions on smoking and trans fats, and he raised property taxes.

So exactly how many Republican votes is he going to poach??

Yojimbo on December 18, 2007 at 2:20 PM

They have a big tent, the problem is…what Hollywood actor is uncommitted?

right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 2:23 PM

So exactly how many Republican votes is he going to poach??

Yojimbo on December 18, 2007 at 2:20 PM

He’s also a divorced, Jewish billionaire from New York City-pretty much as culturally different from the GOP base as you can get. He’ll also scare away fiscal conservatives with his support for CCT programs.

Big S on December 18, 2007 at 2:23 PM

Im moving to France. At least they have a conservative president.

amish on December 18, 2007 at 2:14 PM

Probably not for long. He’s racing to the altar with big socialist.

RushBaby on December 18, 2007 at 2:24 PM

Money doesn’t have as much say in a primary as momentum. Huck is a good example.

bnelson44 on December 18, 2007 at 2:17 PM

But then there is Mitt, the biggest spender in the history of politics, before primaries. It is working for him.

right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 2:24 PM

That lefty fantasy about Bushitler cancelling the election and assuming permanent power is beginning to look good…

trigon on December 18, 2007 at 2:25 PM

Fred’s probably the best bet on paper. He’s on firmer ground with Christian conservatives than Mitt and he’d pick up the same non-religious conservative votes that Romney would. The problem is that he’s much less well funded and we’ll need every penny we can get to counter Bloomy.

There’s the answer. Fund the Fred! I’ve already maxed out :(

RushBaby on December 18, 2007 at 2:35 PM

Bloomberg is unknown to 99% of America and disliked by at least half of the other 1%.
Yojimbo on December 18, 2007 at 2:20 PM

What percentage of Americans knew Mike Huckabee before his current run?

sweeper on December 18, 2007 at 2:37 PM

Big S on December 18, 2007 at 2:23 PM

Both RINOs will have the exact same nanny state policies. Bloomberg, unlike Rudy, at least had the decency to leave the GOP

Valiant on December 18, 2007 at 2:40 PM

Hillary vs. Huck vs. Bloomy — who wins?

Hillary.

Obama vs. Mitt vs. Bloomy — who wins?

Mitt.

If, come next September, the GOP nominee is floundering with 25% of the vote and Bloomy and the Democrat are within striking distance of each other, would you consider voting Democratic?

I’m done voting “against” someone. I’d vote third (fourth?) party or leave it blank. Wow… those were three thoroughly depressing exit questions. Are you in a particularly sadistic mood today?

Mark Jaquith on December 18, 2007 at 2:46 PM

But then there is Mitt, the biggest spender in the history of politics, before primaries. It is working for him.

right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 2:24 PM

Money buys you soft support because it allows for name recognition. That is often not enough.

bnelson44 on December 18, 2007 at 2:47 PM

As someone who has lived through the last 6 years of the Mayor Mike administration, I just want to tell all those who dont live in NYC

that Mayor Mike is an arrogant, rich, leftist, nanny-state idiot.

And I’m trying to be nice.

Always Right on December 18, 2007 at 2:51 PM

With no clear leaders, and the media’s trying to measure every stray political zephyr, the race is already migrane inducing. I can easily see this going to four candidates [D, R, Bloomy, Paul] and even 5, if McKinney can get enough media money from Greens and her tradional base of Middle Eastern physicians.

Can’t watch – Can’t turn away! *head explodes*

eeyore on December 18, 2007 at 2:56 PM

Always Right on December 18, 2007 at 2:51 PM

With one exception: He has said positive things on the war against radical Islam.

sweeper on December 18, 2007 at 3:01 PM

Question: As an Independent, doesn’t the candidate have to solicit signatures on petitions, basically in every state, to have their names show up on each state ballot? It seems to me that even for such staple parties as the Conservative, Libertarian, Constitution and Green need to do this in most, if not all, states.

Paul’s supporters may have the heart but I doubt they have the experience or a sufficient following to achieve getting his name on the ballot in more than a few states. Bloomberg may and Nader, owing to his name, experience, and following, too, but all that costs big bucks and whoever does must have a strong organization.

As such, barring a miraculous effort to be on more than half the state ballots, these folks will be only be tippers and not winners.

BTW, I think Ross Perot was the only one in recent times achieve 50 state access, but even with his status, he had only made it on 24 by mid-July and it took until September to make it to 50.

Dusty on December 18, 2007 at 3:09 PM

I’d vote for Rudy or Huck before I’d vote for Bloomberg, but I’d probably vote for Ron Paul before any of the other three. At least RP supports freedom and liberty in the USA even if his foreign policy is befuddled. What’s the point in fighting overseas if we destroy ourselves here at home, anyway?

I just hope our choices won’t be as poor as that.

Go Fred and/or Mitt!!!

FloatingRock on December 18, 2007 at 3:11 PM

If Bloomberg gets in the race it will push gun control to the front of the issues. Especially with the D.C. case being decided during the election.

Bloomberg, City Stall on Releasing Evidence Regarding Illegal Guns

http://www.nysun.com/article/38669

Bloomberg Misdirects His Anti-Gun Anger

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17384

Bloomberg Went Too Far in Gun Sting, Dealers Say

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/nyregion/09guns.html

Bringing gun control to the front should hurt the Dems, and Rudy, and Mitt.

mad saint jack on December 18, 2007 at 3:16 PM

And exit question three: If, come next September, the GOP nominee is floundering with 25% of the vote and Bloomy and the Democrat are within striking distance of each other, would you consider voting Democratic?

AP, you know I love ya, but if you really believe this is possible, then I really believe you might be smoking something. I know Bloomberg has more of a presence in your life than in most of ours–but that’s exactly my point. The man has no more chance of coming within striking distance of a Democratic nominee than of coming within striking distance of an IED in Iraq. Name recognition aside, and he doesn’t have a ton of it, he’s got all the nanny-statism of Huckabee without any of the evangelical appeal. Assume the GOP nominee as Huckabee, Giuliani, Mitt OR McCain OR Thompson, this simply won’t happen.

Anwyn on December 18, 2007 at 3:23 PM

Ummmmmm. Hit the strike button instead of the quote button and didn’t preview. Sorry.

Anwyn on December 18, 2007 at 3:23 PM

If Bloomy jumps in the race I hope both Dems and Reps go “Clinton” on him with a swiftness.

liquidflorian on December 18, 2007 at 3:35 PM

He could pull people from the left that would vote Republican because of Natl Security. Take that percent away along with discontented fiscal conservative socio-liberals (the center) that aren’t happy with either choice (but would vote republican for fiscal reasons) and you have probably just enough to turn the election.
With 42% (and growing) negatives, Hillary cannot win a head-to-head national election, period, and they know this. Hillary needs a 3rd party to siphon just enough votes from the center to get that magic plurality and useful idiots like Bloomie and Ron Paul are just the people to do it. Even if it’s only two or three percent.

It’s all about getting 100,000 people in Ohio not to vote for a Republican.

madmonaco on December 18, 2007 at 3:41 PM

Exit question one: Hillary vs. Huck vs. Bloomy — who wins? Exit question two: Obama vs. Mitt vs. Bloomy — who wins

1. Hillary
2. Mitt

AP, you know I love ya, but if you really believe this is possible, then I really believe you might be smoking something.

Smoking, in Bloombergistan?!

aengus on December 18, 2007 at 5:31 PM

Living in the Midwest, I can say that I hear and read very little positive about Bloomberg in local media. He would pull some support from liberal population hubs but I don’t see the farming/rural masses even thinking about him. His 2A debacles alone kill him with nearly all rural Midwest, Western non-coast and Southern areas. It would also beat him up in NH and Vermont and certain rural areas of northern states. Rural PA and OH tend to be pretty big on 2A rights as well. I know plenty of dems who hunt and shoot and his overt anti-2A positions would make them cringe. The dems and RINOs at least pretend that they have read the constitution. Add in his pro-illegals stances and I don’t see rural areas most anywhere going for him. I think it more likely he pulls from a Hillary what with her 50% disapproval rating.

He’s pro choice, pro stem cell research, pro gay marriage, anti death penalty, pro gun control, a believer in global warming, pro amnesty for illegals, favors government restrictions on smoking and trans fats, and he raised property taxes.

So exactly how many Republican votes is he going to poach??

Yojimbo on December 18, 2007 at 2:20 PM

I’m pretty much with Yojimbo here. I think he is a dem spoiler much more than a Republican spoiler. There is a HUGE difference in most midwest states between city and rural voters. We regularly see massive splits between the areas. Unlike the Northeast and West Coast, in most of the Midwest and South we have a near 50/50 split between rural/urban-suburban voters with liberal/moderate urban-suburban areas having a 5-10% population advantage. Even a lot of California is pretty different in rural areas and Orange County vs the rest of the state according to family who live there. You get Bloomberg in the race to split up the dem vote in those big cities and some of those traditionally blue states may go red.

deepdiver on December 18, 2007 at 8:57 PM

Allah says:

If it’s unhateable centrist vs. unhateable centrist, i.e. Obama vs. McCain . . .

I beg to differ. McCain is eminently hateable.

Patterico on December 19, 2007 at 1:07 AM