McCain's Success Upsetting Bloomberg's Plans

[DeepModem Mom]

WP: BLOOMBERG'S DECISION
McCain's Success May Be Upsetting N.Y. Mayor's Plans
By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, February 3, 2008; Page A15

NEW YORK -- When the polls close on Tuesday, few will be analyzing the results more closely than Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, whose own thinly disguised presidential ambitions are likely to hinge on the outcome.

Since his reelection in 2005, Bloomberg, a billionaire businessman, has been flirting with a White House run, while publicly denying any such intentions. He has spent millions of dollars on nationwide polling. He left the Republican Party and became an independent. He has traveled widely across the United States and overseas. He has begun speaking out about national issues. Last month, he met with a ballot access expert in Texas.

One current and one former aide compared it to the typical research a businessman does before making a major decision -- collect data, study contingencies and keep options open. They both said Bloomberg has not made up his mind about a run.

But all the research, the positioning and the careful planning seem to have been upended last week by events on the campaign trail that few predicted a few months ago. Sen. John McCain, written off over the summer as an also-ran, won the Florida primary and became the clear Republican front-runner.

Veterans of past Bloomberg campaigns said McCain's unexpected ascendancy -- and the likelihood that the senator from Arizona could emerge from Tuesday's voting as the presumptive GOP nominee -- may have severely complicated Bloomberg's plans. McCain appeals to some moderate Democrats and, more important, to independents -- precisely the group Bloomberg would be targeting....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/02/AR2008020202076.html?hpid=topnews

[saltpoint]

1. That could be the case, but it's also a chance that

Michael Bloomberg considers himself more capable at being an executive than McCain, and I think he'd be right to think that.

McCain would have been imminently defeatable if the GOP had simply run someone of appeal and substance. He's slipped into the frontrunner's position mostly by default and not by cunning and wherewithal.

[DeepModem Mom]

3. Good point -- McCain is a "default" candidate. nt

[saltpoint]

5. Hi, DeepModem Mom. It's a really tough call with Bloomberg's plans

right now.

It could come down to sheer ego -- whether he wants the triumph of the White House as a feather in his cap, especially as his predecessor just bit the dust.

Or it might be a case of his having nothing else to do and more money than he can count.

[DeepModem Mom]

6. I know. It disturbs me that he thinks he can just buy the Presidency...

like anything else. On the other hand, Republicans I know -- especially business people -- aren't sold on any of the GOP candidates, and respect Bloomberg and would like to see him make an independent run. No doubt he's competent, as you say. I, however, wish he'd stay out of it -- and am not so much of a fan, given his allying himself with the GOP, even if temporarily.

I've posted several bits of Bloomberg news, though, cause lots of people I know are keenly interested in the possibility of his running -- and they know he has the moolah to do it if he wants to!

[MADem]

2. Good...I don't want McCain to win, but I don't want Bloomberg to run, either.

There are a lot of almost conflicting statements in this piece. It's interesting, though:

McCain appeals to some moderate Democrats and, more important, to independents -- precisely the group Bloomberg would be targeting. ....."I kind of sense that there are some in the Bloomberg for President camp who thought the balloon lost a little air . . . with Schwarzenegger's endorsement of McCain," said Jonathan Greenspun, who worked in Bloomberg's administration for 4 1/2 years and now is with a public affairs firm in New York. .....Fred Siegel, contributing editor of the City Journal and a professor at the Cooper Union college, offered much the same analysis. "McCain appeals to the independents that Bloomberg would have to appeal to," he said.

"Does he desperately want to run? Yes. But I'm skeptical," Siegel said. "He has to find an opening. What he lacks now is a rationale."

Douglas E. Schoen, a pollster and strategist who did polling for Bloomberg's two mayoral campaigns, disagreed. "I think it's too early to say," ....Schoen said it is too soon to determine whether McCain and the Democratic nominee would be able to unite their parties, or whether large blocs of voters would remain alienated. McCain, he said, is already attracting the ire of the Republican Party's right wing.

There is less of a consensus on how the outcome of the Democratic race will affect Bloomberg's decision. Some said he would be less likely to run if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton became the nominee, because they are both New Yorkers. With Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), the problem is that the senator has exactly the kind of post-partisan appeal that Bloomberg would make central to his campaign, and Obama, in the primaries so far, also has been backed by independent voters. Bloomberg will be watching to see whether the two parties begin to coalesce around their presumptive nominees or whether lingering rancor from the primary battles leaves an opening for him.

But many are skeptical. "If it's McCain as the Republican nominee, and a historic choice on the Democratic side, I'm not sure what would offer," said Rhodes Cook, a political analyst who publishes a newsletter on politics. "He would need a burning issue -- and nothing seems to be burning."

What was up with that 'breakfast meeting' with Obama, then? Was he WARNING Obama, or what??? Something isn't adding up, here.

And there's that creepy "post partisan" word I keep hearing from the GOP pundits....they keep throwing that out because no one is buying the "UNITY" bullshit. It's a Frank Luntz game--not estate tax, DEATH tax! Not UNITY campaign, "POST PARTISAN" instead!

Something stinks here.

[DeepModem Mom]

4. Thanks for your thoughts -- and your good questions. nt