He was despised in NY and had to spend big money to win the mayoral elections by a whisker. How would that translate into the rest of the country where he is barely known or known at best as another rich bloke who equates wealth with power over the masses.....wait, that sounds like The Donald !!
The consultants' maps are hilarious. Bloomberg had no chance under any scenario.
Well, too bad. Too much math too many polls, too much analysis and too little heart.
Aren't we forgetting all the "unpredictable" things in life? This campaign has been very fluid and anything can happen. It is too bad and, in my view an error. He will not get another chance.
Aren't we forgetting all the "unpredictable" things in life? This campaign has been very fluid and anything can happen. It is too bad and, in my view an error. He will not get another chance.
Finally, a gifted, intelligent and worthy American political leader who's willing to put his country before himself. Thank you, Mr. Bloomberg.
2
Mr Bloomberg knows better than most the two essential components of risk analysis: 1. What is the statistical probability of being right? 2. What are the consequences of being wrong? If 2 = Trump, then 2 >1, unless 1 = 100%. It was a nice idea though.
Well, good for Bloomberg (though I think he'd have made a fine President). At best, he'd have won just enough states to keep Hillary from getting 270 electoral votes, so that the House would pick the President. I wonder whether the House would have picked Hillary, or Bloomberg?
Whether Democrats like Hillary or not, they need to ride one horse, and Hillary is that horse. Time for Sanders to follow Bloomberg's lead here.
Whether Democrats like Hillary or not, they need to ride one horse, and Hillary is that horse. Time for Sanders to follow Bloomberg's lead here.
1
Hindsight being 20/20, Bloomberg probably should have thrown his hat in the ring long ago. He'd probably have shoved aside both Hillary and Bernie by now.
But it's too late. He did the right thing to stay out. He'd only have weakened Hillary, possibly fatally.
But it's too late. He did the right thing to stay out. He'd only have weakened Hillary, possibly fatally.
Bloomberg for V.P. on the democratic ticket?
1
Michael Bloomberg is no stranger to strategic decisions under uncertainty. He knows from previous elections that media polling is a poor predictor of presidential-election results. To best simulate his win/loss options in a three-way race, Mr. Bloomberg’s team conducted its own polls, validated the data, supplemented it with statistically-significant non-poll psychographics before feeding the whole into the Electoral-College equation, applying simulation processes such as Monte Carlo.
Besides the maths, the likelihood of nefarious surprise events, even if slim, also works against Mr. Bloomberg’s candidacy.
However, applying the same maths gives a Clinton-Bloomberg ticket the upper hand. Since Bloomberg loves “our country too much to play a role in electing a candidate who would weaken our unity and darken our future”, every effort must now be made to bring about a Clinton-Bloomberg alliance.
Besides the maths, the likelihood of nefarious surprise events, even if slim, also works against Mr. Bloomberg’s candidacy.
However, applying the same maths gives a Clinton-Bloomberg ticket the upper hand. Since Bloomberg loves “our country too much to play a role in electing a candidate who would weaken our unity and darken our future”, every effort must now be made to bring about a Clinton-Bloomberg alliance.
Let's see:
Old -- check.
VERY old -- check (74...come on! it's a job that has aged Obama and before him, Clinton, and they were in their FORTIES).
Extremely filthy rich -- check.
No clue how average Americans live or think -- check.
Whiter than white -- check.
Yeah, just what we needed to break the logjam -- ANOTHER old, white, rich, clueless geezer.
Old -- check.
VERY old -- check (74...come on! it's a job that has aged Obama and before him, Clinton, and they were in their FORTIES).
Extremely filthy rich -- check.
No clue how average Americans live or think -- check.
Whiter than white -- check.
Yeah, just what we needed to break the logjam -- ANOTHER old, white, rich, clueless geezer.
1
Michael Bloomberg would be a superb VP - somewhat like a COO to Hillary's CEO. Hopefully she will consider him
Bloomberg stands for nothing but Bloomberg news and he should really just go away. He's the Crassus of our time. Attempting to use his wealth to subjugate all that are not like him. Went from Republican to Independent to Democrat to Anglophile. He couldn't even remove the snow from the streets of New York unless of course it fell in front of his townhouse. He did not run because he's scared he would get annihilated in a head to head battle against Trump and Clinton. It would kill his legacy and maybe even hurt his business if he were made to look like a fool in a real political contest. Please New York Times - move on ...
5
Weve already got two old white rich liberal New Yorkers in the race, no need to add another.
1
And one former New Yorker who isn't so rich.
Very disappointing. Run, Mike, Run!!!!!!!
As a lifelong leftist, I deeply thank Mr. Bloomberg. It's too bad for all of us (and the world) that Ralph Nader didn't have such good sense and decency in 2000.
1
It's not Nader's fault that the Democrats didn't pick a better candidate. Gore, if he were any good, should have been no where near Bush in terms of votes.
1
It's good to see someone place the good of the country ahead of his ego, although it's ironic that that very quality might well have made him a good president.
1
Has anyone in the 900 plus comments on this article already mentioned Ralph Nader and the viewpoint of his participation impacting the 2000 presidential election outcome and decisions thereafter? Bloomberg, whether for personal or the nation's well being or both, has made what seems to be a well considered investigation and decision.
2
Yes, numerous times. Still no excuse for Gore being anywhere close to Bush in terms of votes. And why does anyone realistically expect someone to know how when to drop out in the middle of voting? GET OVER IT- Gore was a lousy candidate if he was so close to Dubya.
1
Third parties don't win in this country; if Theodore Roosevelt couldn't pull it off, I doubt that anyone can. They usually end up being a spoiler. That said, I wish that Bloomberg had entered as a Republican, at the beginning. He would have made an excellent candidate and President. I had some issues with him as mayor, but they're not issues that Presidents deal with--mostly involving allowing developers too much access to the city and his overbearing approach to the public schools. This campaign is diminished by his decision not to run.
Former Mayor Bloomberg is worried about a divisive, demagogic, GOP campaign that preyed on the electorate's fears and prejudices? Really?
Where has been since the days of Barry Goldwater, on another planet?
Where has been since the days of Barry Goldwater, on another planet?
1
For all those who believe Bloomberg did this as self sacrifice for the good of the country.
A few years ago I met Joyce Purnick, a former Times reporter and editor, who wrote a biography of Bloomberg while he was mayor. I asked if he realized the apparent hypocrisy of promoting gun control while giving money to Republican candidates who opposed it. She replied that he did but that one thing I should understand is that first and foremost in any Bloomberg decision was what was best for Bloomberg.
If he had thought he had any chance of being elected, he would have run.
A few years ago I met Joyce Purnick, a former Times reporter and editor, who wrote a biography of Bloomberg while he was mayor. I asked if he realized the apparent hypocrisy of promoting gun control while giving money to Republican candidates who opposed it. She replied that he did but that one thing I should understand is that first and foremost in any Bloomberg decision was what was best for Bloomberg.
If he had thought he had any chance of being elected, he would have run.
9
To Steve,
Amen!
Amen!
2
Michael Bloomberg's announcement signaled a couple of things. To the Democrats it meant that it was clear sailing for Hillary. Once he saw that Sanders no longer a threat and Hillary's chances of winning the nomination are now over 90%, Bloomberg feels confident that she will probably be our next president, yes, even if Republicans continue to push the FBI to indict.
Bloomberg didn't let it go at that. He saved his ammunition for the Republicans listing ship. The first salvo was fired at Trump, another Manhattan billionaire whom Bloomberg has tolerated when having to do business with him. When it comes to character, however, Bloomberg always found Trump to be a loutish vulgarian, which of course he is.
Bloomberg then fired a second salvo at Cruz. This time it wasn't character which he took to task, though he doesn't much care for Cruz's penchant for attaching a self-righteous and sanctimonious tinge to his brand of snake oil he peddles. No, Bloomberg went head-on and hit Cruz him between the eyes, where it matters, on policy. He attacked the basic tenets of Cruz's plan for America. It was as damning a statement one could make from someone who might have garnered Republican support if he ran.
I did not vote for Bloomberg, especially when he changed the rules of the game so he could run for a third term. But what he did yesterday was both a tribute to his feelings about Hillary, and a scathing rebuke to the Republicans.
What's not to like?
DD
Manhattan
Bloomberg didn't let it go at that. He saved his ammunition for the Republicans listing ship. The first salvo was fired at Trump, another Manhattan billionaire whom Bloomberg has tolerated when having to do business with him. When it comes to character, however, Bloomberg always found Trump to be a loutish vulgarian, which of course he is.
Bloomberg then fired a second salvo at Cruz. This time it wasn't character which he took to task, though he doesn't much care for Cruz's penchant for attaching a self-righteous and sanctimonious tinge to his brand of snake oil he peddles. No, Bloomberg went head-on and hit Cruz him between the eyes, where it matters, on policy. He attacked the basic tenets of Cruz's plan for America. It was as damning a statement one could make from someone who might have garnered Republican support if he ran.
I did not vote for Bloomberg, especially when he changed the rules of the game so he could run for a third term. But what he did yesterday was both a tribute to his feelings about Hillary, and a scathing rebuke to the Republicans.
What's not to like?
DD
Manhattan
So sorry to see the withdrawal of a man I could have wholeheartedly supported. Having to choose among less qualified alternatives is an indictment of our system.
3
Oh, brother. Where have you been the last 50 years?
1
Wasn't just "Fix It" a Ross Perot expression?
2
The hubris, it hurts!!!
3
i sit here and see where the majority o these comments come from and realize they are from NY and CA, both restrictive gun ownership states. No wonder they are upset that Bloomy isn't running, they already have jailbird Clinton on the ticket. You people keep on cheering and supporting these idiots and when your Constitutional rights have all been flushed down the toilet, remember who did it. I really do not expect the Times to let this on the comment site, but at least I tried.
2
I would beg Mr. Bloomberg to please reconsider this decision as America needs a respectable President so very badly. Not a bully and liar as President. This election is so way above partinsanship. America's future is at stake.
1
A pity. A successful billionaire whose success makes Trump look like cheap watch seller on 6th Avenue. A highly successful intellectual mayor of probably the second largest electoral position of responsibility in the US makes all the other candidates (including Clinton and Sanders) look as puny as Trump. He would have been the antidote to the mediocre candidates standing in both parties. Also, the time could never be better for a fresh third party effort. The politics of old is gone, the two parties look tired and out of step with peoples real concerns. This year disillusion is the watchword and many concerned and patriotic people will not vote as they have nothing to vote for, and given the quality of the candidates, no single clear person to vote against. Bloomberg could fill that gap very quickly, gain momentum and possibly score big against the clapped out parties machinery. Maybe one hope is that when the conventions arrive, the Republican convention will be so deadlocked that it might turn to a different person.
2
You did a great service to Hillary. Thank you.
I am in this with Hillary but of all the potential independent candidates Bloomberg has among the strongest appeal. He is disciplined, technocratic, thoughtful, and frank. If there is one issue that matters, it is the mass slaughter of children, and Bloomberg (in whatever capacity he assumes over the years) will go down as a hero for his advocacy against gun lobby greed and fear-mongering.
Mike Bloomberg was not my favorite mayor, but he did some pretty good stuff in this town in addition to a few debacles. Like many others I breathed a great sigh of relief to hear that he had decided not to run. He probably foresaw the inevitable outcome: the election gets thrown into the House, guaranteeing a Republican president. That being said, may I please offer my humble request that, following the current election season, Mr. Bloomberg follow up on his idea of starting a third party. Please do it. This would give sane Republicans and genuine conservatives a place of refuge when their party goes down in flames, perhaps to rise from its own ashes some time in the future. Disgruntled Democrats would also have a viable alternative, which simply does not exist at the present. Really....we need this.
1
Republicans cried that Obama would wreck the country.. Instead we have growth and stability and caution in foreign military adventures. I am hopefully optimistic that people will see that Drumpf would REALLY be a disaster, for the entire world, not just USA. Don't think for a moment Chavez couldn't happen here.
truth be told he would never win no matter who ran agianst him. the american people don't agree with him on his anti contstitutional stances. let alone the FACT that he spends more money every year pushing failed gun control measures than the nra spends on pro 2nd amendment issues.
the man is as much a liar as hillery, as wrong in his information espeically about guns as sarah brady and has almost as many defeats at the supreme court level as obama.
my real question is why would anyone vote for a man who has openly stated he wants to rewrite the constitution? why would you vote for a man who put forth the stop quesiton and frisk policy in as the scotus ruled is in violation of the 4 amendment? i guess his supporters are ok with racial profiling and government being able to search anyone it wants when ever government wants to do the search especially without a warrent...yea this is exactly what this country needs more totalitarians running the show...good call people.
the man is as much a liar as hillery, as wrong in his information espeically about guns as sarah brady and has almost as many defeats at the supreme court level as obama.
my real question is why would anyone vote for a man who has openly stated he wants to rewrite the constitution? why would you vote for a man who put forth the stop quesiton and frisk policy in as the scotus ruled is in violation of the 4 amendment? i guess his supporters are ok with racial profiling and government being able to search anyone it wants when ever government wants to do the search especially without a warrent...yea this is exactly what this country needs more totalitarians running the show...good call people.
2
I can't figure out why no one that I know of has seen the obvious: Michael Bloomberg for vice president.
1
Bloomberg knows he can't win and he is afraid of Mr.Trump he will be more famous in history then Him. I voted for Bloomberg and Now I as indian will vote for Mr Trump I like who love the nation more then them selves.
1
The negative comments here on Ralph Nader are ridiculous!!
Nader's argument was that the two main parties were similarly representing the corporate and banking interests rather than the people. Looking back, his argument is completely justified. Here are a couple recent examples to refresh everyone's memories:
-Everyone remember Al Gore's running mate? Yeah, Joe Lieberman. Well if Gore had won in 2000, then instead of having Obama in 2008, we may have likely had (instead) Lieberman -- someone who is now basically siding with Republicans.
-Everyone remember how the Democrats stood up against the Republicans in the vote to authorize the Iraq war? Well, ok, that didn't actually happen -- the Democrats abandoned us to go along with the Republicans!!
-As Democrats, we'd all like to cast the blame of the 2008 banking failures squarely on the shoulders of GW Bush. But much of that can just as easily be tied to Bill Clinton's deregulation of banking in the 90s.
-How has NAFTA been working for everyone? Remember how all the living presidents (Democrats and Republicans alike) came out together (like old fraternity brothers) to endorse it in the 90s under the Clinton administration? (If you are feeling nostalgic at all, you can still find some nice photos on the web of Clinton, Carter, Bush, and Ford all coming together for the NAFTA signing ceremony.)
Nader's argument was that the two main parties were similarly representing the corporate and banking interests rather than the people. Looking back, his argument is completely justified. Here are a couple recent examples to refresh everyone's memories:
-Everyone remember Al Gore's running mate? Yeah, Joe Lieberman. Well if Gore had won in 2000, then instead of having Obama in 2008, we may have likely had (instead) Lieberman -- someone who is now basically siding with Republicans.
-Everyone remember how the Democrats stood up against the Republicans in the vote to authorize the Iraq war? Well, ok, that didn't actually happen -- the Democrats abandoned us to go along with the Republicans!!
-As Democrats, we'd all like to cast the blame of the 2008 banking failures squarely on the shoulders of GW Bush. But much of that can just as easily be tied to Bill Clinton's deregulation of banking in the 90s.
-How has NAFTA been working for everyone? Remember how all the living presidents (Democrats and Republicans alike) came out together (like old fraternity brothers) to endorse it in the 90s under the Clinton administration? (If you are feeling nostalgic at all, you can still find some nice photos on the web of Clinton, Carter, Bush, and Ford all coming together for the NAFTA signing ceremony.)
4
It is admirable that, unlike some other millionaires/billionaires, Mr. Bloomberg did not succumb to the extreme narcissism and egotism that propels moneyed CEOs without an ounce of political experience to think that just because they have been adept in business (re: making money), doesn't mean they will be successful running a country of diverse and fractured citizenry not beholden to accommodating the whims of political leaders. Nonetheless, the truth is more likely that he assessed the odds of winning and determined that it wasn't worth the money and time spent to come in a distant third. After all, he has said on other occasions, he enters to win.
1
Too bad as he would have bled off some votes from the kleptocrat Mrs. Clinton. Would have been entertaining to watch as his bloviating despicable manner was reviled everywhere in the country outside of NYC.
6
Very saddened and DISAPPOINTED. We needed someone like him to run & save this country
1
Thank you Michael Bloomberg, The scenario you noted in withdrawing is what has concerned me deeply. We cannot afford a toss up in the coming election.
1
Bloomberg wasn't running and never planned to, and making this a story just feeds his already huge ego which pretty much matches the one Trump carries round.
3
The most divisive Presidential candidate ,within the GOP,in my lifetime ,was Barry Goldwater in 1964.3rd party segregationist candidate George Wallace took votes away from the already divided Democrats' Hubert Humphry,helping Nixon to get elected.
Considering how much Bloomberg wanted to run,and given the reason he decided not to,he would make a good cabinet member in the next adminnistration, if the Democrat wins.
Considering how much Bloomberg wanted to run,and given the reason he decided not to,he would make a good cabinet member in the next adminnistration, if the Democrat wins.
The real gist of this is that Bloomberg is bettting that plutocratic Corporatist rule remains safe in the hands of Hillary Clinton rather than Bernie Sanders or renegade plutocrat Trump. But this probably shows yet again the tunnel vision of the plutocratic elite. In fact it will be very difficult for Corporatist Hillary to beat the populist Trump UNLESS Bloomberg runs. Lets all hope Bernie wins the nomination or we are in for big trouble one way or the other.
Personally I will not vote for Hillary Clinton but if Bernie does not get the nomination I will vote for the other woman in the race, Jill Stein from the Green Party. I will be joined by millions of others...
I do not play the game of voting for the "Lesser Evil" which is still evil. I proudly voted for Ralph Nader and although I went door to door and worked for Obama in 2008 I voted for Rocky Anderson in 2012 after Obama's endless Wars and aid to the banksters.
If you never vote for what you want you will never get it...
Personally I will not vote for Hillary Clinton but if Bernie does not get the nomination I will vote for the other woman in the race, Jill Stein from the Green Party. I will be joined by millions of others...
I do not play the game of voting for the "Lesser Evil" which is still evil. I proudly voted for Ralph Nader and although I went door to door and worked for Obama in 2008 I voted for Rocky Anderson in 2012 after Obama's endless Wars and aid to the banksters.
If you never vote for what you want you will never get it...
3
In the 2000 Presidential race George Bush "won" Florida by a little over 500 hanging chads over Al Gore, while Ralph Nader and his Green Party took over 97,000 votes - certainly some 500 or more of which would have gone to Gore.
I know, I know, Scalia and his henchmen were also responsible and I will never forgive his glib "Get over it" when questioned about the decision to give the Presidency to Bush - but if the Florida race had not been so close (and Jeb! not the governor) - Scalia et al would have never gotten their hands on it.
I had always respected Ralph Nader and felt that the windmills he tilted against were worthy ones, but I never forgave him for choosing that particular fight and the stunning difference it made in American history.
Thank you Mr. Bloomberg for sacrificing your own political aspirations - as worthy an occupant of the Oval Office as you may have been - to avoid another such debacle.
I know, I know, Scalia and his henchmen were also responsible and I will never forgive his glib "Get over it" when questioned about the decision to give the Presidency to Bush - but if the Florida race had not been so close (and Jeb! not the governor) - Scalia et al would have never gotten their hands on it.
I had always respected Ralph Nader and felt that the windmills he tilted against were worthy ones, but I never forgave him for choosing that particular fight and the stunning difference it made in American history.
Thank you Mr. Bloomberg for sacrificing your own political aspirations - as worthy an occupant of the Oval Office as you may have been - to avoid another such debacle.
1
Sad day to hear that Mr. Bloomberg will not run. I am a lifelong Democrat, but I would have voted for him in a heartbeat!
I must say I have mixed feelings about this; I think Bloomberg is smart, capable, pragmatic, and a class act. He would have made a good President. Trump's lack of dignity and grace makes it awfully hard to imagine him in the Oval Office. But if Bloomberg has decided not to run because he would siphon votes away from Clinton, thus handing the White House to Trump, he should have the nation's gratitude.
He was 100% correct in his assessment- he wouldn't win AND he would have pulled votes from Hillary not the GOP. Smart move for the country. A true patriot unlike his fellow republicans.
1
As Bloomberg is a New Yorker, I guess it isn't surprising he often displays a well known trait of its inhabitants: chutzpah.
He attacks Trump's demagoguery and failure to condemn David Duke. Bloomberg kept alive a nothing third party, the Independence Party, co-founded by the leader of anti-psychiatry Scientology like cult and a woman who once said the Jews were the cause of the world's evils. When asked about the latter, Bloomberg said no one believes that stuff anymore. I guess the same as no one believes in the KKK.
And in his last mayoral election, he gave millions to that party to challenge voters in primarily Hispanic neighborhoods. The money didn't need to be reported until after the election.
Finally, he hypocritically gave money to Republicans at state and federal levels who opposed gun control to keep his political options open.
No Mr. Bloomberg, Donald Trump has nothing on you in the race to the bottom. Trump is just more entertaining do it.
He attacks Trump's demagoguery and failure to condemn David Duke. Bloomberg kept alive a nothing third party, the Independence Party, co-founded by the leader of anti-psychiatry Scientology like cult and a woman who once said the Jews were the cause of the world's evils. When asked about the latter, Bloomberg said no one believes that stuff anymore. I guess the same as no one believes in the KKK.
And in his last mayoral election, he gave millions to that party to challenge voters in primarily Hispanic neighborhoods. The money didn't need to be reported until after the election.
Finally, he hypocritically gave money to Republicans at state and federal levels who opposed gun control to keep his political options open.
No Mr. Bloomberg, Donald Trump has nothing on you in the race to the bottom. Trump is just more entertaining do it.
2
As a lifetime resident of New York City who is active in politics and has closely observed the Bloomberg reign, I have come to the careful conclusion that more income was redistributed upward in "Mayor Mike's" years than at any other time in NYC history - by far. It is no coincidence that it was during this communications "mogul's" time in office that living in NYC became unaffordable for many men and women in the middle class.
Since we already have so much of the nationwide income going to the 1%, I cannot see what good (or bad) it would do to make Bloomberg President.
It is tempting though, because if Mike left NYC to go to Washington, then America's loss would be NYC's gain. Unfortunately, this is an illusion as Bloomberg through his surrogates continues to exert a bad effect on NYC, while his cronies and supporters in the media continue to try and make this look good.
Since we already have so much of the nationwide income going to the 1%, I cannot see what good (or bad) it would do to make Bloomberg President.
It is tempting though, because if Mike left NYC to go to Washington, then America's loss would be NYC's gain. Unfortunately, this is an illusion as Bloomberg through his surrogates continues to exert a bad effect on NYC, while his cronies and supporters in the media continue to try and make this look good.
3
Such a shame that we won't have an opportunity to vote "President Big Gulp". We do not need another authoritarian in the white house who is so sure of his own wisdom and importance that he feels comfortable micromanaging the details of the lives of 300 million people.
2
How very sad that Bloomberg will not come in and save the day for the American people. The man who gave himself near dictatorial power in New York City determined to decide for you what you could eat and drink, and how much. He is not as aware of American values and history as he would lead us to believe or he is simply another revisionist. Both Truman and Eisnehower deported Mexican enmasse during their terms in order to protect the American worker. Trump would not set a precedent, it has already been set. We did not allow communists into this country when our attention was directed to them.
As an Eastern effete intellectual snob (I miss Spiro Agnew), I am sorry that Bloomberg could not find a way to the presidency because I think he is by far and away the optimal choice among the current candidates. However, as a realist I support his decision. In Maine, we have proof of what happens when the most capable candidate, running as an independent, falls short and allows a right-wing village idiot to get elected governor.
Gun control sank your campaign nothing more or less. Had you not been the poster boy for only gubment owning weapons you may have had a shot. After all I was a big fan of your stop and frisk of minority's.
If this hasn't convinced you that the American voting system is fundamentally broken, what will? A voting system that excludes candidates by relying on parties acting as "gatekeepers" to institutionalize the two party system is incompatible with democracy. For decades if not longer, we have known there is a better way, and it's called "range voting" (also known as "score voting."). Simply put, instead of simply ticking the box of the candidate you like, you give each candidate a score. For example, using a 0-10 score, you might do: Bloomberg: 10, Sanders: 7: Clinton: 6: Cruz: 1 Trump: 0. Suddenly, it's a real contest. Do a search on "range voting" to learn more.
Who has the bigger ego?
Bloomberg
Trump
Hillary
Bloomberg
Trump
Hillary
1
Perhaps Mr. Bloomberg is making the correct choice by not running. Maybe, maybe not. Is the implication that more Democrats would vote for him than Republicans and thus Trump would have a better path to the presidency?
Maybe this would be the problem but as I see it, a third choice is what our country needs. Currently, the only candidate who is not being picked to pieces is Bernie Sanders. Everyone else is badly flawed. Unfortunately, Congress stands in the way of Sanders.
Perhaps Mr. Bloomberg should wait until the battle over the future of Trump is resolved before he walks away.
Maybe this would be the problem but as I see it, a third choice is what our country needs. Currently, the only candidate who is not being picked to pieces is Bernie Sanders. Everyone else is badly flawed. Unfortunately, Congress stands in the way of Sanders.
Perhaps Mr. Bloomberg should wait until the battle over the future of Trump is resolved before he walks away.
1
I so wish Bloomberg had had the option to run as a Democrat in this race because the country needed his skills. The saddest thing is the enormous pool of skills and talents in this country not being used to solve its problems. Instead Trump, "heaven help us Cruz" and the GOP think tanks reflecting Ayn Rand and a greedy treasonous class of true democracy destroyers. Hilary will just be bogged down in more years of GOP mud slinging.
Sad day. Unfortunately, the result is going to be the opposite of what he wants. Hillary Clinton is not going to win owing to a variety of factors of her own making resulting in the election of Trump . His supporters have no sense of disbelief to suspend and are willing to buy into his candidacy under any circumstance.
1
The real reason is not Trump. The real reason is Bloomberg, just like Biden are not going to lend themselves to engage in interactions with candidates that have no class, Republican or Democratic. And Bernie is nice, but he lacks personality.
Mr Bloomberg, whether or not you ever become president, your name will always represent dignity and true public spirit.
His analysis is flawed. It may be the only thing Trump has right. Conservatives like me would vote for Bloomberg over Trump and Hillary, thus splitting the Republican vote and assuring Hillary a win.
The real reason Bloomberg is not running? I bet his private polling shows no one would vote for him outside of NY and perhaps LA.
The real reason Bloomberg is not running? I bet his private polling shows no one would vote for him outside of NY and perhaps LA.
Why Donald Trump gain so much ground ? Why his philosophy find an echo in the people of the USA. He knows very well how to speak to people. He symbolize the american self-made man. And that's why he is liked by many ameican people in a country, like the USA, which is in a crisis of identity, according to me. But, certainly that Trump, the candidate or the extreme right of the Republican, is very dangerous for the USA first, for the World secondly. He split people with his racist theories. He has even tweeted a Mussolini's quote !
Cruz, born in Canada. Does this set a precedent for future elections?
"The most favorable result for Mr. Bloomberg might have been a stalemate in the Electoral College, with no candidate capable of taking the 270 votes required. Under those conditions, the House of Representatives, where Republicans hold a majority, would choose the president."
Bloomberg would have been toast if the decision went to the House, as would just about any Democrat. It could have worked well for Jim Webb though had he stayed in. If it was Webb/Clinton (or Bernie)/Trump, Webb would have stood an excellent chance as a compromise candidate.
Bernie could do a whole lot worse than to try and snag Webb for a running mate. Might be good life insurance, too. The AIPAC crowd isn't pleased with Bernie, but they like Webb even less - might forestall his getting "Wellstoned"
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/110102_wellstone.html
Bloomberg would have been toast if the decision went to the House, as would just about any Democrat. It could have worked well for Jim Webb though had he stayed in. If it was Webb/Clinton (or Bernie)/Trump, Webb would have stood an excellent chance as a compromise candidate.
Bernie could do a whole lot worse than to try and snag Webb for a running mate. Might be good life insurance, too. The AIPAC crowd isn't pleased with Bernie, but they like Webb even less - might forestall his getting "Wellstoned"
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/110102_wellstone.html
Than God. If Ralph Nadar had been as smart, we'd not have had 8 years of Bush43 ruining our country. Now elect Hillary and get the country moving forward again.
1
America missed an opportunity! Bloomberg would have been a presidential option from all angles. He needs to remain active and be a loud voice for rational thinking. And for America!
Just what we needed. An extreme Nanny Stater who would lecture us on how to eat or banning things because he doesn't think they're good for us.
Bloomberg's major fans are the New York City real estate moguls who have done very well financially under his administrations.
The man who would find as many ways as possible to ban gun ownership but is never without one of the five retired New York City detectives who are his body guards would automatically lose the votes of tens of millions of gun owners.
And a president who spends his weekends flying to his home in the Bahamas would surely go over as well as it did in New York City.
Bloomberg's major fans are the New York City real estate moguls who have done very well financially under his administrations.
The man who would find as many ways as possible to ban gun ownership but is never without one of the five retired New York City detectives who are his body guards would automatically lose the votes of tens of millions of gun owners.
And a president who spends his weekends flying to his home in the Bahamas would surely go over as well as it did in New York City.
3
In my view, Mike Bloomberg is the best thing that ever happened to New York City. I'm for Hillary, 100 per cent, but Mayor Bloomberg, America's leading advocate for gun control and an amazingly effective administrator, would have been a terrific president.
The City has suffered, since his retirement as Mayor.
The City has suffered, since his retirement as Mayor.
It is quite possible that Bloomberg has been approached by Hillary to run as her VP.
First of all, the Super Delegates and fluid and not committed to Hillary Clinton, so stop spreading that disinformation.
Massachusetts (margin of about 17,000 votes) and Iowa were virtual ties, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Colorado, Vermont, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and Maine were clear Sanders victories. Hillary has only had clear victories in the Old Confederacy- none of which will vote for a Democrat in the General excepting maybe Virginia. So let's stop pretending that Democrats are enamored of Hillary outside of a very limited set of Southern Primary voters.
Second, Mr Bloomberg was being delusional if he thinks a Sanders voter would support a Billionaire with NeoLiberal Economics as his prime mantra and a record of serving 3 terms as NYC Mayor when a 2 term limit was in place- that smacks of arrogance and entitlement. Maybe in New York City, but few other places.
Massachusetts (margin of about 17,000 votes) and Iowa were virtual ties, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Colorado, Vermont, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and Maine were clear Sanders victories. Hillary has only had clear victories in the Old Confederacy- none of which will vote for a Democrat in the General excepting maybe Virginia. So let's stop pretending that Democrats are enamored of Hillary outside of a very limited set of Southern Primary voters.
Second, Mr Bloomberg was being delusional if he thinks a Sanders voter would support a Billionaire with NeoLiberal Economics as his prime mantra and a record of serving 3 terms as NYC Mayor when a 2 term limit was in place- that smacks of arrogance and entitlement. Maybe in New York City, but few other places.
2
Welcome to possible democracy. The two party system is corrupt so maybe Trump will break it for good and make Americans realize that a snake oil salesman could game the system to become POTUS.
We The People get the leaders we (theoretically) elect.
When friends ask me how Trump might win… I mention that George Carlin said it best.
'Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.'
We The People get the leaders we (theoretically) elect.
When friends ask me how Trump might win… I mention that George Carlin said it best.
'Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.'
I didn't particularly care for him as the mayor. He ran the city as a business, which it is not. This move however, is the classiest thing he's ever done so he hA gained my respect, unlike when he bullied his way to a third term as our mayor.
Let Hillary or Bernie smash the buffoon NYer Donald Trump.
Let Hillary or Bernie smash the buffoon NYer Donald Trump.
I for one would have no hesitation in voting for Bloomberg. Contrast him with the Republicans running. He is not perfect but he would never stoop to the level seen on the Republican side. He hasn't made his fortune through multiple bankruptcy,a fraudulent University etc.
After reviewing my chances of being elected, I have decided not to run for President of the United States. I do not want to split the vote and cause electoral mayhem. (Also the commute would have been a downer, since I am an expat.) If I had decided to run, I would not have taken a cent from corporate interests.
This announcement was paid for by my supporters. I am Dr D and I endorse this message.
This announcement was paid for by my supporters. I am Dr D and I endorse this message.
2
Precisely what will it take for the GOP elites to comprehend that their base don't love Trump? They just love whoever will do the most damage to the establishment. If it was not Trump, it would be someone else. And yet they have not changed their behavior one iota. Are they stupid or just delusional? The people with the pitchforks are coming - maybe that will waken them up. Bloomberg is a smart man - when he says the end is nigh, the GOP and their corporate puppetmasters have a lot to answer for. Interesting times...
Tell us something that wasn't obvious from the get go.
1
Is it true that he would require all Americans to chew 30 times before swallowing?
1
What's with us Americans? We can't seem to get rid of millionaires and billionaires wanting to run, desiring to run, considering to run or being pleaded to run for high public office? While few among the uber-wealthy may be eligible for political office, most are not...and some are even destructive to the democratic process.
It may come to a point where the Presidency will become irrelevant. In some ways it already is. And State power will increase. That is how "secession, civil war or political landscape with powerful States versus weak Federal government" are born,
Maybe America is already there. GOP is probably glowing with glee on this. Trump may actually be the set up and the fall guy who was used to push things to a more secure strong Right that looks normal compared to Trump. Shrewd move Conservatives. I don't know if that is true...but Trump, the wild crazy card (who is not that crazy, but very shrewd), makes any analysis, allegations and supposition in this race a strong possibility.
If Hillary win it might be due to him or because of him. If Cruz wins it might be due to him or because of him. If Bernie wins it could be due to him or because of him. If he wins it is because of the state of country, or due to his voters and supporters. Any argument might look legit now.
What does that say about the State of the Union?
It may come to a point where the Presidency will become irrelevant. In some ways it already is. And State power will increase. That is how "secession, civil war or political landscape with powerful States versus weak Federal government" are born,
Maybe America is already there. GOP is probably glowing with glee on this. Trump may actually be the set up and the fall guy who was used to push things to a more secure strong Right that looks normal compared to Trump. Shrewd move Conservatives. I don't know if that is true...but Trump, the wild crazy card (who is not that crazy, but very shrewd), makes any analysis, allegations and supposition in this race a strong possibility.
If Hillary win it might be due to him or because of him. If Cruz wins it might be due to him or because of him. If Bernie wins it could be due to him or because of him. If he wins it is because of the state of country, or due to his voters and supporters. Any argument might look legit now.
What does that say about the State of the Union?
He was a great mayor and would have been a great president. But he did the right thing, and history will remember him kindly.
Juxtaposed Ralph Nader, who gave us Bush due to Nader's narcissism, Bloomberg is a saint.
Juxtaposed Ralph Nader, who gave us Bush due to Nader's narcissism, Bloomberg is a saint.
I've heard more people mention 'independent' now than ever before...
Bloomberg say the direct opposite of what Trump did and what will happen. So hes a liar!
What a shame that a statesman, one who holds the welfare of his country above his own, is not running. We have far too few of them. Hats off to Michael Bloomberg.
5
You must be joking.
2
Thank you, Mr. Bloomberg, for a truly patriotic act!
1
A run for governor in 2018, Bloomberg? Savvy move.
1
Bloomberg is an authoritarian and a neocon. People who care about civil liberties and freedom could not in good conscience support him.
2
So is Hillary, but they will still vote for her.
I would have voted for him. And by the way, Michael Bloomberg is TRULY a successful businessman.
5
Bloomberg is an authoritarian and neocon. As a civil libertarian, I would oppose Bloomberg'a run for dog catcher.
1
Ralph Nader did not cause the Democrats to lose the election in 2000. That would go to Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris who purged 100,000 Floridians, mostly black, from the voter rolls leading up to the 2000 election. They falsely labeled tens of thousands of Floridians as felons to revoke their voting rights. Jeb is a disgusting figure, and I'm glad he had to pull out of the race this year.
3
"If no individual had a majority, then the House of Representatives would choose from the five individuals with the greatest number of electoral votes. In either case, a majority of state delegations in the House was necessary for a candidate to be chosen to be President".
Theoretically it would be between Trump, Bloomberg and Clinton or Sanders. Even the congress is run by republicans, lately congressmen are not biggest fun of Donald, unless he would make a promise to elderly behave in the future ( you know - like in school).
Theoretically it would be between Trump, Bloomberg and Clinton or Sanders. Even the congress is run by republicans, lately congressmen are not biggest fun of Donald, unless he would make a promise to elderly behave in the future ( you know - like in school).
Trump would win either way, no worry. This is just the beginning.
Thank you, Mr Bloomberg, for not splitting the vote of reasonable Americans! I would have voted for you, but that vote would have been subtracted from Hillary Clinton's ballot. It is unlikely that you would have been the preferred alternative for a lot of Trump supporters, had you decided to run. In this desperate hour, the main priority of all responsible citizens must be to prevent a Trump presidency. Thank you for putting the interest of the country before your own ego. You are the president our country would have needed, but with millions of Trumpeteers on a rampage, did not deserve - and hence won't get. What a shame!
11
Oh the horror---I am reading of Democrats who would support a man who bought himself and 3rd term in NYC. Furthermore has policies that helped increase his wealth and that of his comrades. And here I am being told that only the rich bad GOP controls Wall Street. The hypocrisy on both sides on the aisle knows no bound.
17
The voters of NYC chose him for a third term. And would have again for a a fourth if he had run.
But thank you for your opinion.
But thank you for your opinion.
I am very grateful to Mr Bloomberg for this decision. I believe Bloomberg would have made the best President among all the candidates currently in the field. Unsurprisingly, he is also the only one who acted in the best interest of the country (by declining to run) instead of narrow self interest. A three-way race between Trump, Clinton and Bloomberg would have been chaotic and could very well have led to a deadlock, invocation of the 12th amendment, and possibly a Trump presidency.
4
And it had nothing to do with the fact that no one would vote for him. Facts, after his exhaustive and expensive and extensive investigation proved.
But being Republican, and truth not being on his side, makes up his excuses.
Well, I hope he feels he's saved face, however, to the rest of New Yorkers he had no face to save.
But being Republican, and truth not being on his side, makes up his excuses.
Well, I hope he feels he's saved face, however, to the rest of New Yorkers he had no face to save.
14
@Mickey,
Thanks for the truth.
3-8-16@2:47 am
Thanks for the truth.
3-8-16@2:47 am
Except that he won 3 Mayoral elections in nyc. Seems like many people did, in fact, vote for him, no? But then again, facts are becoming an endangered species on our political discussion landscape.
@@buzzy,
With respect, people also voted against him during his last and were unhappy with him. While Di Blasio's been a disappointment in some ways, my understanding is he won the next election by a large count by promising to be an improvement on Bloomberg. If you're going to consider facts endangered things, perhaps that fact could be pondered.
Anyway, Bloomberg isn't running, so...
3-8-16@6:22 pm
With respect, people also voted against him during his last and were unhappy with him. While Di Blasio's been a disappointment in some ways, my understanding is he won the next election by a large count by promising to be an improvement on Bloomberg. If you're going to consider facts endangered things, perhaps that fact could be pondered.
Anyway, Bloomberg isn't running, so...
3-8-16@6:22 pm
1
I hope he stays actively involved in politics. The national needs him.
6
If Bloomberg were open to it, a Clinton-Bloomberg ticket would be a knockout. But would it require Hillary registering in a state other than NY to avoid running afoul of Constitutional prohibitions.
4
I see the Nader haters are all out in force. I love that they demand the head of a man with more integrity than anyone who has run for president probably since Lincoln. Nader is a far better man than Bloomberg (or I for that matter) will ever be.
Seriously, you blame Bush on Nader instead of on the absolutely ludicrous electoral system we have? Why aren't you out there demanding a change to Instant Runoff Voting? No, you'd rather sit around and complain about how your moral betters "really fouled things up that time."
Seriously, you blame Bush on Nader instead of on the absolutely ludicrous electoral system we have? Why aren't you out there demanding a change to Instant Runoff Voting? No, you'd rather sit around and complain about how your moral betters "really fouled things up that time."
4
excuse me.
hillary has a dominant lead in mainstream press.
i also idk of nyt dismissing the possibility of bernie sanders.
hillary has a dominant lead in mainstream press.
i also idk of nyt dismissing the possibility of bernie sanders.
1
@marie bernadette
san Francisco
Actually she has a dominant lead of around 200 amongst pledged delegates and this will further increase today. Like most Sanders fans (not to mention the majority of Republicans) you don't recognize reality.
san Francisco
Actually she has a dominant lead of around 200 amongst pledged delegates and this will further increase today. Like most Sanders fans (not to mention the majority of Republicans) you don't recognize reality.
2
The ultimate vanity campaign. I'm sure that he could find a much more productive use for a billion or so dollars. It's an open question whether Bloomberg could even win statewide election in New York. The idea that he could win outside of it is an even greater delusion. I'm sure this is disappointing news for his campaign consultants.
9
My 44-ounce drink rests easy tonight.
14
As do our guns.
The greatest pity is that neither party had the acumen to tap Michael Bloomberg at the outset. What is left now is the innate good sense of the Ordinary American. That Ordinary American is, from my experience a decent, fair-minded and responsible person. Remember that Trump has to face the whole of the USA not just those wilder elements of the GOP to which he panders. If the readers of the New York Post could make a concerted effort to mobilise the Ordinary American to get out and exercise his/her only real right in a democracy to VOTE. A voter turnout of less than 50% is not democracy, it's idiocy. Please, embrace Australia's compulsory voting system. It's not about socialism it's about making sure that the will of the people is just that - all of the people voting for a government that the majority want, not only the majority of those who turn out on the day.
3
A compulsory system is not the answer as I can imagine many Australians entering the voting booth and pulling any lever just to say they voted.
Thank you, Mike, for your honesty and assessment of the political climate. Your voice is needed in these times of extreme divisions. Please continue to speak your considerations on all matters. If asked or nominated, please accept the role of Vice President on the Hillary for President ticket.
7
Now he will have more time to focus on getting a constitutional change so that he can finally ban those big evil sugary drinks. Well, maybe he won't need to, if Obama gets another SCOTUS pick!
2
Another scenario had Bloomberg run is that the Sanders supporters who would never vote for Hillary Clinton would have voted for Bloomberg, also setting the stage for no candidate winning the Electoral College outright, in which case the Repubs in Congress would it award the presidency to the Repub (sound familiar, almost like 2000)? I am still hoping that Bloomberg will hold his nose and support Sanders if he manages to prevail (which I and many others hope he does).
6
@scratchbaker,
I could never vote for Bloomberg and I'm volunteering for Sanders, nor would I see an endorsement from Bloomberg an favorable thing for Sanders's campaign.
3-8-16@2:43 am
I could never vote for Bloomberg and I'm volunteering for Sanders, nor would I see an endorsement from Bloomberg an favorable thing for Sanders's campaign.
3-8-16@2:43 am
Hillary is going to have a *real* hard time getting support from Sanders supporters if she prevails in the nominating process. Tens of thousands have vowed to write in Sanders or vote Green if he is not the nominee - and interviews like this suggest that for a not inconsiderable number of Bernie supporters their second choice is Trump, and *not* HRC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhwBHm9dQqg#t=57
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhwBHm9dQqg#t=57
This race is between the past remaining in the present or the present drastically changing in a diametrically opposed direction.
The reason for one (Trump) being reflected around the world in Western Democracies are citizens realisation Edmund Burke was right when he said abstract philosophical acceptance of individual 'rights' over the cultural norms within which these individuals exist will destroy the State. The unleashing of a culture within Western Democratic space determined by the political elite as 'good', non-radicalised, moderate, law-abiding which research has proven as well as the bodies in the streets, the culture informed political/social constructs developed or developing as in Turkey as having diametrically opposed ethics-morals-values-beliefs and methodology to Western Democratic values-institutions.
The reason for the other one (Sanders) being reflected around the world in Western Democracies are citizens realisation that the collusion of Management and Labour coordinators professing to represent the interests of both sides from within their political institutions of the State, manifestly preferring publically one constituency over the other has simply enabled these coordinators to take advantage of their privileged position to take advantage of the coordinated whole.
Citizens are sick of having to pay on a regular basis for 'expert' approved ‘gold’ standard’ paradigms from drug ‘control’, financial institution ‘oversight’ to cultural relativism.
The reason for one (Trump) being reflected around the world in Western Democracies are citizens realisation Edmund Burke was right when he said abstract philosophical acceptance of individual 'rights' over the cultural norms within which these individuals exist will destroy the State. The unleashing of a culture within Western Democratic space determined by the political elite as 'good', non-radicalised, moderate, law-abiding which research has proven as well as the bodies in the streets, the culture informed political/social constructs developed or developing as in Turkey as having diametrically opposed ethics-morals-values-beliefs and methodology to Western Democratic values-institutions.
The reason for the other one (Sanders) being reflected around the world in Western Democracies are citizens realisation that the collusion of Management and Labour coordinators professing to represent the interests of both sides from within their political institutions of the State, manifestly preferring publically one constituency over the other has simply enabled these coordinators to take advantage of their privileged position to take advantage of the coordinated whole.
Citizens are sick of having to pay on a regular basis for 'expert' approved ‘gold’ standard’ paradigms from drug ‘control’, financial institution ‘oversight’ to cultural relativism.
Can't the Republican Party draft Bloomberg at the Republican Convention? That would be the IDEAL!!!
6
Michael Bloomberg is a billionaire, and on his watch as mayor, billionaires did very well in New York City. I'm sure that if he had run and been elected president, billionaires would continue to do well. I'm not sure about everyone else.
14
People forget his dictatorial rule in NYC. Running for a third term when the people voted to term limits of two years for mayor. The rediculous push to ban the infamous Big Gulp Soda because only little Napoleon knew what was best for the people. In Bloomberg's mind there are two ways of doing things His Way and the right way and they were always the same.
15
Yes, and dismisses the concerns of the peasants wanting to arm themselves against some thugs kicking their door in while he goes nowhere without an armed security detail...
1
Bloomberg who? Well if he wont run I wont either.
9
Good that he's doing the right thing for a change.
We already have enough plutocrats and neoliberals in the race, and had he run, as he clearly realized, he might have helped put the plutocratic fascist in office.
As it is, we'll probably get plutocrat-lite, which is better than anyone from the extremist quartet on the right, but yet again, doesn't bode well for the middle class.
If only we could clear out the GOP-controlled Congress and elect Bernie Sanders too!
We already have enough plutocrats and neoliberals in the race, and had he run, as he clearly realized, he might have helped put the plutocratic fascist in office.
As it is, we'll probably get plutocrat-lite, which is better than anyone from the extremist quartet on the right, but yet again, doesn't bode well for the middle class.
If only we could clear out the GOP-controlled Congress and elect Bernie Sanders too!
5
Nice humblebrag from Mr. Bloomberg. How many electoral votes would he have won.....140? 78? Phew, we're so fortunate that he didn't enter the race and set off a repeat of the election of 1824!
Except that there once was this man named Ross Perot. He polled 18.9% of the popular vote in 1992, and won exactly -0- electoral votes. Bloomberg would have had an uphill battle simply to match Nader's 2.75% of the popular vote in 2000.
Yes, Mr. Bloomberg, you were truly the only one standing between us and an invocation of the 12th Amendment.
Except that there once was this man named Ross Perot. He polled 18.9% of the popular vote in 1992, and won exactly -0- electoral votes. Bloomberg would have had an uphill battle simply to match Nader's 2.75% of the popular vote in 2000.
Yes, Mr. Bloomberg, you were truly the only one standing between us and an invocation of the 12th Amendment.
8
So nice that someone who no one wanted to run decided not to run. Talk about the billionaire bubble.
14
A politician who put the good of the country before his own long-held ambition?
Well done, Mr. Bloomberg.
Well done, Mr. Bloomberg.
7
That, and he realized that he could not get the numbers he needed to win.
1
too bad, he was my last hope... I can't see either front runner at this point as offering me or the county a viable choice.. despite Clinton's democratic victory, she will not be a strong candidate... Trump has touched on a well spring of anger .. in some measure of all the things Clinton has come to represent...
5
It appears, then, it's time you advocated for a different front runner.
#FeelTheBern
#FeelTheBern
Re: "Michael R. Bloomberg, who for months quietly laid the groundwork to run for president as an independent, will not enter the 2016 campaign, he said Monday, citing his fear that a three-way race could lead to the election of a candidate he thinks would endanger the country: Donald J. Trump."
Smart guy. Most of the New York Times's reader's comments had been predicting a Bloomberg run would tilt the race toward the Democrats. They were reasoning erroneously.
Smart guy. Most of the New York Times's reader's comments had been predicting a Bloomberg run would tilt the race toward the Democrats. They were reasoning erroneously.
1
Mr Bloomberg hasn't the discipline to be a President. You have to go to nations where you mightn't like the weather, and you can't just turn around and get back on your private jet and take off out of the place like he did when he visited Queenstown, South Island, New Zealand. He even told the world he hated the place! lol!
4
He most probably would not have made a very good President as you have to fly to and stay in nations where you don't like the climate. You can't just get back on your private jet and fly out and complain you hated the place because of the weather. That's what he did when he visited Queenstown, South Island, New Zealand. You lose your freedom of choice if you are a President.
1
Mr. Bloomberg, thank you for not pulling a Nader.
4
Funny how you blame Nader but don't demand an Instant Runoff style election. Says volumes.
3
Gee. I could have told him a while ago he had very little support to run. After his 3rd term, which was bought and bullied, against the will of the public that wanted term limits to be for 2 terms, he thinks that he's going to come in and "save the day?"
This spoiled, authoritarian billionaire, that can't understand the common man's concerns is finally being told that he lacks the popularity and message necessary to run again for public office.
Let me have my Bloomberg approved size of soft drink and ride my bike in the empty bike lanes while crying about how I wanted him to run. NOT.
This spoiled, authoritarian billionaire, that can't understand the common man's concerns is finally being told that he lacks the popularity and message necessary to run again for public office.
Let me have my Bloomberg approved size of soft drink and ride my bike in the empty bike lanes while crying about how I wanted him to run. NOT.
12
If Bloomberg could take enough votes away from Hillary to elect a Republican, then, at least at this point, Hillary's Campaign is walking on egg shells.
5
To lay aside my biases, I am a Bernie supporter. This being said, if the general election was a three-way between Trump, Clinton, and Bloomberg, I would have voted for Bloomberg without reservation. He's a strong centrist candidate that may have retained a lot of votes on the far left, from people that cannot forgive Clinton for her many blunders, seeming insincerity and/or for the fact that her last name is Clinton.
8
To lead is to make the occasional blunder. To sit on the sidelines as Bernie has done for thirty odd years, that isn't leadership, nor is it gaining any clear understanding of what leadership actually entails.
8
"To lead is to make the occasional blunder."
Please, to let us be sure, that assertion was in reference to...?
Please, to let us be sure, that assertion was in reference to...?
Leigh: The occasional blunder? The occasional blunder? She voted for the Iraq War. I'd call that more than a blunder. I'd call her vote a colossal failure, a complete collapse of wisdom. In the months leading up to that vote, I read several New Yorker articles where high-level military officials and inspectors were quoted as saying, "There are no Weapons of Mass Destruction. There is no link to 9/11." Somebody was paying attention, because half of the Democratic Senators voted against that war, but all the Democratic Senators with presidential aspirations (Kerry, Edwards and Clinton) voted for it because they didn't want to appear weak on defense, like the Democrats who voted against the first Gulf War. She voted for that war, not because she actually believed there were WMD's and a link, but because she thought it was the best path to the White House. She was wrong. Her horrible, wrong-headed vote helped pave the way to horror, debt and catastrophe. And it cost her the White House in 2008. Will it cost her again this year?
5
I hope he offers to serve our country as Hillary's VP. Michael, America needs you.
3
I hope he does also so we can be done with both of them once and for all.
4
I'm sure that the GOP nominee hopes for the same.
2
Both from New York. Both self-financed billionaires. Both "Republican." I think you meant Trump's VP.
1
Well, at least my soda is safe.
12
IMHO, a Bloomberg - Mullen ticket most probably would not win. But a Michael Bloomberg - Warren Buffet ticket ( two of the most respected, successful and wise people around ) would blow everyone else out of the water and that would would such a nice way to tell the whole world, "America is back again" !
1
Michael Bloomberg was an amazing Mayor, and is a prince among men, with an amazing record of philanthropy. We would welcome his Presidency. We New Yorkers are grateful for his service to the City of New York, and are sorry he has seen the need to bow out of the race, but understand.
4
"We New Yorkers"? Speak for yourself.
14
He could implement a nationwide Stop & Frisk People of Color initiative.
Mayor Mike:
Thank You! You did a great job as Mayor of NYC for 12 years, every mistake was offset by many great improvements. You saved a disaster of taking 20%+ votes from Hillary and elected one of the awful Rebulican candidates remaining.
You took over a cripled NYC after 9/11 and bought us back, especially in the
IT area, a natural for NYC, never exploided by any Mayor but YOU! NYC had plenty of smart guys; they needed guidance out of Financial Brokerages as you did. IT was a natural
Also you improved my ex-wife's modest 3 family house in Brooklyn by 8 times
from 1987 to now. My daughters got good educations, as I had the house money to pay their tution, etc. DiBlasio does the same for her now; my daughters will have fine inhertances thanks to your efforts.
Thank You! You did a great job as Mayor of NYC for 12 years, every mistake was offset by many great improvements. You saved a disaster of taking 20%+ votes from Hillary and elected one of the awful Rebulican candidates remaining.
You took over a cripled NYC after 9/11 and bought us back, especially in the
IT area, a natural for NYC, never exploided by any Mayor but YOU! NYC had plenty of smart guys; they needed guidance out of Financial Brokerages as you did. IT was a natural
Also you improved my ex-wife's modest 3 family house in Brooklyn by 8 times
from 1987 to now. My daughters got good educations, as I had the house money to pay their tution, etc. DiBlasio does the same for her now; my daughters will have fine inhertances thanks to your efforts.
3
Your reportage strongly emphasizes a potential Donald Trump victory as the reason Michael Bloomberg has decided against running as a third party candidate. In fact, Bloomberg stated that "As the race stands now, with Republicans in charge of both Houses, there is a good chance that my candidacy could lead to the election of Donald Trump or Senator Ted Cruz. That is not a risk I can take in good conscience" By all but ignoring the stated danger of a Cruz presidency here and elsewhere in your recent news coverage, you champion the demise of one demagogue (Trump) while letting another (Cruz) rise to electoral power with much less scrutiny by the NY Times.
5
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Maybe Senate? Replace Schumer? Or move here and replace Rahm! Please!
3
This is called putting country before your personal interests. Wish we had more politicians and leaders like Mr. Bloomberg.
9
Maybe Hillary could do that too.
Not just Trump... Cruz also. Bloomberg's own words.
Why do you insist on focusing expressly on Trump, even to the point of being completely disingenuous?
The real evil here is Cruz (starting in '16 then every four year increment afterwards). Don't contribute in any way at all to this evil stumbling one random electoral cycle into the White House.
Start, NYTimes, by updating your headline to include Cruz.
Why do you insist on focusing expressly on Trump, even to the point of being completely disingenuous?
The real evil here is Cruz (starting in '16 then every four year increment afterwards). Don't contribute in any way at all to this evil stumbling one random electoral cycle into the White House.
Start, NYTimes, by updating your headline to include Cruz.
9
Given the dispositions and backgrounds of all of the candidates, Bernie Sanders is the only one I would have in my house for dinner. Mr. Bloomberg is another monied plutocrat who would likely look right through me and my wife as if we weren't even there. Same goes for Cruz, Rubio and Hillary (who I will ultimately support). As for Trump, I feel like I'm watching a replay of Stalin's rise to power. If time travelers really do exist, I suspect Trump will wind up assassinated.
In any case, our nation is facing the greatest threat to its founding principles in its long and illustrious history. How it will end, only providence can say. But dear god, what a wonderful experiment in democracy we shall lose, before this business ends.
In any case, our nation is facing the greatest threat to its founding principles in its long and illustrious history. How it will end, only providence can say. But dear god, what a wonderful experiment in democracy we shall lose, before this business ends.
7
Hillary is such a weak candidate that Trump will win easily. Bloomberg would still be the best chance to beat Trump.
1
We would have been fortunate if his public service would have done for our Country what it accomplished in our city.
Our nation would be greener, healthier and economically more prosperous.
Even keeled, smart and pragmatic, just the leadership our country could use right now.
Our nation would be greener, healthier and economically more prosperous.
Even keeled, smart and pragmatic, just the leadership our country could use right now.
2
Everyone's praising Bloomberg for being so un-Naderly, but I find it a bit sad that he was willing to derail Sanders but not Clinton. It's like the rich/establishment had this little backup plan to make sure the riffraff stays out of the White House, but now they don't need to use it.
9
I note a number of comments suggesting that support should be switched from Trump to a Democrat. But that assumes that the problem is Republican voters, while early indications have instead been that Democrats will be failing to turn out.
If Democrats fail to turn out, the Republicans will not switch to a Democrat, but, after eight years of a Democrat in the White House, they will take advantage of the situation to put a Republican, any Republican, into the White House.
If Democrats fail to turn out, the Republicans will not switch to a Democrat, but, after eight years of a Democrat in the White House, they will take advantage of the situation to put a Republican, any Republican, into the White House.
2
A number of people in the comments section say Bloomberg "put his country before his ego" - what a joke that is! The man is a control freak, a little dictator in his own right, and he has an ego the size of Alaska. He turned NYC into a playground for the ultra-rich at the expense of ordinary working people who form the backbone of society.
The main reason Bloomberg's not going to run is because very few people (statistically) would support him. The outcome would be very embarrassing to him.
As someone who lived under his "rule" in NYC for 12 years, I would never vote for Bloomberg for any public office again - he has proven himself willing to subvert the law (by ignoring term limits), and THAT alone makes him unfit for any public office, IMO.
In his willingness to decide for himself what laws he considers "advisory" rather than binding, Bloomberg has far more in common with Trump than he'd like to acknowledge. They both have huge egos and they both really, really want POWER - there isn't enough power in the world to satisfy either of these very damaged men.
The main reason Bloomberg's not going to run is because very few people (statistically) would support him. The outcome would be very embarrassing to him.
As someone who lived under his "rule" in NYC for 12 years, I would never vote for Bloomberg for any public office again - he has proven himself willing to subvert the law (by ignoring term limits), and THAT alone makes him unfit for any public office, IMO.
In his willingness to decide for himself what laws he considers "advisory" rather than binding, Bloomberg has far more in common with Trump than he'd like to acknowledge. They both have huge egos and they both really, really want POWER - there isn't enough power in the world to satisfy either of these very damaged men.
28
Thank you, well said. The differences between the two Oligarchs are one of style and tenor rather than morals or decency. Yes Bloomberg is less crude but Trump is more honest.
Indeed Trump will help the average American far more than Bloomberg would. And like Hillary more wars for AIPAC in the ME, a new cold war with Russia and more killing not less. Just like the failure to compare the POLICIES of the candidates fools people into NOT seeing Cruz and Rubio have WORSE and even more extreme policies!
WE need to return this democracy to the people (read 'rabble' for the fake democratic oligarchs). To much focus on tone and not enough on policy!
Indeed Trump will help the average American far more than Bloomberg would. And like Hillary more wars for AIPAC in the ME, a new cold war with Russia and more killing not less. Just like the failure to compare the POLICIES of the candidates fools people into NOT seeing Cruz and Rubio have WORSE and even more extreme policies!
WE need to return this democracy to the people (read 'rabble' for the fake democratic oligarchs). To much focus on tone and not enough on policy!
1
And you think Hillary would be any different? At least Bloomberg doesn't have blood on his hands and stolen silverware in his closet.
I can't figure out why people thank him for not running. If he really wants to run for the good of the country, pick a party and run like Senator Sanders did.
4
A true leader...big picture, wisdom and foresight...and doing (or withholding) based on what's best to keep (all of) us viable.
1
He just wanted to protect his own money from being Berned. Now he thinks Hillary will win so he's backing out. Too bad he's wrong.
6
Admire Bloomberg. Scared stiff that Trump can still win. Perhaps this scary election points to the need to better educate voters - do they teach civics anymore?
2
actually no
4
Outside of New York, Bloomberg has very little appeal so his candidacy was dead on arrival. Also, he was less a leader of New York City and more a leader of Wall Street; a credential which definitely disqualifies him from this particular Presidential race! He should stick with running his company and looking after his vast personal wealth.
9
Uh.......wrong. I, a moderate conservative, former Republican, would have voted for him in a second versus the 2 pathetic alternatives.
Why are so many people thanking MB for not running, as if to do so would be pulling a Ralph Nader? Ralph Nader is not to blame for Gore's loss; your political system is. You have gerrymandered precincts, a wacky "electoral college," and a two-party system that is (from my Canadian view) right-wing (the Dems) and far-right-wing (the Reps). (And American Democrats are not the equivalent of Canadian Liberals; they're far closer to Canadian Conservatives.)
Here, we have three major political parties, one sort of ascendant one (the Greens), and a smattering of others, including Libertarians and Communists and the like (who never win a single seat). Most often, federal and provincial elections are won by the party getting most votes, which is almost never about 50%. Our new Prime-Minister said he will change the electoral system to introduce a form of proportional representation. That is exactly what you need to break this deadlock of two parties and congress.
So, don't blame Nader. That's too easy. Look closer at yourselves and the work you need to do to change your system, rotting as it is with the influence of money.
Here, we have three major political parties, one sort of ascendant one (the Greens), and a smattering of others, including Libertarians and Communists and the like (who never win a single seat). Most often, federal and provincial elections are won by the party getting most votes, which is almost never about 50%. Our new Prime-Minister said he will change the electoral system to introduce a form of proportional representation. That is exactly what you need to break this deadlock of two parties and congress.
So, don't blame Nader. That's too easy. Look closer at yourselves and the work you need to do to change your system, rotting as it is with the influence of money.
16
Excellent observations. Thank you!
3
I was very disappointed to receive this story as an alert on my phone from the Times today. I had held out hope that Bloomberg would offer an alternative to the two likely party candidates this November. Darn.
1
Mr. Bloomberg, I woder if either party would love to now welcome you? Don't give up.
The difference between a truly self-made individual and one who started out with Daddy's millions couldn't be more clear.
5
I've always had deep and considerable respect for Mr. Bloomberg, a truly wise and shrewd man. Personally I feel he's a step or two ahead of this nation, which is a reflection of our collective problem.
2
So disappointed. Bloomberg, by all accounts, would really have been the bullseye...just what we needed. The only consolation is knowing he may have taken a large part in preventing Trump from taking the reigns of this country. Thank you Mr. Bloomberg. A true self-effacing hero. (Can anyone imagine that term being used to describe Trump???)
1
But what if the FBI indicts Clinton?
5
When the FBI investigates the mob real estate ties and his failed business deals,Trump is more likely to be be indicted
5
Then Sanders actually has a chance to win without Bloomberg as a spoiler.
5
What fancy coat of paint.
It's dispiriting that, just by virtue of his deep pockets and the marketing, legal and administrative help he could buy, Mr. Bloomberg would receive the votes of millions of Americans who wouldn't know him from Adam. He deserves no deification for not going through with that.
These billionaires really are wizards at promoting their brands. Here's a news story based on a non-action.
These billionaires really are wizards at promoting their brands. Here's a news story based on a non-action.
7
As a country we lost today. He would have been miles better than anyone in the race. Get ready for more gridlock and no change, folks. #whatcouldhavebeen
3
The Republicans have plunged this election so far beneath the dignity and critical importance of the office of the Presidency. His campaign would have raised the level of debate across the political spectrum. However, his analysis is correct, and a Trump Presidency is something we nor the world can abide. Mr. Bloomberg is doing remarkable work in the areas of climate change, gun safety, cancer prevention, and boosting business and trade internationally. I hope he continues to use his voice and position to raise the level of discourse and advocate for the issues he has already made great strides on. Even if it's not as President, our country needs his intellect, talent and desire to improve humanity.
4
Did he really think the 100-odd people that would actually vote for an old, white, liberal member of the .1% would make a difference? We've already got Hillary filling that role.
9
Details reported here of Bloomberg's meticulous pre-planning are amazing -- not just slogans, logos and ads, but legal machinery to address Electoral College snafus. I guess it's what the best billionaires do. Bernie Sanders for President.
5
Which presidential candidate is a person with a sadistic personality demonstrating a pervasive pattern of cruel, demeaning, and aggressive behavior? Which presidential candidate gains satisfaction from intimidating, coercing, hurting, and humiliating others? Which presidential candidate is frightening and cruel and appears to relish the act of menacing and brutalizing others; forcing others to cower and submit, gaining satisfaction from demeaning and bullying others? Do you want the President of the United States to be this kind of person, a sadistic human being? People like this dominate others and force others into submission.
2
Answer: Hillary Rodham Clinton
5
If Bernie Sanders wasn't in the race, I'd have gone for Bloomberg.
I wanted Obama to pick him as vice president. He's smart, knows business, is an experienced administrator, can't be bought, is dedicated to the public interest.
Bernie is all that too, except for knowing what it is to run a business.
It's too bad for obvious reasons Bernie can't make Michael his VP.
I wanted Obama to pick him as vice president. He's smart, knows business, is an experienced administrator, can't be bought, is dedicated to the public interest.
Bernie is all that too, except for knowing what it is to run a business.
It's too bad for obvious reasons Bernie can't make Michael his VP.
6
Can't be bought ?
Does he run a business and does that business have clients ?
Same with Trump. His shell companies owe literally billions of dollars to banks all over the world. They can pull his credit and bankrupt those shell companies tomorrow.
There are few people on Earth who are more reliant on banks than Trump, yet people fall for his phony veneer of independence.
Does he run a business and does that business have clients ?
Same with Trump. His shell companies owe literally billions of dollars to banks all over the world. They can pull his credit and bankrupt those shell companies tomorrow.
There are few people on Earth who are more reliant on banks than Trump, yet people fall for his phony veneer of independence.
4
fran, you make some good points but don't you think there are some presidents that couldn't be bought, like TR, FDR, JFK, Jimmy Carter, Harry Truman?
All Democrats, by the way. (Yes, TR, too. FDR's first vote, as he wrote to his mother, Sarah for Theodore Roosevelt: "Because he was the best Democrat running.")
Of course we all live in a world dependent on money, organized around money, run by money, so theoretically everybody is corruptible. But to all of the aforementioned and Bernie Sanders, for sure, money is not the most important thing or even the second or third most important thing. As opposed to the you know who's. My preferences in order, Sanders, Bloomberg, and the sage of Omaha...
All Democrats, by the way. (Yes, TR, too. FDR's first vote, as he wrote to his mother, Sarah for Theodore Roosevelt: "Because he was the best Democrat running.")
Of course we all live in a world dependent on money, organized around money, run by money, so theoretically everybody is corruptible. But to all of the aforementioned and Bernie Sanders, for sure, money is not the most important thing or even the second or third most important thing. As opposed to the you know who's. My preferences in order, Sanders, Bloomberg, and the sage of Omaha...
If only Nader had been this wise.
10
Oh, give it up- Nader had no way of knowing that it boiled down to one state with a margin of a few hundred votes.
Besides, the fact that Bush was so close to Gore in votes shows that the Democrats should have run someone half-decent in the first place.
Besides, the fact that Bush was so close to Gore in votes shows that the Democrats should have run someone half-decent in the first place.
4
Indeed.
2
A decent Ralph Nader should have ordered his followers before election day to vote for the Democratic candidate. His only contribution to the general good happened years earlier. Since then he became a self-absorbed, manic, pseudo politician. His irrational followers deluded themselves. We can thank him, along with Jeb Bush's administration of the State of Florida voting system and the Supreme Court, for 8 more years of Bush family in the White House.
5
Quite lofty and noble of Mr. Bloomberg, but he is nothing if not one who competes to win. He would not win the presidency. He can deflect from this by pooh-poohing others, but as easily as people are fooled (more easily with each passing day and each passing drop in IQ, so it seems), few will be taken in by this posturing. Bloomberg's position is one of saving face, nothing more.
8
We may still see Bloomberg. If establishment Republicans are successful at denying Trump sufficient delegates to close the nomination, it would turn into a brokered convention. If that happens and the gentlemen in the smoke-filled rooms refuse to nominate Jeb! as the compromise candidate, it's possible that Bloomberg could get the nod. He wouldn't be much of a Republican, but then neither would Trump. And he'd be running under a major party banner. From that perch he'd have the potential to crush Hillary.
2
Mike Bloomberg's position on gun control would make him persona non grata as the GOP nominee.
11
Another ineffective lost Bloomberg cause.
1
Along with his position on climate change and soda size regulation. The fact that he has an advanced degree would also be viewed with suspicion.
The fact that he is a Wall Street billionaire who deflected blame for the 2008 crisis away from Wall Street, and his embrace of a charter-school utopia, would be disqualify on the other side of the political aisle.
His whole campaign trial ballon was an exercise in delusion. It's doubtful that Bloomberg could even top Perot's performance in 1992.
The fact that he is a Wall Street billionaire who deflected blame for the 2008 crisis away from Wall Street, and his embrace of a charter-school utopia, would be disqualify on the other side of the political aisle.
His whole campaign trial ballon was an exercise in delusion. It's doubtful that Bloomberg could even top Perot's performance in 1992.
Thank You , Mr. Bloomberg. We have a big enough mess right now.
5
I respect Bloomberg's decision unequivocally.
Had he run he would have assured Trump the presidency as he would have pulled far more votes from Hilary than from Trump.
I believe he realized this and simply couldn't stomach, as those of us in New York knows, Donald Trump anywhere near the Oval Office.
Had he run he would have assured Trump the presidency as he would have pulled far more votes from Hilary than from Trump.
I believe he realized this and simply couldn't stomach, as those of us in New York knows, Donald Trump anywhere near the Oval Office.
4
That was the act of a true statesman; something we've not witnessed in decades. If he were to run the next time around I would work tirelessly to help him become elected. Thank you, Mayor Bloomberg, thank you.
5
What's with all this "statesman" business? The guy determined he couldn't win. He's a grating little egomaniac, completely out of touch with anyone beyond his cocktail party crowd and as inspiring as Novocaine - but he's not stupid.
14
Why must the NYT routinely use various forms of the word "fear" in so many of its headlines? There must be other 4-letter words (I can think of a couple) that would do.
I assume Bloomberg does not fear Trump. Is revolted at the idea of him as president, yes; but here as in so many other cases the use of "fear" is inaccurate and empowers the enemy, whether it be Trump, ISIS, the NRA, subway slashers etc etc.
Why would the NYT want to do that? Bloomberg, in his wisdom, would not choose to.
I assume Bloomberg does not fear Trump. Is revolted at the idea of him as president, yes; but here as in so many other cases the use of "fear" is inaccurate and empowers the enemy, whether it be Trump, ISIS, the NRA, subway slashers etc etc.
Why would the NYT want to do that? Bloomberg, in his wisdom, would not choose to.
"...preying on peoples' fears and prejudices ..." I think he didn't have to prey on them, he just put himself in the position to coalesce the bigots and hateful people. Have Americans ever put such an ugly face forward for the rest of the world to see? My grown children, when traveling, and asked where they are from, answer Canada. Sad
2
Re Bloomberg's comment - “For most Americans, citizenship requires little more than paying taxes,” - Is he so out of touch that he doesn't realize that approximately 50% of Americans don't pay taxes; instead, they receive a check from the government...
2
Really ?
Sales tax isn't a tax ? Payroll taxes aren't taxes ?
All of us pay some taxes. You are very wrong.
Sales tax isn't a tax ? Payroll taxes aren't taxes ?
All of us pay some taxes. You are very wrong.
6
I would venture he saw how much he would be reviled and loathed for his spotted record and realized that he would just be a repacked, sedate version of what Mr. Trump might be.
Good riddance.
Good riddance.
7
He's not running because he wouldn't have won. My guess is that he wouldn't have won a single state. His outlook is that of a typical Manhattan moderate: socially liberal on big issues, nanny state on small ones and a sort of mushy centrism on economics and foreign policy. That sounds good to a lot of pundits and NYT readers but most voters want the real thing, one way or the other, warts and all. He's basically a boring Perot, with none of the weird charisma or the anti-free trade proposals that gave Perot some traction and is giving Trump traction now. I'm sure he was also terrified of being on the debate stage with Trump. I imagine he tries to carry forward a certain public dignity. It's impossible to be on the same stage with Trump and keep your dignity, even if you try to ignore him. HRC and the GOP candidates will happily dive into the sewer to grab the prize but not Bloomberg. I can't say I blame him.
8
Just what the 2016 presidential circus needed--another billionaire who fancies himself a man of the people . . . I can not believe all the Bloomberg love from Times readers in this Comments section. During his mayoralty, NYC became a playground for the rich, while the poor were left to rot. Thanks but no thanks.
10
I agree with the logic of not pulling a Nader. But, why doesn't he enter the Republican primary, and try to dislodge Trump and Cruz before they even get to the Presidential election? What has he got to lose? The opportunity to be the first to say something sensible in a Republican debate? Even if Trump loses the nomination, he has done a huge amount of damage, especially internationally, with his trash talk. Even if Bloomberg loses the nomination, he could show the world the good side of America - something that Cruz and Rubio have failed to do.
1
I think his staff underestimated how many people don't want to vote for the available options. I think it would be a landslide.
6
Maybe it's time we embrace an instant-runoff voting system. More independents could run for president and voters wouldn't have to worry about splitting the vote.
3
Darn.
I'm not a political junkie, but was just telling my wife the other day that Bloomberg could come to the rescue. I had no idea that he was really considering a run.
He's got the qualities our country needs; Level-headed, non-partisan.
Maybe his people could re-check the math. Wait a few weeks. Try again.
We could use his no-drama even-handed leadership.
I'm not a political junkie, but was just telling my wife the other day that Bloomberg could come to the rescue. I had no idea that he was really considering a run.
He's got the qualities our country needs; Level-headed, non-partisan.
Maybe his people could re-check the math. Wait a few weeks. Try again.
We could use his no-drama even-handed leadership.
2
Bloomberg coopted a 3rd term as Mayor which was one term to many. His overbearing know it all nanny attitude wore very thin, very fast. That being said he was able to run this city in his sleep and now that we have seen the constant bumblings of our always tardy foot in the mouth mayor I appreciate Bloomberg's service. But America is not ready for his brand of leadership.
4
All things considered, it seems Bloomberg served New York well. He would not prevail in a presidential contest. He may as well live with a decent record (not flawless) and attend to other matters, such as.....next time!
"Michael Bloomberg Will Not Enter Presidential Race"
--------------------------
To quote David Lettermen: "Bloomberg is this high (lowering his hand to his hip) - not even a good veep."
--------------------------
To quote David Lettermen: "Bloomberg is this high (lowering his hand to his hip) - not even a good veep."
5
I would have relished a Bloomberg run, and probably would have gotten off my posterior to help in any way I could. True, I’d have to put aside excessive regulatory impulses by him concerning Big Gulps, smoking, salt and guns, but of all the candidates out there he’d make the best president. He could win, too.
But he’s right: he’d leech away the sanity vote from Hillary and might get Trump elected. But Bloomberg is pretty establishment himself, and his problems with Trump could be as much cosmetic as substantive. Trump certainly is no policy wonk, but a processor, someone who reacts to circumstances – much like Bloomberg. However, Bloomberg isn’t much for discussing the size of his hands or calling for building a wall and getting Mexicans to pay for it.
So, I may be forced to go to work flogging Trump, instead.
But he’s right: he’d leech away the sanity vote from Hillary and might get Trump elected. But Bloomberg is pretty establishment himself, and his problems with Trump could be as much cosmetic as substantive. Trump certainly is no policy wonk, but a processor, someone who reacts to circumstances – much like Bloomberg. However, Bloomberg isn’t much for discussing the size of his hands or calling for building a wall and getting Mexicans to pay for it.
So, I may be forced to go to work flogging Trump, instead.
1
I was critical of your tenure as mayor and I never voted for you, but today I take my hatbox to you Mike. You are an honorable man and you've done the right thing. I would be more than happy if HRC gives you a place in her cabinet.
3
Sounds like a plan...I would have liked to see him as president but v.p. would be a good compromise.
2
Somehow, I daresay, the Republic will go on.
8
Mr. Bloomberg lost my respect when he manufactured his third mayoral term despite the public voting twice for term limits. I guess power does trump money. Have a happy retirement, we'll take it from here.
15
In the hindsight, Bloomberg's 3rd term and his independence of the special interests were very important factors in NYC recovering from the Great Recession faster than most of the country. I don't know if he foresaw it when running for the 3rd term - but I suspect that his pessimism about the ability of most of the NYC pols to manage difficult situations had been the driver for that decision in 2009.
It wasn't Bloomberg that saved NYC. It was American taxpayers. A huge bundle of TARP money, and extraordinary actions by the Fed, went a long way towards supporting the city's recovery. If the rest of the country had received as much federal support as NYC did, the rest of the country also would have recovered more quickly. Bloomberg just happened to be Mayor when federal taxpayer funds flooded the financial markets.
2
Bloomberg for VP under Hillary!
9
Wow, a billionaire with a conscience who actually knows business AND government. Clearly he's too good for American voters.
9
Wise move Mr. Bloomberg!
2
Bloomberg has proven once again he is an extremely intelligent patriot.
I am proud he is a New Yorker.
I am proud he was our mayor.
He is truly a great American.
I am proud he is a New Yorker.
I am proud he was our mayor.
He is truly a great American.
6
The obvious question is: Will Ms Clinton ask Mr Bloomberg to be her running mate?
3
Can't. They're both from the same state.
3
The VP has to come from Florida or Ohio. No other states really matter with our corrupt election system. I wish my vote counted, but I'm from Texas. Hence, my vote goes to the Republican, no matter what I say at the voter booth.
If only Ralph Nader had demonstrated such wisdom. Sigh.
3
Watching the now-defunt ad for Bloomberg, I'm startled to find some striking similarities with Donald Trump, especially with how he uses his wealth as an asset. He's a super successful businessman and therefor would know how to run the economy from a governmental position, and he's so rich he finances his own campaigns, implying he's clean from political corruption.
That's not to say Bloomberg is anywhere near the nightmare-fuel of a potential Trump presidency. Although I'd sooner vote for either of the two Democratic nominees over Bloomberg, I'd wouldn't hesitate to vote for Bloomberg if it was a choice between him and any of the Republican candidates.
Rather, it makes me wonder if he could have taken hold of the Republican election if only he'd started campaigning sooner, perhaps with the mix of consistent policy's and fiery populism that has done Bernie Sanders well. Who knows how well that would have matched Trump's popularity without resorting to promises of a Great Wall of the U.S. and muslim-bashing, but I guess we'll never know.
That's not to say Bloomberg is anywhere near the nightmare-fuel of a potential Trump presidency. Although I'd sooner vote for either of the two Democratic nominees over Bloomberg, I'd wouldn't hesitate to vote for Bloomberg if it was a choice between him and any of the Republican candidates.
Rather, it makes me wonder if he could have taken hold of the Republican election if only he'd started campaigning sooner, perhaps with the mix of consistent policy's and fiery populism that has done Bernie Sanders well. Who knows how well that would have matched Trump's popularity without resorting to promises of a Great Wall of the U.S. and muslim-bashing, but I guess we'll never know.
2
The looming figure of Michael Bloomberg has been worrisome to those of us who believe that it is imperative, in the face of a radical obstructionist Congress and an activist Supreme Court, for Democrats to retain the White House. His entry into the race would have taken far more votes from Hillary Clinton or any other Democrat than from any Republican contender.
Fortunately, Bloomberg has realized that avoiding a disaster like Donald Trump must be the central concern for any responsible American. We all should be thankful for his wisdom and selflessness.
As difficult as it is to imagine someone of Michael Bloomberg’s stature working for anyone, it would be wonderful if the administration of Hillary Clinton could find a position worthy of Mayor Bloomberg and interesting to him. Perhaps a roving Ambassador Plenipotentiary Extraordinary would be appropriate.
Fortunately, Bloomberg has realized that avoiding a disaster like Donald Trump must be the central concern for any responsible American. We all should be thankful for his wisdom and selflessness.
As difficult as it is to imagine someone of Michael Bloomberg’s stature working for anyone, it would be wonderful if the administration of Hillary Clinton could find a position worthy of Mayor Bloomberg and interesting to him. Perhaps a roving Ambassador Plenipotentiary Extraordinary would be appropriate.
1
I caught the suggestion that Bloomberg might make a good VP candidate with Hillary. Go for it! Further comment is icing on the cake.
3
Well I guess there won't be thousands of expensive glass skyscrapers blocking out the sunshine on main streets across America. The super-rich will have to be content with Manhattan for their unoccupied eighth residence and money laundering schemes.
14
I guess Michael Bloomberg made his decision after listening to his "experts". If Bloomberg's "experts" ran polls it would be great if we could learn more about the polls and how they were conducted.
Lake they say in computer science: Garbage In Garbage Out.
Based on the document published in the New York Times I personally think they have the maps switched.
These "experts" vastly understate the popularity of Bernie Sanders' domestic economic policies due to his wanting to address income inequality, wanting to fix healthcare with single payer, having free college tuition for all students, fix the infrastructure, etc.
These "experts" also understate the extreme hatred many on the right have towards Hillary Clinton. Bill. Benghazi. The email server.
Both of these sentiments would definitely affect any conclusions that these "experts" may have drawn from their polls.
Sanders vs Trump == Change vs Crazy Change.
Nobody wants to vote for the rich White Establishment guy. Which is what the map on the bottom shows.
Clinton vs Trump: == rich White Establishment woman vs Crazy Change.
This is the year of change so Hillary will have to work hard to fight that trend. And Republicans who don't like The Donald and hate Hillary would have a reasonable alternative.
They would get to vote against both Trump and Clinton, badda bing, badda boom, President Bloomberg.
Which is what the map on the top shows.
If he is not running to protect Hillary, mission accomplished.
Lake they say in computer science: Garbage In Garbage Out.
Based on the document published in the New York Times I personally think they have the maps switched.
These "experts" vastly understate the popularity of Bernie Sanders' domestic economic policies due to his wanting to address income inequality, wanting to fix healthcare with single payer, having free college tuition for all students, fix the infrastructure, etc.
These "experts" also understate the extreme hatred many on the right have towards Hillary Clinton. Bill. Benghazi. The email server.
Both of these sentiments would definitely affect any conclusions that these "experts" may have drawn from their polls.
Sanders vs Trump == Change vs Crazy Change.
Nobody wants to vote for the rich White Establishment guy. Which is what the map on the bottom shows.
Clinton vs Trump: == rich White Establishment woman vs Crazy Change.
This is the year of change so Hillary will have to work hard to fight that trend. And Republicans who don't like The Donald and hate Hillary would have a reasonable alternative.
They would get to vote against both Trump and Clinton, badda bing, badda boom, President Bloomberg.
Which is what the map on the top shows.
If he is not running to protect Hillary, mission accomplished.
2
If you think Trump would be a disaster for the U.S. and the rest of the world, just consider Ted Cruz in his place. What's sad is that the possible winner on the Democratic side (HRC) is no prize.
6
This is essentially an endorsement of Hillary Clinton.
3
While I don't think that a Jew, much less a NY Jew, of which I am one, could today win the presidency, the man has class, style and a presence which is sorely lacking in all of the leading candidates. It's too bad that he can't run.
NEVERTRUMP!!!
NEVERTRUMP!!!
Be thankful you live in New York instead of Texas, where I do, and where my vote never counts.
If you don't like Hillary and you're in New York, your vote doesn't count either.
How has that worked out for the country?
An inspiring man. He would have raised the moral tone of this race considerably. I'm a moderate and I will vote for Hillary, but I'm sad to miss the opportunity to vote for him.
2
Bloomberg probably couldn't have won -- Jews are only slightly less objectionable than blacks to many people's way of thinking. But if I thought voting for Bloomberg wouldn't take votes away from Clinton, I would. He grew up poor, worked hard in school, and invented a business that made him a billionaire. Despite his reputation among some, he built low-income housing and parks in low-income neighborhoods. He's done a few things I haven't liked, but so have all the politicians I've had to vote for.
He pulled out for the right reasons. Let's hope we don't end up with Trump, who is probably a little psychotic, or Cruz, the grand Inquisitor.
He pulled out for the right reasons. Let's hope we don't end up with Trump, who is probably a little psychotic, or Cruz, the grand Inquisitor.
1
Perhaps Ms. Clinton should make Blumberg her running mate - this would make sure Hillary will be elected as President and Bloomberg would make a strong VP.
3
Secretary Clinton's game theory expert advisors will or have figured out who she needs to pick for a running mate. It would be political suicide to pick a running mate from New York, a state that is already in her pocket (thankfully).
too bad that the American Presidential Axiom exists....oh, never heard of it?
Anyone fit for the Office has too much character to stoop as low as 'merican politics require them to.
I wrote in Bloomberg in 2012.
RIP Bloomberg 2016.
Anyone fit for the Office has too much character to stoop as low as 'merican politics require them to.
I wrote in Bloomberg in 2012.
RIP Bloomberg 2016.
2
A mature, informed decision. What a concept. Thank you Mr. Bloomberg, you are a class act. Hopefully, you will be given a high level cabinet position. You are what this country needs.
4
Sorry to hear this. He would have had my vote. This may be first presidential election that I do not vote in. No good candidates. Unbelievable!
2
This dismaying sentiment seems the electoral version of "If I can't win, I'll just take my ball and go home."
In this week's edition of The New Yorker, Adam Gopnik describes how the emergence of Jean-Marie Le Pen, the French version of Donald Trump, as a possible winner of the Presidency in 2002 was such an appalling possibility that conservatives and socialists teamed up to defeat him. "Socialists...held their noses--some literally asked to take clothespins into the voting booth...and voted against Le Pen," Gopnik writes.
I am a lifelong Democrat and there is a good chance that I will be unhappy with my party's choice for the nomination. But faced with the prospect of a Trump, or Cruz, or Rubio presidency, I will hold my nose, like our French counterparts, and vote the party ticket.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-clothespin-campaign-a-fr...
In this week's edition of The New Yorker, Adam Gopnik describes how the emergence of Jean-Marie Le Pen, the French version of Donald Trump, as a possible winner of the Presidency in 2002 was such an appalling possibility that conservatives and socialists teamed up to defeat him. "Socialists...held their noses--some literally asked to take clothespins into the voting booth...and voted against Le Pen," Gopnik writes.
I am a lifelong Democrat and there is a good chance that I will be unhappy with my party's choice for the nomination. But faced with the prospect of a Trump, or Cruz, or Rubio presidency, I will hold my nose, like our French counterparts, and vote the party ticket.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-clothespin-campaign-a-fr...
3
Bloomberg was a great mayor.
He would have made an exceptional president.
He would have made an exceptional president.
7
Bloomberg should rejoin the Republican party and jump into their primary.
4
Hillary might wish to consider meeting with Bloomberg right now and offering him the Vice Presidential position. That would make the balance of this insane political season moot and go a very long way to allay the fears of so many. What Democrat or semi-conscious Republican wouldn't get behind that ticket? Hillary lost despite her best efforts eight years ago, she might wish to short circuit any remaining doubts now and do the country a real favor at the same time.
2
Many will NOT vote for hrc no matter tbe ticket.
1
I'm generally a fan of Bloomberg. Authoritarian tendencies aside, he proved himself a highly competent manager of this city.
However the map used by his team showing him to be competitive in several states borders on delusional. Georgia? Tennessee? Those would be Bloomberg states? And the interior state is undecided? That's fantastical stuff.
However the map used by his team showing him to be competitive in several states borders on delusional. Georgia? Tennessee? Those would be Bloomberg states? And the interior state is undecided? That's fantastical stuff.
1
I do think he is wrong. If it is him and Hillary and Trump, I would vote Bloomberg without a second thought.
3
Suggestion- using the Apprentice formula, all of the candidates are given a project. Make Gallup , NM great again. The boardroom would be past and present Presidents. Whoever succeeds will be hired.
1
Mike Bloomberg is an exemplary man. I believe he is someone who has shown his strong moral compass, willing to be used for the good of our country, but it is not to be. I very much respect his years of service and leadership over his lifetime and I thank him for being an example of a great man that we can all look up to. We need more of them!
3
If Ralph Nader thought like Mike Bloomberg, we would not have got Bush.
3
The purpose of this article is plug the queen again indirectly and tell us that Bloomberg a king of the oligarchs will run for POTUS if his queen's throne is threatened(as it is).
3
Way too many thoughtless jabs at Ralph Nader in these comments. I could not disagree more with Mr. Nader on the issues, but I support the right, and
recognize the benefit to our republic for anyone of conscience to run for whatever elected office they feel a passion towards. The highest office in the land does not exclusively belong to the nominee of the republican and democrat parties.
recognize the benefit to our republic for anyone of conscience to run for whatever elected office they feel a passion towards. The highest office in the land does not exclusively belong to the nominee of the republican and democrat parties.
4
Your last statement is a fond wish, not a fact.
Thank you for coming to your senses, sir. You were a GREAT mayor and we love you. However, Mr. Trump will secure the GOP Nomination, in a very decisive victory as the Trump Train pulls in to Cleveland later this year. Mr. Trump will crush Mrs. Clinton in a grand fashion in November, thus Making America Great Again. Again, thank you Mayor Bloomberg for doing the right thing and not muddying up the waters. We appreciate you!
So Bloomberg is sacrificing himself to save the United States of America from Donald Trump?
An ego as maniacal as his is the real threat to any nation.
An ego as maniacal as his is the real threat to any nation.
6
By the way, this whole problem of vote-splitting by which Nader allegedly helped GW Bush get in, and is the reason Bloomberg can't run, would be eliminated or greatly minimized if we adopted a rating (or "range") voting system for all candidates for an office (at least as an option), instead of the outmoded binary one we use which doesn't work when there are more than 2 serious candidates for an office. Some of us have been saying this for years, but no one listens.
2
Awww... come one. Run dude. A dose of humility would be good for you. It would be entertaining to see what the rest of the country thinks of you.
Hillary would mop the floor with you and your tailored suit.
Run man run.
Hillary would mop the floor with you and your tailored suit.
Run man run.
2
Fingers are crossed that some back room deal has been made with Hillary and Bloomberg will be chosen as her running mate.
3
I have an idea for you - be a policy driver. I heard you were ready to spend 1B$ any way - you can do the same. All right, we do not have any official mechanism to direct vote on initiatives and national level. But nothing is barring from creating unofficial ones. Set up a mechanism so voters (must be verified as such) can vote unofficially on policy proposals. That be a good push on the politicians, who often vote against voters' choices.
It is too late, I suspect, but Mr. Bloomberg was ill advised to run as an independent, The GOP is desperate for mature leadership. If he had elected to run as a Republican, he had a strong chance of saving the moderates and independents. Get rid of those advisers and understand the history of this country and use his innate insight. As it stands now the polarization and extremism that is being reinforced by the irrational statements of the GOP bench in this campaign is harming the country. Admiral Mullen was a poor adviser. We don't need to study war no more. Our problem is smart investment in the supporting infrastructure of this economy. Mr. Bloomberg, needs someone as a running mate who understands the Federal Government. One candidate is Senator Rob Portman of Ohio.
I am very disappointed that Mr. Bloomberg decided not to run. This country has been good to him and he should continue as a public servant. He fell into the myth of created by his advisers that it was better to be an independent. A huge mistake.
I am very disappointed that Mr. Bloomberg decided not to run. This country has been good to him and he should continue as a public servant. He fell into the myth of created by his advisers that it was better to be an independent. A huge mistake.
Agreed. I would suggest he chose Rice or Powell as a running mate.
I like the Powell idea.
Surprising move since he already had the backing of the Society for a Better West 57th Street.
9
One plutocrat less running for President? What a shame!
29
He's a generous philanthropist and a brilliant, self-made billionaire. It IS a shame he's not running, but fear of splitting the vote against Donald Trump made this the right choice.
1
Bloomberg might have been the closest thing to the sensible, moderate presidential candidate I’d like, though on foreign policy I still like Sanders who, like only a few other public figures, opposed the invasion of Iraq from the beginning on PRINCIPLE because it never had sufficient moral justification, WMD or not, not because it didn’t turn out so well.
But another problem about Bloomberg’s consideration of being a presidential candidate I think we’re overlooking is that now EVERY presidential candidate or potential candidate in both parties, must either be very wealthy or backed by people or groups who are very wealthy, with the sole exception of Sanders, who may be the last hurrah of the democratic republic, which has gradually, unnoticeably transmogrified into utter plutocracy (with a strong militaristic & theocratic bent). Especially since the Supreme Court’s Citizen United decision, you can’t run for president unless you’re rich or are willing to be a puppet to those who are. We all just accept that now.
But another problem about Bloomberg’s consideration of being a presidential candidate I think we’re overlooking is that now EVERY presidential candidate or potential candidate in both parties, must either be very wealthy or backed by people or groups who are very wealthy, with the sole exception of Sanders, who may be the last hurrah of the democratic republic, which has gradually, unnoticeably transmogrified into utter plutocracy (with a strong militaristic & theocratic bent). Especially since the Supreme Court’s Citizen United decision, you can’t run for president unless you’re rich or are willing to be a puppet to those who are. We all just accept that now.
15
A day late and a dollar short.
My aunt Millie isn't running for the same reason, "doesn't want to split the vote and have Trump win".
My aunt Millie isn't running for the same reason, "doesn't want to split the vote and have Trump win".
16
Thank you Mr. Bloomberg! I can understand the Republican Party's anxiety about Trump, but I cannot understand their desire to offer Cruz or Rubio as a candidate, because they will be easily crushed by Clinton. Trump? Who can tell?
4
Bloomberg should be commended on his frank and accurate assessment. It's scary that so many can't see what Trump really is and the damage he would do to this country, if elected. Just look at what he's done already... further turned the presidential election process into a carnival side show.
2
If Bloomberg were to run six months ago he may have had a chance but as he realizes now he does not have a chance. It makes ample sense not to run because he would not win.
8
Whatever happened to one person, one vote?
In ancient Rome, a victorious General back from a successful military campaign would be welcomed in Rome with a triumphant parade, but there was always a guy riding with him on the back of the chariot whispering in the honoree's ear, "thou art only a man".
I'm a fan of Mr Bloomberg in general, but its weird that Mr Bloomberg feels he has a right to veto the result of democratically elected candidates who've earned their slots on a national primary ballot.
The sense of entitlement brings to mind the way Mayor Bloomberg massaged, or shall we say, put his fat moneyed thumb on the corrupt scales of New York city politics, to tip the legislative process in his favor and thereby circumvent the term limits then in place that would have denied him his third term in office.
Mayor Bloomberg didn't like the law on term limits, so he changed the law rather than respect it.
What was Mayor Bloomberg's rationale at the time? New York city needed Mike Bloomberg to be mayor. The only reason Mayor Bloomberg has this prerogative to in essence veto the elections, is because of his phenomenal wealth. There's something wrong with this picture.
It kind of sounds like Mayor Bloomberg has a "savior complex". Which is admittedly better than Ted Cruz's "apocalyptic martyr complex", though not necessarily better than Donald Trump's "Narcissistic complex".
In ancient Rome, a victorious General back from a successful military campaign would be welcomed in Rome with a triumphant parade, but there was always a guy riding with him on the back of the chariot whispering in the honoree's ear, "thou art only a man".
I'm a fan of Mr Bloomberg in general, but its weird that Mr Bloomberg feels he has a right to veto the result of democratically elected candidates who've earned their slots on a national primary ballot.
The sense of entitlement brings to mind the way Mayor Bloomberg massaged, or shall we say, put his fat moneyed thumb on the corrupt scales of New York city politics, to tip the legislative process in his favor and thereby circumvent the term limits then in place that would have denied him his third term in office.
Mayor Bloomberg didn't like the law on term limits, so he changed the law rather than respect it.
What was Mayor Bloomberg's rationale at the time? New York city needed Mike Bloomberg to be mayor. The only reason Mayor Bloomberg has this prerogative to in essence veto the elections, is because of his phenomenal wealth. There's something wrong with this picture.
It kind of sounds like Mayor Bloomberg has a "savior complex". Which is admittedly better than Ted Cruz's "apocalyptic martyr complex", though not necessarily better than Donald Trump's "Narcissistic complex".
17
In response to Oh please:
Well, I think you have Bloomberg all wrong. He was right that New York City could benefit from his having a third term. He was a skilled manager, and quite fair to all, even though, many in the city could not see this.
But most of all: I'm wondering how a savior complex (compulsion to save) is not appreciably better than a narcissistic complex (it's all about me).
Well, I think you have Bloomberg all wrong. He was right that New York City could benefit from his having a third term. He was a skilled manager, and quite fair to all, even though, many in the city could not see this.
But most of all: I'm wondering how a savior complex (compulsion to save) is not appreciably better than a narcissistic complex (it's all about me).
2
One person, one vote has never happened. And it probably never will.
Hey Eric, my comment was about Mayor Bloomberg not respecting the law regarding term limits, not whether he was a good Mayor.
As I said, I liked Mayor Bloomberg as a Mayor, but I was troubled by the way he went about undoing a law that was on the books as a result of a democratic process. It was an absolutely clear conflict of interest for Mayor Bloomberg to undertake that effort. He put himself above the law.
Its much like the GOP senate members today that have said they won't meet or consider a supreme court nominee from President Obama. They don't like the law, so they invent rationals for doing what they want to do. They simply don't respect the democratic process nor the outcome of elections. They don't accept President Obama as legitimate.
Concerning which type of psychological complex is worse, while not an expert in psychology, I'm referring to the job they would do as president. Both Trump and Bloomberg are bright and perceptive, yet both have their blind spots.
Bloomberg is wholly blind to the issue of wealth inequality. His approach to the Occupy Wall Street protests was right in line with a 3rd world authoritarian regime. There should have been prosecutions of police for violence against private citizens, not the other way around. Those incidents were shameful and appalling.
But I also remember Bloomberg passed the "no-smoking in public" laws, which made the city livable again, best law I've seen in my lifetime.
Not sure we disagree, but fine if we do.
As I said, I liked Mayor Bloomberg as a Mayor, but I was troubled by the way he went about undoing a law that was on the books as a result of a democratic process. It was an absolutely clear conflict of interest for Mayor Bloomberg to undertake that effort. He put himself above the law.
Its much like the GOP senate members today that have said they won't meet or consider a supreme court nominee from President Obama. They don't like the law, so they invent rationals for doing what they want to do. They simply don't respect the democratic process nor the outcome of elections. They don't accept President Obama as legitimate.
Concerning which type of psychological complex is worse, while not an expert in psychology, I'm referring to the job they would do as president. Both Trump and Bloomberg are bright and perceptive, yet both have their blind spots.
Bloomberg is wholly blind to the issue of wealth inequality. His approach to the Occupy Wall Street protests was right in line with a 3rd world authoritarian regime. There should have been prosecutions of police for violence against private citizens, not the other way around. Those incidents were shameful and appalling.
But I also remember Bloomberg passed the "no-smoking in public" laws, which made the city livable again, best law I've seen in my lifetime.
Not sure we disagree, but fine if we do.
I find it interesting that, if the election would need to go to the House of Representatives, that it is the current House that would do the selecting. The Founding Fathers did not think such an important decision had to wait for the newly elected representatives reflecting the new "will of the people" to be considered. I think this constitutional idea of not waiting could be applied to a Supreme Court opening.
9
Why on earth did Bloomberg not commit to a party? He knew from history, an "independent" has no chance in our election system. Had he decided for one side or the other, he might easily be now the front runner. One has to wonder if he really meant and wanted to be POTUS.
As about the comments about Nader's ego, I disagree. Ralph has strength of character first, and confidence and conviction in his beliefs to a point that's called abnegation; where money is not allowed; where money is evil. That's not ego.
Sanders reminds me very much of Nader- doing something for the country, for the people, not just for the egoistical satisfaction of being "president"- and I wish him all the best.
As about the comments about Nader's ego, I disagree. Ralph has strength of character first, and confidence and conviction in his beliefs to a point that's called abnegation; where money is not allowed; where money is evil. That's not ego.
Sanders reminds me very much of Nader- doing something for the country, for the people, not just for the egoistical satisfaction of being "president"- and I wish him all the best.
7
Although he is a superior candidate in every way to Hillary, Bloomberg would simply siphon the democrat votes from her and increase the Trump landslide margin of victory in November. In any event, it is astounding that the establishment politicians, particularly the condescending limousine liberals from both major political parties, still don't understand what the American voter is saying through its support and hunger for Trump and Sanders. Running another politically connected rich insider who thrives on and prefers the status quo is a losing formula. Radical change that doesn't favor the establishment, the insiders, the privileged and the monied class is what the masses want, even if it results in a lot of things getting "broken" in the process.
7
I am sure his wife and his dog are disappointed - they seemed to be the only ones clamoring for his entry.
10
He is not married.
1
And does not have a dog.
Any candidate elected will "endanger the country." That's what presidents do!
And really, Bloomberg already ruined NYC's character. Let's not him do the same nationwide.
And really, Bloomberg already ruined NYC's character. Let's not him do the same nationwide.
11
He should have run as a Moderate Democrat. He actually could have potentially beaten Hillary Clinton for the nomination. His path to the Presidency was there. I can't see the USA ever electing an Independent Candidate, at least, not in the foreseeable future with the current Bi-Party system.
4
The republican's created this Frankenstein in 2009 when Mitch McConnell said: “there are enough of us to block the Democratic agenda-as long as they all marched in lockstep.” “As long as Republicans refused to follow his (President Obama’s) lead, Americans would see partisan food fights and conclude that Obama had failed to produce change.”
Then in a meeting following that:
Frank Luntz - GOP Minister of Propaganda
Rep. Paul Ryan(R-WI)
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA),
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX),
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX),
Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI)
Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA),
Sen. Jim DeMint (SC-R),
Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ-R),
Sen. Tom Coburn (OK-R),
Sen. John Ensign (NV-R) and
Sen. Bob Corker (TN-R).
Non-lawmakers present Newt Gingrich
All pledged to block any and all actions of the new "Black" president Barack Obama at any cost.
This set the stage for today's outrage over present government leadership. Donald Drumpf and Bernie Sanders are both products of this intentional destruction of this country. They represent the most angry and most concerned sides of the same coin. The GOP’s use of mass psychological tools and mass media last seen by Joseph Goebells, has driven this country into a fearful frenzy of mob like activity. Even if Drumpf doesn’t win the presidency, as Biden has said, this had brought this country’s racism and bigotry out of the closet…unfortunately in a very uncontrolled, loose on society kind of way.
Then in a meeting following that:
Frank Luntz - GOP Minister of Propaganda
Rep. Paul Ryan(R-WI)
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA),
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX),
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX),
Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI)
Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA),
Sen. Jim DeMint (SC-R),
Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ-R),
Sen. Tom Coburn (OK-R),
Sen. John Ensign (NV-R) and
Sen. Bob Corker (TN-R).
Non-lawmakers present Newt Gingrich
All pledged to block any and all actions of the new "Black" president Barack Obama at any cost.
This set the stage for today's outrage over present government leadership. Donald Drumpf and Bernie Sanders are both products of this intentional destruction of this country. They represent the most angry and most concerned sides of the same coin. The GOP’s use of mass psychological tools and mass media last seen by Joseph Goebells, has driven this country into a fearful frenzy of mob like activity. Even if Drumpf doesn’t win the presidency, as Biden has said, this had brought this country’s racism and bigotry out of the closet…unfortunately in a very uncontrolled, loose on society kind of way.
9
They should all be prosecuted for sedition and treason.
3
There were several meetings following the 2008 election of Obama that set the Republicans on a course of full time obstructionism. One of them occurred at "an historic inn" in Annapolis, Maryland. Another took place at the Koch brothers annual gathering. Still others were conducted in and around Washington, DC. The unified strategy of defy, defy, defy was decided on in those meetings. (Some of these meetings are detailed in Jane Mayer's new book, Dark Money, and I have written many times about the Annapolis meeting here and on my website.)
The strategy was also to de-legitimize Obama with the rumors that he was Muslim and that he wasn't born in this country. One random quote I read was from a man who said, "There must be something to them, they've been repeated so much." (Forget logic.) The supposedly respectable, decent leaders of the Republican party were silent, which means they were, at minimum, complicit.
Because Obama came on the national scene so quickly, because of the color of his skin and his heritage of having a father from Africa, the efforts against him fell on highly fertile ground. In far right wing areas, like east Texas, there was a panic in which people went out buying thousands of rounds of ammunition following both election victories.
Trump has stirred up a very ugly pot of stew, but it was already boiling before he came along. The Republicans have been bent on nullification of the last two elections and they have, in a significant way, succeeded.
The strategy was also to de-legitimize Obama with the rumors that he was Muslim and that he wasn't born in this country. One random quote I read was from a man who said, "There must be something to them, they've been repeated so much." (Forget logic.) The supposedly respectable, decent leaders of the Republican party were silent, which means they were, at minimum, complicit.
Because Obama came on the national scene so quickly, because of the color of his skin and his heritage of having a father from Africa, the efforts against him fell on highly fertile ground. In far right wing areas, like east Texas, there was a panic in which people went out buying thousands of rounds of ammunition following both election victories.
Trump has stirred up a very ugly pot of stew, but it was already boiling before he came along. The Republicans have been bent on nullification of the last two elections and they have, in a significant way, succeeded.
1
What is your website? Or if you wrote for NY Times, can you provide a link to the article(s)? Thanks.
If only Hillary would drop out to save to save us from a Trump or Cruz presidency, but all Hillary is worried about is Hillary :( .
11
How would Hillary dropping out save us from a Trump or Cruz presidency?
I suppose Bernie is not worried about himself? Get real!
Trump or no Trump, Bloomberg would have been a grand loser in the contest for the White House anyway. He's accusing Trump of demagoguery, meanwhile he's a demagogue himself, by disseminating his toxic views of Trump with the obvious intent of playing on people's fears, thereby hoping to influence the voter's mind.
It's clear that he, like most minorities hates Trump. Trump is too American for his taste.
It's clear that he, like most minorities hates Trump. Trump is too American for his taste.
4
The headline should read: Bloomberg Says He Won't Run, Fearing Victory for Trump OR Cruz
4
Too bad. If he had run and seen how he can't even win a single state, maybe we won't have to listen to his presidential ambitions ever again.
Bloomberg is no Bernie Sanders.
Bloomberg is no Bernie Sanders.
8
During most his three terms as mayor, Michael Bloomberg lived in Bermuda. Bloomberg hired the former mayor of Indianapolis to run the city.
He would only show up in the city for news conference after emergencies and ceremonies. The corporate owners of the newsmedia were too afraid of the little napoleon to properly vetted him.
He would only show up in the city for news conference after emergencies and ceremonies. The corporate owners of the newsmedia were too afraid of the little napoleon to properly vetted him.
8
We can't risk having for president the most dangerous political player since Joseph McCarthy.
Thank you Mike for taking one for the team.
Thank you Mike for taking one for the team.
4
Grateful that Bloomberg stated clearly that the risk of electing either Trump OR Cruz was too great. Those scoundrel establishment Repubs are already trying to push Cruz as an acceptable candidate rather than Trump. Good God, NO. Trump may be a narcissistic dumb-dumb, but Cruz is just plain evil.
5
With all his money and at his age, I for one can appreciate how he feels should Trump ever become President of our wonderful country. True patriots and people with any common sense and knowledge of history knows what a disaster Trump would be not only for us but for the world. That being said, I have faith in the American people and that we will all do the right thing once again as we did in electing President Obama, twice.
2
Bloomberg would not have won any states but he would have taken votes from Hillary. Possibly handing the WH to the GOP. Had Bloomberg thought he would hurt the GOP he certainly would have run. No one is fooled by his editorial.
3
It seems that on the map where Bernie Sanders is the Democratic nominee, Vermont is in the undecided column!! Sorry homey, something wrong herel
2
Mr Bloomberg's competence aside --, he seems godlike compared to the Republican candidates -- does anyone really think that this country would elect a Jewish president?
1
Ave atque vale, Mike. You can't buy a 1st term presidency the way you bought an illegal 3rd term as mayor. Go & stay gone.
9
The presidency is the highest honor American citizens have to give. It is the honor that many seek, as well as earning a place in the history books and the potential to make some difference in our future. Yet, there are many more ways to change things and with the honor of the presidency comes legions of people ready to stop the president with every move.
Who would have imagined that Obama, with his overwhelming election as president in 2008 and he re-election in 2012, would be stymied at every turn? AND, that the voters would reward the Republicans for their insistence that closing down government is better than trying to make it work?
Bloomberg should forget about the honor and dedicate himself to making a positive change in the nation by running as a Democrat in the latter primaries of this year. No one knows what will happen between now and convention time. No one knows if something will arise which would make Mrs. Clinton unable to claim her own dream. No one knows what will happen to Trump and his shooting off at the mouth. He might yet do himself in, even if he gets the nomination. He might wind up with 23.2% of the vote nationally.
This looks close to a done deal, Trump vs. Clinton, but the fate of our nation could reside in having another choice. He should keep getting ready to run, withdraw his withdrawal.
Before he became mayor, Mr. Bloomberg and I spoke occasionally about technological matters. If I could speak to him now it would be, Run, Mike, Run.
Who would have imagined that Obama, with his overwhelming election as president in 2008 and he re-election in 2012, would be stymied at every turn? AND, that the voters would reward the Republicans for their insistence that closing down government is better than trying to make it work?
Bloomberg should forget about the honor and dedicate himself to making a positive change in the nation by running as a Democrat in the latter primaries of this year. No one knows what will happen between now and convention time. No one knows if something will arise which would make Mrs. Clinton unable to claim her own dream. No one knows what will happen to Trump and his shooting off at the mouth. He might yet do himself in, even if he gets the nomination. He might wind up with 23.2% of the vote nationally.
This looks close to a done deal, Trump vs. Clinton, but the fate of our nation could reside in having another choice. He should keep getting ready to run, withdraw his withdrawal.
Before he became mayor, Mr. Bloomberg and I spoke occasionally about technological matters. If I could speak to him now it would be, Run, Mike, Run.
1
Ugh, like I needed a new reason to hate Trump: he deprived us of the moderate President that might have been. I like Hillary, I'm voting for Hillary, but all of the vitriol against her from the right will stall progress. I feel like the longer we have a liberal in office the more extreme people become on the Right--a moderate might have brought some sanity to American politics.
The fact that he would drop out for the greater good is exactly why he would have been the president we need. Thank you anyway, Mr. Bloomberg. :-(
The fact that he would drop out for the greater good is exactly why he would have been the president we need. Thank you anyway, Mr. Bloomberg. :-(
3
The longer we have a liberal in office...? We haven't had a liberal in office in decades. Obama & Bill Clinton weren't/aren't liberals, nor is Hillary Clinton. That's republican-speak.
2
Bloomberg is a bit of a cipher. Things would be much different today if he had announced early that he was an independent running as a Republican. He'd have displaced that jerk, Bush, as the nominal candidate to beat. But Bloomberg didn't want to campaign in frozen New Hampshire. He didn't want to do the hard work of holding town meetings and signing autographs. He over-thought. He hesitated. Now it's too late.
Napoleon's admonishment comes to mind: If you say you're going to take Vienna, take Vienna!
Napoleon's admonishment comes to mind: If you say you're going to take Vienna, take Vienna!
8
What a shame, poor Bloomberg will have to scratch "President of the USA" off his bucket list. Hey, at least there's still bungee jumping.
14
Every evening, about this time, I do a "find" on "Trump" on your home page.
Today, it's 12.
Two days ago, it was 17.
Tomorrow, with the primaries, it'll likely spike above 20.
I think you all should get paid something for this - you're providing at least $20M in free advertising for the man.
I'm surprised other candidates haven't gotten the FEC on your case, for disproportionately under-disparaging them.
I think you should offer to change the name of the paper to the New York Trump, for 8 months - for that $20M or so.
BTW, you all could've made the difference for Bloomberg. He was a great mayor for three terms - and you and your over-critical commentista all act like his tenure never happened. Or carp on his under-attention to Queens and Brooklyn.
Folks, the building booms near Barclay's, in Long Island City, and in Flushing are all results of things Michael Bloomberg put in motion.
Heck - he got 1st-tier universities to build campuses in the place.
If you really want to weep - putting aside all of the inequitable, unjust, immoral, unfair, and repugnant...sheer...inequality of it all - think of what the US would be like twelve years from now, if hizzoner were to have been elected president this November.
(yeah - he'd figure out some way to get the third term)
Today, all the eulogies come in.
A day late - a dollar short.
Today, it's 12.
Two days ago, it was 17.
Tomorrow, with the primaries, it'll likely spike above 20.
I think you all should get paid something for this - you're providing at least $20M in free advertising for the man.
I'm surprised other candidates haven't gotten the FEC on your case, for disproportionately under-disparaging them.
I think you should offer to change the name of the paper to the New York Trump, for 8 months - for that $20M or so.
BTW, you all could've made the difference for Bloomberg. He was a great mayor for three terms - and you and your over-critical commentista all act like his tenure never happened. Or carp on his under-attention to Queens and Brooklyn.
Folks, the building booms near Barclay's, in Long Island City, and in Flushing are all results of things Michael Bloomberg put in motion.
Heck - he got 1st-tier universities to build campuses in the place.
If you really want to weep - putting aside all of the inequitable, unjust, immoral, unfair, and repugnant...sheer...inequality of it all - think of what the US would be like twelve years from now, if hizzoner were to have been elected president this November.
(yeah - he'd figure out some way to get the third term)
Today, all the eulogies come in.
A day late - a dollar short.
7
People are heaping praise on this man, who would have been happy to do his utmost to torpedo a Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, were Sanders to win the nomination?
Good riddance.
Bernie 2016!
Good riddance.
Bernie 2016!
22
Commenters forget that Michael Bloomberg is a billionaire who would ultimately follow the establishment path. He may be intelligent and according to some, perhaps inject some moderation in to the debate, but, it still would be the same old status quo. 35 years of the status quo accomplished little or nothing and that is now no longer good enough.
5
It continues to amaze how many of the favorable views of Mr. Bloomberg come from those outside NY. Even he knew that a far sighted view of him was the best view. I attended a function once at Gracie Mansion where he offered the following anecdote. "Whenever I go out I run into people who tell me what a great job I'm doing. The problem is none of them live in NY." Principled - the third term was not principled. Brilliant problem solver - not to the homeless or forced out middle class. America - we'll be ok.
3
I have to strongly disagree with the person I would gladly vote for had he decided to stay on and run.
We cannot keep using the same reason at each and every election: that a third candidate will result in the worst of the other two getting elected.
Americans need to be given choices at the ballot box, even more so with independents. The country desperately needs such candidates to send a message to the tired old duopoly that is somehow considered a "democracy".
We need a third way out of the staunch partisanship and political impasse. Otherwise, it will take a very long time to get out of the rut we are in. The problems we face as a country and as a planet cannot sit back and wait for the glacial place of political "action" and progress we've witnessed for the past few decades.
Mr. Bloomberg, please reconsider.
We cannot keep using the same reason at each and every election: that a third candidate will result in the worst of the other two getting elected.
Americans need to be given choices at the ballot box, even more so with independents. The country desperately needs such candidates to send a message to the tired old duopoly that is somehow considered a "democracy".
We need a third way out of the staunch partisanship and political impasse. Otherwise, it will take a very long time to get out of the rut we are in. The problems we face as a country and as a planet cannot sit back and wait for the glacial place of political "action" and progress we've witnessed for the past few decades.
Mr. Bloomberg, please reconsider.
1
This isn't about Trump whom Bloomberg complains about in his statement. It's about keeping party hegemony and killing off any outsiders, including Sanders, as revealed in the 8th paragraph. Sanders or Trump what's the difference to people like Bloomberg?
As decent a man as Bloomberg seems to try and present himself to be he is inherently conflicted because of his wealth and power. He is just another billionaire that does not want to lose power and wealth in his part of the economy and in conjunction with all the other billionaires continue to accumulate more even while providing lip service lamentations about the ever shrinking middle class. It's a sham.
Change of the status quo, to really help the lower and middle class, by necessity will be painful to the Bloombergs of the world so if they are not mad and frenzied then nothing is happening. Behind Clinton they all seem fat and happy.
As decent a man as Bloomberg seems to try and present himself to be he is inherently conflicted because of his wealth and power. He is just another billionaire that does not want to lose power and wealth in his part of the economy and in conjunction with all the other billionaires continue to accumulate more even while providing lip service lamentations about the ever shrinking middle class. It's a sham.
Change of the status quo, to really help the lower and middle class, by necessity will be painful to the Bloombergs of the world so if they are not mad and frenzied then nothing is happening. Behind Clinton they all seem fat and happy.
3
I would have relished the opportunity to vote for Mike Bloomberg for the presidency. But I agree with him, and many others, that the downside risk of his helping to elect someone who would be disastrous for the country outweighed the odds that he could have won.
As it's clear that his decision was made in large part to abet Secretary Clinton's candidacy--and that her positions, on balance, most closely resemble his own--I hope our former Mayor is open to the possibility of continuing his public service in the Cabinet of a second President Clinton.
As it's clear that his decision was made in large part to abet Secretary Clinton's candidacy--and that her positions, on balance, most closely resemble his own--I hope our former Mayor is open to the possibility of continuing his public service in the Cabinet of a second President Clinton.
3
Those from whom we truly have to be saved are the fraudsters of Wall Street who wantonly pillaged our country in 2008, who remain completely unpunished and who continue to pull the strings of our puppet politicians. There's only one candidate who gives the slightest hope that it is possible to bring justice to the land: Bernie Sanders.
8
Without the Electoral College. Trump could use a massive number of votes from one state to offset the votes of many other states. But the Electoral College was designed to prevent that by holding 50 individual state elections. It gives the small states(in population) a leg up only in Presidential Elections. It was designed to prevent populist candidates from large states using large numbers of votes from one state to wipe out the voters' will in several small states. They created the Electoral College specifically to prevent popular candidates from steamrolling over the rest of the nation into the White House. It may prove valuable this year.
1
Yeah. Just like it proved so valuable by giving us George W. Bush.
Bloomberg is exactly the person we need and losing him shows how far we have fallen. Independent with stellar business record plus 12 years steering major city exceptionally well. We need you Mr. B!
2
"Demagogues" is what elites always label champions of the people.
If you don't have money invested with Wall St., you should be very, very worried if your favorite candidate isn't regularly called a demagogue.
If you don't have money invested with Wall St., you should be very, very worried if your favorite candidate isn't regularly called a demagogue.
1
All these Ralph Nader references. Wonder where they came from so spontaniously. I guess that was going to be the Hillary campaign's key talking point on Bloomberg.
5
Times change, maybe that tells you something about the mood of the electorate.
First Bloomberg was a Republican who declared he was then a Democrat to run for NYC Mayor. Now he is Independent.
Sounds like he wised up huh?
Sounds like he wised up huh?
So the Bloomberg threat disappears like a puff of smoke. I always took his interest in the race with a large helping of salt. He wanted to run? Sodas plenty of other billionaires apparently. Not just nanny person can be president.
3
If only Ralph Nader had been similarly smart and unselfish.
8
I will always wonder how thing's would have turned out if Nader never got in that race. We could be a much safer world today if dumbya lost.
If only the Democrats ran someone half-decent, instead of Gore. Gore should not even been close to losing.
3
Bloomberg for VP, on the Democratic Ticket.
1
Mr. Bloomberg, please put your resources and talent at fighting the NRA. That’s a fight we need to win.
11
Absolutely fascinating how, ONE YEAR before the election, reliance on "polls" determines a candidate's decision whether or not to run.
Reminds me (not that I was there) of 1948, the NIGHT BEFORE the election, reliance on polls dictated the newspaper headline "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN."
Something in the Bloomberg 'reasoning' doesn't hold water....
Reminds me (not that I was there) of 1948, the NIGHT BEFORE the election, reliance on polls dictated the newspaper headline "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN."
Something in the Bloomberg 'reasoning' doesn't hold water....
3
not understanding all the love for Bloomberg
I mean, it isn't like we have a shortage of egocentric billionaires trying to tell the rest of us how to live, usually by rules that don't apply to the rich
I mean, it isn't like we have a shortage of egocentric billionaires trying to tell the rest of us how to live, usually by rules that don't apply to the rich
22
I am glad that Mayor Bloomberg decided not to run. He is the kind of politician who disfigures democracy in a different way than Mr. Trump, but it is just as harmful. Mr. Trump is a demagogue, who appeals to the baser instincts of the people. Mr. Bloomberg is a technocrat, who believes that experts and engineers should make the cardinal choices. He neither educates nor trusts the people to make those choices. Both men have contempt for the ordinary citizen and voter.
14
Thank you I wanted to say something similar but it just wouldn't come ut as anything but nasty. I really dislike Bloomie his contempt for the common man and worship of avarice disgust me.
4
I voted for him in the last two elections. I was hoping that this time it wouldn't be another write in vote.
I am still hopeful he will reconsider. We have no good choice at the moment.
This is not the first time that Mayor Bloomberg has had presidentalitis. The recidivism rate is very high for this disorder.
5
Bloomberg ought to campaign for HRC if he wants to help this country.
5
I think that's what he did with his latest statement.
But unsaid, Bloomberg might accept a nomination as the dark horse Republican nominee from a brokered convention.
And it does appear there will be a brokered convention.
In that case, it is Trump who would run as an independent, resulting in a Democratic win.
And of course, Bernie Sanders still can get the Democratic nomination. Either Sanders or Clinton would easily win in a three way election if the GOP dumped Trump for Bloomberg.
And it does appear there will be a brokered convention.
In that case, it is Trump who would run as an independent, resulting in a Democratic win.
And of course, Bernie Sanders still can get the Democratic nomination. Either Sanders or Clinton would easily win in a three way election if the GOP dumped Trump for Bloomberg.
3
My wife and I had dinner on Saturday with three other liberals. We arrived at the same conclusion that Mr. Bloomberg did - that he would throw the race into the House where heaven only knows what mischief Paul Ryan would have engineered. Actually, we all thought we knew and we sure it would not have been a pretty sight for democracy. Having said that, even though we are all self-described liberals, there was a general consensus that he could very easily have won our votes. It's too bad that we often think that politicians run for office for all the wrong reasons. Bloomberg is an exception and is in my mind superior to anybody in the race, including the Dems.
3
I am glad Mayor Bloomberg decided not to run. His analysis of the repercussions is exactly right.
http://c-dawson.blogspot.com/2016/01/here-is-how-donald-trump-becomes-ou...
http://c-dawson.blogspot.com/2016/01/here-is-how-donald-trump-becomes-ou...
Just what we did NOT need--another Wall Street billionaire with a large ego to match running to be oligarch-in-chief. I guess you think Hillary can be trusted to continue her subservience to you and your fellow financial titans. But, unlike you, this Democrat feels anyone who takes your money for speeches that she refuses to share with the voters as she tried with her email server, and for her SuperPAC, and is clearly a creature of the establishment might find herself quite vulnerable to your fellow oligarch, The Donald, with his populist bombast appealing to those disaffected and disillusioned by the entitled elite.
10
I hope this does not offend her royal highness, while I meekly say that Bloomberg would have made a much better presidential candidate than her.
3
Lol couldn't agree more
3
Trump has all the usual hallmarks of a third party candidate. He appeals to a politically naive group of voters and people who don't normally show up at the polls, he's a "tell it like it is" blowha, I mean, candidate, and his chances of winning are fairly slim. However, this time the third party candidate is running as a major party candidate, and I don't think a major party has had a nominee come out of left - or right - field.
Another however. If Trump doesn't get the nomination he will definitely run as a third party candidate, or throw his support behind Cruz for a quid pro quo. I shudder to think what that might be. Secretary of Commerce? State? Ambassador to Russia?
Another however. If Trump doesn't get the nomination he will definitely run as a third party candidate, or throw his support behind Cruz for a quid pro quo. I shudder to think what that might be. Secretary of Commerce? State? Ambassador to Russia?
1
Bloomberg's fear mongering about a Trump presidency is completely overblown. What's the worst that could happen? So Trump makes America great again. What's wrong with that? And if he doesnt then he serves one term. So what? The only thing worse than a Trump presidency is another Clinton in the White House.
3
I guess the question is whether you thought the first Clinton was too liberal or too conservative. I do not want another moderate conservative, so will support Sanders.
3
Or any other Republican in the White House.
It's a shame. He was the last hope of the thinking voter. Now we stare into an abyss populated by clueless demagogues and power hungry and corrupt ideologues, and one honest the goodness clown.
2
Small hands
4
If hillare were smart Bloomberg would make a perfect vp. Diffuses Donalds so called business advantage
Mike made his billion s from scratch. . No inheritance to start. And while Donald thinks he has lots of money mayor mike has him ten times over. As for me I get social values from democrats and financial ones from republicans. I would quit my day job to volunteer
Mike made his billion s from scratch. . No inheritance to start. And while Donald thinks he has lots of money mayor mike has him ten times over. As for me I get social values from democrats and financial ones from republicans. I would quit my day job to volunteer
Thank you, Mr. Bloomberg. Difficult to give up a dream of US presidency. As I see it, he would have taken votes from Hillary Clinton and make her victory more difficult. All of us who think of us as 'progressive' should vote for her in the general election.
2
Too bad our primary-caucus system is so party-controlled, meaning voters can only vote for their political party's candidate in many states.
This system discriminates against (1) voters registered as Independent (now about 42% of our voters), and (2) cross-over voters where Republicans or Democrats may want to vote for the other party's primary candidate.
This means the nation may lose the best candidate to run in the national election. For example, in national polls of voters a recent poll showed that Bernie Sanders had the lowest unfavorable rating and could beat the possible Republican candidates better than Hillary Clinton could.
Bloomberg could probably convince a lot of Democratic and Independent voters to vote for him, but he can't pass the ultra-conservative ideological litmus test of the Republican party these days.
So the system is rigged by the parties so the best woman/man for the job can't get passed the primaries.
I hear California has an interesting system to get better candidates that can appeal to people from both parties.
So once again, it's a party over country political system in the not-so democratic U.S.A.
This system discriminates against (1) voters registered as Independent (now about 42% of our voters), and (2) cross-over voters where Republicans or Democrats may want to vote for the other party's primary candidate.
This means the nation may lose the best candidate to run in the national election. For example, in national polls of voters a recent poll showed that Bernie Sanders had the lowest unfavorable rating and could beat the possible Republican candidates better than Hillary Clinton could.
Bloomberg could probably convince a lot of Democratic and Independent voters to vote for him, but he can't pass the ultra-conservative ideological litmus test of the Republican party these days.
So the system is rigged by the parties so the best woman/man for the job can't get passed the primaries.
I hear California has an interesting system to get better candidates that can appeal to people from both parties.
So once again, it's a party over country political system in the not-so democratic U.S.A.
5
Gosh I miss the days when we had an empty suit as POTUS who spent the first 20 years as an alcoholic and then a born again christian. Or a shady felon who eventually resigned after ordering a breaking or entering. Or a smooth talker who took advantage of a 22 year old intern...right there in the Oval Office and left the evidence on her dress. We need to return to the good old days.
6
Bloomberg's fear mongering about a Trump presidency is completely overblown. What's the worst that could happen? So Trump makes America great again. What's wrong with that? And if he doesnt then he serves one term. So what? The only thing worse than a Trump presidency is another Clinton in the White House.
3
I am a naturalized citizen from the Philippines. Marcos won the presidency of the Philippines overwhelmingly and then proceeded to declare martial law. And he was nowhere as demagogic as the D. That is the worst that could happen as Trump decides to round up Muslims, silence the NYT, WaPo and the press with libel suits, waterboard anybody suspected of terrorism (and that may include you),etc. He has said he will do all these things. He does his own fearmongering. No need for anybody else to do that.
1
That is why high levels of gun ownership are so helpful. It puts power in the hands of the people. If Trump tries to round up Muslims his problem is a lot bigger when they are sitting at home with an assault rifle on their lap.
1
It's a shame that the best person qualified to lead this country has to bow out due to "politics". We are all starving for bipartisan pragmatism, and Mike embodies that unequivocally. While I believe our system is the best in the world, this election represents a very sad state in our history. At the very least, one can only hope this acts as a wake up call to all politicians that Americans have had enough of Washington as we know it.
2
A wise move, but sad news for our country.
1
Not so sure he would have siphoned votes away from Hillary. I know plenty of Republicans that would vote for Bloomberg over Trump
1
I hope he didn't pay too much to that consulting group for those electors maps. He has VT, NH and ME as "undecided", states where Sanders dominated in the primaries, and he has himself winning Massachusetts against Sanders. Sorry Mr. Wall Street Oligarch, you're dreaming. As this 65 year old New Englander who has lived in four of those states can reliably tell you, probably you might win CT, because it has so many rich white guys like yourself. But none of the others. Dream on; smart that you decided against running. Clinton won't defeat Trump either, so put your influence and money (if he'll take it) behind Bernie Sanders. Your taxes might go up, but life will be better. Even for you.
8
The real meaning. His political pollsters told him outside NY he has no support.
7
Dang. I just watched the ad. Bloomberg would have had my vote!
1
Glory, spare me the fawning over this man. Among New Yorkers I know, he is reviled, in sizable part because of his arrogant decision to have the term limits changed so he could snag that last term as mayor.
In that third run for office, he had to spent $102 million, or $183 per vote, to get re-elected. According to the NYT, he spent over a quarter BILLION dollars overall to secure and keep the mayorship.
And therein lies a huge problem. This is a guy who buys his way into getting his way. According to his own research, he'd lose NY State in both scenarios. This country does not need a billionaire at the helm, of whatever stripe or party. Praise him all you want, but in middle America they'd see someone who's coming for their guns and Big Gulps, and he'd lose.
In that third run for office, he had to spent $102 million, or $183 per vote, to get re-elected. According to the NYT, he spent over a quarter BILLION dollars overall to secure and keep the mayorship.
And therein lies a huge problem. This is a guy who buys his way into getting his way. According to his own research, he'd lose NY State in both scenarios. This country does not need a billionaire at the helm, of whatever stripe or party. Praise him all you want, but in middle America they'd see someone who's coming for their guns and Big Gulps, and he'd lose.
20
I suppose they all have advertising agencies to groom their images with psychologically-effective messaging and branding campaigns, but that doesn't make it feel any less smarmy.
Democracy works when voters have accurate, unbiased information on which to base their decisions in the voting booth. Branding campaigns may be many things, but they are not about providing accurate, unbiased information.
Good call, Mr. Bloomberg. Now please support the Democratic nominee in November.
Democracy works when voters have accurate, unbiased information on which to base their decisions in the voting booth. Branding campaigns may be many things, but they are not about providing accurate, unbiased information.
Good call, Mr. Bloomberg. Now please support the Democratic nominee in November.
3
Bloomberg took one Big Gulp before deciding not to run. I don't think he needs another Big Gulp to endorse HRC.
2
What farcical arrogance. Yet another millionaire/billionaire thinks he can save America... from yet another millionaire/billionaire...
As for the media, you guys/gals made a story ("Bloomberg to run!!") out of a non-story (did he ever give a press conference saying he would?) that then becomes a non-story (he disappears into political nothingness) made into a story ("I will not run!!").
As for the media, you guys/gals made a story ("Bloomberg to run!!") out of a non-story (did he ever give a press conference saying he would?) that then becomes a non-story (he disappears into political nothingness) made into a story ("I will not run!!").
10
There is still a chance that Bloombery could emerge as the Republican dark horse candidate from a Convention that is not taken on the first ballot, and won't accept either Trump or Cruz.
THAT may be Bloomberg's last best chance to become President. This is what he'd have to do to get that chance.
None of the Republican elite is happy with any of their choices now, and those who do like a choice are especially determined not to compromise on the other choices.
Watch for it.
THAT may be Bloomberg's last best chance to become President. This is what he'd have to do to get that chance.
None of the Republican elite is happy with any of their choices now, and those who do like a choice are especially determined not to compromise on the other choices.
Watch for it.
4
Mark, there is no possibility the Republicans are going to nominate an anti-gun liberal like Bloomberg.
3
Best comment.
1
WestSider -- What would people like Mitt Romney be willing to say or do to capture the White House?
Their biggest objection to Trump is they think he'll lose. They'd prefer someone more malleable like Jeb? or Rubio, but just winning it at all is the main point.
Bloomberg would beat Hillary. Would they sell out gun rights to do that?
Remember Romney was Governor of Mass, a liberal place, and did health care before Obama did. He'd go that far to win.
It may be a long shot, but for Bloomberg it is his only shot now, and not zero, in fact better odds than an independent run.
At bottom, I don't think Republicans like Romney believe in anything but winning. And I don't think Hillary is any better about that.
Their biggest objection to Trump is they think he'll lose. They'd prefer someone more malleable like Jeb? or Rubio, but just winning it at all is the main point.
Bloomberg would beat Hillary. Would they sell out gun rights to do that?
Remember Romney was Governor of Mass, a liberal place, and did health care before Obama did. He'd go that far to win.
It may be a long shot, but for Bloomberg it is his only shot now, and not zero, in fact better odds than an independent run.
At bottom, I don't think Republicans like Romney believe in anything but winning. And I don't think Hillary is any better about that.
I am tired of candidates like Mayor Bloomberg who think their millions or billions qualify them to be in public office. Its good he at least has the sense to not run for office.
He would have been absolutely rolled in the mud, as he should be, had he tried to run.
it's not enough that they've bought the system, they want to tell everybody else what to do!!!
He would have been absolutely rolled in the mud, as he should be, had he tried to run.
it's not enough that they've bought the system, they want to tell everybody else what to do!!!
8
I would bet that in addition to this courageous decision, Michael Bloomberg will also throw a lot of his money towards anti Trump and Cruz messaging. At least I hope so.
2
All the praise of Mr. Bloomberg: let's not forget that he circumvented the will of the people (I guess that's what he means by "independent" and not "accountable" to interests ) and bought himself a third term as mayor.
Billionaires seem to busy buying their own way of what they think is best, the little people be damned. "They" know best. I prefer accountability to the myriad of so called special interests that make up America. From business and professional groups to unions, and so on-- it's called our democracy.
Billionaires seem to busy buying their own way of what they think is best, the little people be damned. "They" know best. I prefer accountability to the myriad of so called special interests that make up America. From business and professional groups to unions, and so on-- it's called our democracy.
8
Well, he's never gon' be president now.
2
Very disappointed. If anything, the exact would occur; Trump would definitely lose. And there was a good chance, that Bloomberg could actually win outright.
I knew Mike many years ago and would have gladly contributed both time and money to his campaign. Now it appears that we will have only the choice of a lesser of two evils. Please re-consider, Mike. I will gladly leave my semi-retirement as an MBA program Professor (Finance) and also write a check for $10,000 just for starters.
1
Never mind, I'll send $5 dollars to the Cruz campaign in the name of Professor Francis Marion.
But Bloomberg IS still running, he's just running through his surrogate, Hilary Clinton. It's right there in print - when it appeared that Sanders was going to be the democratic nominee, Bloomberg was willing to step in order to prevent a Cruz/Trump presidency. Bloomberg and the other Wall Street democrats (I don't use that expression as a pejorative) will not bother interfering with the election as long as their woman has a viable shot.
3
As one of the strongest advocate of sane gun control laws, Michael Bloomberg realized he would take more votes from Hillary than Trump. Funny how people like Bloomberg and Warren Buffett never feel the need to brag about their "yoouge" banks accounts. Hmm...could it be they are secure, sane adults?
www.newyorkgritty.net
www.newyorkgritty.net
2
Mr. Bloomberg is absolutely presidential.... thankfully he had the good sense and dignity to back off and give Clinton a clear path to the white house.
1
Excellent decision! Good to know that there are still politicians who put the country before themselves. My respect for Bloomberg just went up significantly.
1
Unfortunate. He would have made an insufferably good president.
2
"Michael R. Bloomberg-- who for months quietly laid the groundwork to run for president as an independent-- is disturbed by Mr. Trump’s 'feigning ignorance of white supremacists,' alluding to Mr. Trump’s initial refusal to disavow an endorsement from David Duke."
And although a synonym, rather than repudiate-- IE to refuse to have anything to do with, to refuse to accept, to reject as unauthorized, to reject as untrue or unjust, to refuse to acknowledge or pay-- Trump said that he "disavows" the KKK endorsement. IE to disclaim knowledge of, connection with, or responsibility for; disown; repudiate: "He disavowed the remark that had been attributed to him."
And although a synonym, rather than repudiate-- IE to refuse to have anything to do with, to refuse to accept, to reject as unauthorized, to reject as untrue or unjust, to refuse to acknowledge or pay-- Trump said that he "disavows" the KKK endorsement. IE to disclaim knowledge of, connection with, or responsibility for; disown; repudiate: "He disavowed the remark that had been attributed to him."
Unfortunately Mayor Bloomberg's political team underestimated the Trump factor--
If only Bloomberg had invested $25 million or so, (of his $1 billion budget) in a nationwide infomercial ad campaigns on the cable news networks, with their never-ending coverage of the Trump vitriol, the country would have gotten to know a classy, brilliant "presidential" billionaire. With that juxtaposition, Trump would have folded early on like a cheap (Trump) suit...
If only Bloomberg had invested $25 million or so, (of his $1 billion budget) in a nationwide infomercial ad campaigns on the cable news networks, with their never-ending coverage of the Trump vitriol, the country would have gotten to know a classy, brilliant "presidential" billionaire. With that juxtaposition, Trump would have folded early on like a cheap (Trump) suit...
3
Another reason why he didn't run: he can't win. But that's secondary to his big moral point about saving the nation, nay, saving the world, from Trump. There's something self-serving about Mike that's faintly unpleasant. He's played Hamlet twice before this cycle about running for president. What is he, larger than life?
5
Trump or Hillary, the lesser of two evils. I would've voted for Bloomberg. (And IMHO Cruz is as bad or worse than Trump, but in other ways)
1
He is the one Republican for whom I might have chosen to vote.
Party does not mean what it once did. I grew up believing in the Eisenhower era. When Nixon ruined my faith, I became ever more progressive. Now, I do not believe that anyone less than Bernie can lead our country.
Party does not mean what it once did. I grew up believing in the Eisenhower era. When Nixon ruined my faith, I became ever more progressive. Now, I do not believe that anyone less than Bernie can lead our country.
Please, Mayor Bloomberg, run for Vice President on a ticket with Hillary Clinton! You are such a gifted and competent leader, and if would send the perfect message of unity to America to have you both reach across the party lines and work together!
I wonder if Hillary would consider Bloomberg for VP? While the Bernie fans will want a hard left VP should Hillary get the nomination, a moderate independent (socially progressive yet fiscally conservative) might get the people that hate both Trump AND Hillary enough of a nudge to vote for Clinton....
Just a thought. Really, at this point we'll take anything that will result in Trump and/or Cruz both loosing. Yeeecchh. Could not stomach the prospect of either one.
Just a thought. Really, at this point we'll take anything that will result in Trump and/or Cruz both loosing. Yeeecchh. Could not stomach the prospect of either one.
This makes me admire Bloomberg even more. The idea of personal sacrifice for the good of the order is what is missing from politics. That said, I'm happy he won't be in a race against Hillary. If Sanders was in the lead, this die-hard Democrat would have put my support behind Bloomberg. He proves you don't have to be political to be a good politician.
1
Good riddance to this would be 2016 version of 2000 Ralph Nader.
1
Too bad. A Bloomberg presidency would likely improve American infrastructure, resulting in an overall economic improvement.
Oh, goodie! Now I can continue to drink my EXTRA LARGE sodas. After all, allowing poor people to drink soda is the biggest problem our country is facing right now. Bloomberg would have solved that problem.
5
Thank you Mr. Bloomberg. We all know it takes a very large ego to run New York City or run for president, but you just put that aside for the greater good of the nation. A Trump or Cruz presidency is unthinkable. This is the act of a true patriot and we salute you.
Thank you, Mayor Bloomberg, for putting the country first.
Bloomberg is a plutocrat who places financial interests first. There should be no place in democratic politics for someone who is so out of touch with the lives of most working people. I find it well to remember that the Borough of Brooklyn voted against him in his last mayoral run, and I like to think Brooklynites went against him because they don't like his heavy-handed monied ways of doing things.
7
I would find two very wealthy establishment Television stars from NYC to be a real curiosity. It would be like the past World Series play between the New York Yankees and the New York Mets. Not many in the nation were interested.
Imagine two New York Rich guys trying to win votes from a population harmed by wealthy interests. Got to love those conservative Republican voters. They have extremely short memories and attention spans.
Imagine two New York Rich guys trying to win votes from a population harmed by wealthy interests. Got to love those conservative Republican voters. They have extremely short memories and attention spans.
1
Agree with him or not, it’s hard to argue that Michael Bloomberg doesn’t put his country first. On paper, Mr. Bloomberg is light years ahead of Mr. Trump in the qualities that would make a good president, but it’s hard to predict how anything will go with a Trump wild card.
While many think Trump would be a weak general election candidate, they are forgetting the Trump scorched-earth effect. He burns everyone and everything around him. Even if Hillary Clinton does pull out a victory, she is going to get to the White House like the walking dead after battling Trump. But she'll have a better chance in a 2-way race.
While many think Trump would be a weak general election candidate, they are forgetting the Trump scorched-earth effect. He burns everyone and everything around him. Even if Hillary Clinton does pull out a victory, she is going to get to the White House like the walking dead after battling Trump. But she'll have a better chance in a 2-way race.
2
Barack Obama says that Donald Trump will not win, and asked why, he said because he trusts the American people. We have to trust the American people to repudiate Trump and hand him a through defeat. If we don't we will get what we deserve in such case and America will no longer be great in any sense. Let's just keep trusting that the American people will do what's right.
1
I disagree with Mr. Bloomberg's vehemently anti-gun stand (but agree that we need to make some changes to reduce gun violence), but otherwise think he would be a rational and attractive alternative to the clown car on the right and the likely winner of the Dems primary on the left, who Charles Blow referred to as a "hawkish political shape shifter". Its going to be a "hold yer nose and vote" election. Thanks for trying, Mr. Bloomberg.
2
What a relief! With his decision, Mr. Bloomberg hit it out of the park! I am very grateful to him. Now, all our efforts can be directed to put a democrat on the White House. Thank you Mr. Bloomberg and good luck!
1
A liberal, fiscal conservative. A man after my own heart. I'm sad he's not running.
Let me tell ya Mike, it was a wise decision and thank you. Everyone loves a candidate before and just after the election, but they soon become the focus of hatred and scorn. You probably saved a lot of dignity and your inner peace with this decision.
Reading all the admiring and flowery comments on his choice is making me laugh -- albeit ruefully. As an ex-New Yorker, I was living in the city during Bloomberg's tenure. While he did some great things, such as added much-needed green space and bike lanes to Manhattan, he was incredibly pro-development, to the complete detriment of the middle and working class. I feel strongly that his policies added to the growth of the homeless population and for sure contributed to the insane cost of living in NYC.
I want to see the middle and working class grow and prosper and not be left behind by the 1% (of which Bloomberg is a member; lest we all forget). FEEL THE BERN!!
I want to see the middle and working class grow and prosper and not be left behind by the 1% (of which Bloomberg is a member; lest we all forget). FEEL THE BERN!!
6
Clearly Bloomberg is a person who puts the country's electoral welfare ahead of ego gratification! What a concept.
Mr. Bloomberg, please redirect your campaign largesse toward defeating Trump. With minimal tweaking you can transform Glaser's and Meyerhoffer's messaging and branding campaign to help expose Trump for what he is and put an end to this Trump trajectory.
He would have been perfect
Yeah too bad he's not running. it would have been fascinating to watch him rezone the entire country for the rich.
4
He made this decision, because it was the right thing to do. That is one reason why he would have been the right person for the job.
But under the Twelfth Amendment, House Republicans might have chosen Bloomberg over Trump.
And a campaign for an establishment Republican write-in vote nationwide could still leave things open, even with a Trump nomination.
And a campaign for an establishment Republican write-in vote nationwide could still leave things open, even with a Trump nomination.
1
If the choice was up to Congress, the Congress wouldn't be restricted by candidates who ran. There is absolutely no chance that a very conservative GOP controlled Congress would vote for Bloomberg.
No, you're wrong. The 12th Amendment restricts the House choice to the three electoral candidates garnering the most delegates in November (and to the two top runners for VP, chosen by the Senate).
Doing what is right, ethical and fair is the hallmark of Michael Bloomberg. Today’s decision is another milestone in Bloomberg’s long journey of exemplary leadership based on reason and above all a selfless public service of a his beloved community and country.
1
The most interesting and decent man in politics in generations has deferred. He has put his country ahead of his wish and his willingness to expose himself to the animalistic intensity and perversity of Donald Trump.
Mike's qualities are beyond comparison. His intelligence and perspective are simply unique - and remarkable. There is no point is drawing the distinctions.
In a world of rank mediocrity it makes little sense to compare...
And Mike is right: Donald Trump would be an unmitigated disaster.
Mike Bloomberg is in a class by himself. And he was in June 1966.
So, let's be clear. When he had nothing, he exhibited what he exhibits now.
When he came for a job at Salomon Bros. & Hutzler, Wm. R. "Billy" Salomon and John H. Gutfreund sent him to me. I was young and able. Mike was younger and green. And we saw the comparison: Salomon vs. Goldman... ability vs. something quite different. We were a bond house, considering equity. Mike got it. He came for half the money - to work with me.
Mike's sense of humor and decency radiated, and his willingness was clear. Mike struck me as gold at a discount. He was humble and funny.
I have a wish: let the GOP convention hang... and let the floor turn to the one man that belongs in The White House above all others.
Mike Bloomberg and John Kasich would be a wonderful ticket for the nation to consider.
Just think: two honest men, each with a good sense of humor....
One more decent than the other.
How about that?
Mike's qualities are beyond comparison. His intelligence and perspective are simply unique - and remarkable. There is no point is drawing the distinctions.
In a world of rank mediocrity it makes little sense to compare...
And Mike is right: Donald Trump would be an unmitigated disaster.
Mike Bloomberg is in a class by himself. And he was in June 1966.
So, let's be clear. When he had nothing, he exhibited what he exhibits now.
When he came for a job at Salomon Bros. & Hutzler, Wm. R. "Billy" Salomon and John H. Gutfreund sent him to me. I was young and able. Mike was younger and green. And we saw the comparison: Salomon vs. Goldman... ability vs. something quite different. We were a bond house, considering equity. Mike got it. He came for half the money - to work with me.
Mike's sense of humor and decency radiated, and his willingness was clear. Mike struck me as gold at a discount. He was humble and funny.
I have a wish: let the GOP convention hang... and let the floor turn to the one man that belongs in The White House above all others.
Mike Bloomberg and John Kasich would be a wonderful ticket for the nation to consider.
Just think: two honest men, each with a good sense of humor....
One more decent than the other.
How about that?
3
Given the R and D field of candidates and the likely final candidates in November, I'll probably just vote for Mr. Bloomberg as a write in anyway.
There goes our only hope for a decent, intelligent, bi-partisan and electable candidate in this presidential race. I'm already dreading four (or, God forbid...eight) years of yet another Clinton in the White House, undoubtably followed by the robotic Chelsea imposed upon us in some form of public office. Ugh.
Hillary Clinton was an abysmal and incompetent Secretary of State. I was disappointed in Obama's appointing her (I had believed him to be above this type of cronyism).
The private email server fiasco and her casual dismissal of its impropriety speaks volumes about the type of president she would be.
Since she first came on the political scene with Bill in 1992, Hillary has consistently proven herself to be a dishonest and self-serving opportunist. And her sense of entitlement to be the first woman president proves is a turn-off to many feminist voters such as myself. Yes, to a woman president, it's long overdue...but I want the first woman elected president to be a role model for my daughters and the young women of this country...someone exemplary.
Too bad Bernie Sanders doesn't have more broad appeal. He's honest and is obviously running for the right reasons, but the Democratic establishment has already decided this race is over. The big loser will be the American people. For the first time in my life, I may not be able to vote for president. Ted Cruz vs Hillary Clinton? Just shoot me.
Hillary Clinton was an abysmal and incompetent Secretary of State. I was disappointed in Obama's appointing her (I had believed him to be above this type of cronyism).
The private email server fiasco and her casual dismissal of its impropriety speaks volumes about the type of president she would be.
Since she first came on the political scene with Bill in 1992, Hillary has consistently proven herself to be a dishonest and self-serving opportunist. And her sense of entitlement to be the first woman president proves is a turn-off to many feminist voters such as myself. Yes, to a woman president, it's long overdue...but I want the first woman elected president to be a role model for my daughters and the young women of this country...someone exemplary.
Too bad Bernie Sanders doesn't have more broad appeal. He's honest and is obviously running for the right reasons, but the Democratic establishment has already decided this race is over. The big loser will be the American people. For the first time in my life, I may not be able to vote for president. Ted Cruz vs Hillary Clinton? Just shoot me.
1
Nader's Nadir. If only Ralph had had Mike's humility, good sense and respect for the common weal. Thanks for putting the country first, Bloomie.
2
The anti-Nader. God bless you, Sir.
All of this bloviation on the part of Bloomberg is nonsense (!) --his entry into the fray would not have even raised a ripple in the race between Clinton and Trump. Moreover, one can hardly imagine Trump supporters voting for a gun control zealot. If anything, he would take a few votes from Clinton, but in the end, he would be irrelevant.
3
Hey, Michael . . . how about quickly joining the Republican Party, run in whatever primaries are left and then get the nomination in a brokered convention. The Republicans would have a true leader that would finally straighten out the so-called Party of Lincoln that, in truth, Lincoln would be deeply ashamed of on this day.
1
WISE DECISION!!! Thank you, Michael Bloomberg, for rational, thoughtful decision.
Almost forgot what a TRUE leader of ALL Americans could look like. Naturally, it won't wash. Thanks, Mike, for your genuine sense of civic duty. We need more, many more, like you here.
1
I am sorry his candidacy wouldn't have the viability that it should. He would be a good president - even great, maybe. But now, Mr. Bloomberg, will you come back as Mayor? I am so tired of the smell of pot on the streets. You spoiled us with your competence and level-headedness.
1
He should have run as a Republican contender......he would have won but I'm saying that using 20-20 hindsight. Mea culpa!!!
EdB
Williamsburg, VA
EdB
Williamsburg, VA
A shame--exactly the fiscally responsible, socially moderate/progressive candidate for whom I would like to vote. But his reasoning for choosing to not run is sound and his ego did not 'trump' his sense of altruism.
It's interesting that Bloomberg demonstrated some real leadership, understanding the spoiler role he might play in electing Trump. If only Ralph Nader had shown similar leadership in 2000.
3
Why are you focusing this headline/article on Trump? Bloomberg called out BOTH:
"As the race stands now, with Republicans in charge of both Houses, there is a good chance that my candidacy could lead to the election of Donald Trump or Senator Ted Cruz. That is not a risk I can take in good conscience."
"As the race stands now, with Republicans in charge of both Houses, there is a good chance that my candidacy could lead to the election of Donald Trump or Senator Ted Cruz. That is not a risk I can take in good conscience."
Honestly, I'm bummed. I'd love a Bloomberg presidency, and my gut said this was the time that he'd have a solid chance.
In terms of character, Bloomberg is basically the opposite of Trump. He would have made a good president.
Mr. Bloomberg, you represent decency and integrity. Thank you for thinking of your country and not of yourself. Your wise decision will ensure the end of Trump's foolhardy ambitions. A Trump win, though hardly possible in any case, would have led to utter disaster for the U.S. and the world.
Can we stop deifying Bloomberg here? The man doesn't do anything that's not good for Bloomberg. Is that how he got to be worth 50 billion, by being selfless? The reason he didn't run is because he doesn't want to look like a chump. Even under the ideal circumstances, he wouldn't get more than a third of the vote. But the ads against him write themselves--he'd be taken to pieces by both progressives and Trumpian nativists.
And let's stop bashing Nader. I was pleased to vote for him in '96. I didn't do so in 2000. Any fool could see the difference then. Let's applaud people with principles, who do not run it past their PR people before saying what needs to be said. The Sanders phenomenon is to some degree being fired by people whose eyes were opened by Nader.
And let's stop bashing Nader. I was pleased to vote for him in '96. I didn't do so in 2000. Any fool could see the difference then. Let's applaud people with principles, who do not run it past their PR people before saying what needs to be said. The Sanders phenomenon is to some degree being fired by people whose eyes were opened by Nader.
5
Nothing can tear down the network of entrenched plutocrats like the Republican nomination of Donald Trump. The fat cats in Washington are currently scared senseless. Too bad Bloomberg doesn't think he can beat Hillary, she is the most duplicitous of the whole bunch.
The article informs that Mr. Bloomberg was convinced that the electorate was seeking a"nonpartisan technocratic government." If that was truly his hypothesis, I believe it fundamentally flawed. We are an extremely nation that has never favored nonpartisan National elections. The only time in our history where there was a legitimate 3rd party candidate was in 1912 when the nation's most popular man, Theodore Roosevelt challenged the two major parties. He finished a very distant second. As for a technocratic government, Herbert Hoover, who ran as a Republican, well respected by both parties, who began governing as a technocrat. Unfortunately, for Hoover (and for the U.S.) a worldwide economic depression overwhelmed the country 7 months into his term. Hoover continued governing as a technocrat. It didn't work and the American economy didn't begin to recover until the next administration.when the new President began improvising. I think Michael Bloomberg is smart, practical and innovative. I think he would make a fine President, Republican or Democrat (not nonpartisan); smart, practical, ready to improvise (but not a technocrat). Ah well, where do we go from here?
1
I understand and obviously have no choice but to accept Mr. Bloomberg's decision, but I am so deeply disappointed. I feel like we need Mr. Bloomberg's leadership and level-headedness now more than ever, and there really is no way to judge how things would have turned out. How many times have "the polls" been wrong? Would Donald Trump have made it this far if all he did was listen to the polls? The real mistake was not jumping into this race at the beginning of this political season. I can only hope that Mr. Bloomberg keeps his excellent health and perhaps decides to run in 2020 . . .
And with that, all hopes of any real progress in this country went out the window. He was the only one who had legitimate business experience and legitimate govt experience, and knows how to get things done in a logical, non partisan way.
Whoever wins now, congress will be more stagnant than ever, and either we'll have more war, our economy will blow up, or I guess the best of the worst is that nothing will change and we'll continue to see zero progress for the next 4 years.
That announcement really took the wind out of my sails. I can only hope someone like him comes in for the next cycle, although with our rigged two party system and the obsolete rigged electoral college in place, that may never happen.
Whoever wins now, congress will be more stagnant than ever, and either we'll have more war, our economy will blow up, or I guess the best of the worst is that nothing will change and we'll continue to see zero progress for the next 4 years.
That announcement really took the wind out of my sails. I can only hope someone like him comes in for the next cycle, although with our rigged two party system and the obsolete rigged electoral college in place, that may never happen.
I never believed he'd run. And I'm glad he didn't; now the Republicans can eat themselves alive and the rest of us will be better off for it. They've been out of ideas since Ronald Reagan's second term, and ever since they've just been mouthing slogans they associate with him, getting more and more extreme to the point they're now completely unrecognizable. They have to lose in a landslide and get sick of losing, or they'll never get any better.
Let the Stupid Party diehards keep putting up racists and theocrats; in a year or two maybe Bloomberg can start funding a new, practical, humane center-right political party. That would be a historic legacy to cap your career, Mr. Mayor; founder of the Party of Tomorrow.
Let the Stupid Party diehards keep putting up racists and theocrats; in a year or two maybe Bloomberg can start funding a new, practical, humane center-right political party. That would be a historic legacy to cap your career, Mr. Mayor; founder of the Party of Tomorrow.
2
I liked him as mayor of New York and thought he did very good things for this city, but I don't know if he has the temperament to deal with Congress. People who are their own boss for too long forget what it means to have to compromise. Still, it takes a very big man to give up a lifelong dream like that rather than plunge into a divisive and self-aggrandizing but ultimately damaging race. He so out-classes Trump that it's like they're not even in the same stratosphere. Good luck to you, Mr. Bloomberg, whatever you do next.
3
Its great to see him put his country above his ego but I am saddened in not having someone of his caliber as president.
1
A grateful thank you to Mike Bloomberg for not entering the 2016 race. While his mayoralty was not without blemish, he was - without a doubt - the best mayor that I have seen in my thirty plus years living in New York. His decision not to run for President is a selfless one, given that doing so wouldn't have cost him anything monetarily that he couldn't have afforded, but might well have led to a deadlock by the Electoral College and the Presidency being decided by the House of Representatives. While I will be voting for Bernie Sanders in the fall, because I do believe that the system is broken and gives an unfair advantage to the wealthy, I do not view all billionaires as cut from the same cloth. The contrast between Mike Bloomberg and Donald Trump couldn't be clearer.
74
A vote for Sanders is a vote for a Trump. Why make the distinction between billionaires if you're planning to help put one you that don't like in the White House?
Classy? Hardly. He just did the math and realized that he was unelectable. Besides, didn't he say that he was going to concentrate on philanthropy after ending his term as Mayor? When is that going to happen? He's 74 now.
What makes people think they know that Donald Trump won't make a good president. He might be ok, he might not. We don't know.
Whomever can name all the rulers worldwide who have their finger on the button please raise your hand. Nobody here? Thought so.
Whomever can name all the rulers worldwide who have their finger on the button please raise your hand. Nobody here? Thought so.
1
Former Mayor Bloomberg would have made a great president! A true: Compassionate, Understanding, Intelligent and Tough as Nails person who believes in; Fairness and Equality for all. Being a Philanthropist just goes to show society that Bloomberg is a true: Humanitarian for " The People"!
1
I for one am very, very disappointed by this news, but if the numbers were crunched and the analysis done. I will have to accept it would not be wise for Mr. Bloomberg to move forward, and vote for someone else.
Silent majority stunned, grieving, as Michael Bloomberg declines to come to their rescue.
(Not !!)
(Not !!)
2
Are expensive advisors necessary to determine that Michael Bloomberg would take more votes from Democrats (especially Hillary Clinton) than Republicans (especially Donald Trump)? Isn't this perfectly obvious to everyone? But in any event, good call Michael.
1
Once you put all the political calculus aside, forget about whether you like him on a personal level, I honestly truly believe he would have been a good president. I think his motives are predominantly to do the right thing and that he has a consistent set of principals that are in-line with the best American virtues. He is smart, knows how to manage and has more than enough experience. I think he genuinely cares.
1
Mr. Bloomberg made the correct choice; the last thing we need now is any third party candidate helping Trump. Bloomberg did a great job as Mayor and he would have made a good president, but he made the right decision.
40
" He said he was alarmed by Mr. Trump’s threats to bar Muslim immigrants from entering the country "
Wasn't it Bloomberg who had the dumb idea of supporting an Islamic center near the WTC site? He is a sensible man but the idea was incredibly naive.
He is pro-Muslim which is fine and even good, but he needs to realize that not all of his fellow citizens are pro-Muslim. Given that he would surely draw more votes away from Hillary than from Trump.
Wasn't it Bloomberg who had the dumb idea of supporting an Islamic center near the WTC site? He is a sensible man but the idea was incredibly naive.
He is pro-Muslim which is fine and even good, but he needs to realize that not all of his fellow citizens are pro-Muslim. Given that he would surely draw more votes away from Hillary than from Trump.
Mike Bloomberg: Best politician in my lifetime and would have been a great leader. But he is doing the right thing. He is falling on the sword to keep Trump out of the white house. Say thank you, Hillary.
2
Bloomberg is a legend in his own mind. He is more of a non-starter than Pataki. What possesses these people to wake up one morning and think they have a shot at the presidency. Perhaps it's the Trump effect, but few exhibit that degree of megalomania. Certainly shorty doesn't inspire that degree of loyalty.
8
The fix is in. Hillary is the next President. No need for Bloomberg to come to the rescue of status quo, which is so favorable to Oligarchs.
3
What an out of touch with reality individual Bloomberg is. Probably 98% of the people in the country have no idea who he is; does he know that? He probably wouldn't win one state.
Bernie will win the Democratic nomination and then make mincemeat of Trump.
Bernie will win the Democratic nomination and then make mincemeat of Trump.
2
At least he is acknowledging that Hillary Clinton is so unpalatable to Americans that people would vote for ANYONE other than her or Trump.
1
Did we read the same article? In no way did Mr. Bloomberg take a swipe at Hillary. In fact, he decided not to run, among other reasons, once it became clear that she would be the Democratic nominee. And there can be no doubt that he will endorse her at the most politically advantageous time. Others here have already suggested a possible Clinton-Bloomberg ticket. Sounds like an idea.
A sure way for Hillary to win: pick Bloom as her running mate!
1
Shoot. Bloomberg would be the most competent sane choice- A true independent who can't be bought, would use his won money, does not have the the extreme views of Sanders or Trump or the downside of Hillary. He's governed a major city, is a truly successful business man, isn't swayed by extreme ideology, and works with both sides.
He would be the one person, of all the candidates that could have a chance to melt the gridlock. President Hillary? the Republicans are going to "Obama" her and block everything even of its good for the country so she won't succeed.. President Trump? - he will make a ton of enemies on both sides and insult them and other world leaders if they aren't "fair" to him. President Cruz? He hasn't shown he can work with people on Capital Hill- As President will he all of a sudden be able to work with others?. WIll he be able to compromise or is it a dirty word to him? Can you name anything Cruz has accomplished as a Senator? What makes him qualified to be President? What makes Trump qualified?
He would be the one person, of all the candidates that could have a chance to melt the gridlock. President Hillary? the Republicans are going to "Obama" her and block everything even of its good for the country so she won't succeed.. President Trump? - he will make a ton of enemies on both sides and insult them and other world leaders if they aren't "fair" to him. President Cruz? He hasn't shown he can work with people on Capital Hill- As President will he all of a sudden be able to work with others?. WIll he be able to compromise or is it a dirty word to him? Can you name anything Cruz has accomplished as a Senator? What makes him qualified to be President? What makes Trump qualified?
Bernie Sanders is not extreme. With all due respect, you have been duped by the media if you think he is.
CathyZ thanks for the nod to respect- Its refreshing after all the
acrimonious slinging this political season. I like Sanders as a person, his integrity and some of his ideas but he will not be able to implement most of his key ideas if he is elected president -like free college, universal healthcare, his tax plan and many more are . The money and the congressional votes aren't there. He is a movement and at this point in time he needs to have it grow from the bottom up- to go local and elect people to Congress and the who embrace his ideas- But as President at this time there will not be enough support for his plans in the congress to cary them out- Thats what I meant by being extreme.
acrimonious slinging this political season. I like Sanders as a person, his integrity and some of his ideas but he will not be able to implement most of his key ideas if he is elected president -like free college, universal healthcare, his tax plan and many more are . The money and the congressional votes aren't there. He is a movement and at this point in time he needs to have it grow from the bottom up- to go local and elect people to Congress and the who embrace his ideas- But as President at this time there will not be enough support for his plans in the congress to cary them out- Thats what I meant by being extreme.
This is a disappointment. I have enormous respect and admiration for Michael Bloomberg. He managed a divisive city and built one of the great companies in the world. He's a leader with disciplined good sense, unshakeable ethics and a moral compass. Mike Bloomberg understands our constitution and the key tenets of a democracy, he knows that a "deal is only a deal" when both sides win and that leadership is not a dictatorship. I hope that his vision for America is realized in this election cycle and that a viable candidate will yet emerge to sustain the Republic for eight more years.
Missed opportunity, I really wanted Mr. Bloomberg to run and to win. I certainly would have voted for him. I am thankful he did the math first, we do not need a Republican appointed president.
Whoa...too bad. He would be an excellent President of the NYS Glee Club...certainly not President of a country. e as a Bloomberg agenda...not one about people.
5
Saw that coming from a mile away. He's scared to death of Trump.
4
This is all about ego. The phrasing, the tone of this article, the "poll"'s ridiculously tailored conclusion: "Mr. Schoen’s February polling found that AFTER voters heard mostly favorable descriptions of Mr. Bloomberg, Mr. Trump and Mr. Sanders, Mr. Bloomberg collected 35 percent of the vote and a solid lead in the Electoral College"... Wow! When do we erect a statute (wink, wink) to Mr Bloomberg for sacrificing his destiny for he good of the masses? I mean, what a man!
11
I am very disappointed that Bloomberg cannot run as an independent candidate. The best outcome would be this: no one gets the required number of delegates for the Republication nomination. And all of the Republican candidates and the establishment agree that Bloomberg should be the Republican nominee. I know I am dreaming, but I think Bloomberg would be the best candidate that the Republican party could put up to beat Hilary.
23
Sorry to burst your bubble, but if that happened and they wanted to bring in a mainstream establishment candidate, it would probably be Paul Ryan.
True, but at the last debate, Kasich said that he was the only adult on the stage. He was right and among the four that were there, he had the least support from voters.
Maybe Bloomberg would have the same problem - he too is an adult.
But a lot of Americans are angry. They are not looking for an adult - after all Obama is an adult and his approval ratings are pretty dismal.
The country is looking for someone with passion, a Sanders or a Trump.
Maybe Bloomberg would have the same problem - he too is an adult.
But a lot of Americans are angry. They are not looking for an adult - after all Obama is an adult and his approval ratings are pretty dismal.
The country is looking for someone with passion, a Sanders or a Trump.
I'm still voting for Sanders regardless of what Bloomberg's advisors say about his odds. First I believe in Sanders and not the born-again-slick-talking Clinton and secondly I don't believe any of the political strategists this season have been right about anything. Or lets say, very little at best.
Nope, I'm sticking with Bernie.
Nope, I'm sticking with Bernie.
12
Stuck with Bernie, is more like it.
You betcha! I do, too.
thank goodness. The best thing he could have done.
3
It's dispiriting that, just by virtue of his deep pockets and the marketing, legal and administrative help he could buy, Mr. Bloomberg would receive the votes of millions of Americans who wouldn't know him from Adam. He deserves no deification for not going through with that.
6
6
America. Your right to a 36 oz. Slurpee is safe for now.
8
Oh, I'm heartbroken. Mr. Bloomberg would have made a wonderful president. Unbelievably intelligent and beholden to no one. Social liberal, fiscal moderate. He had the best and the brightest working with him in City Hall.
Sadly, as an uncharismatic, unmarried man, and at this late date, it would have been an uphill battle.
Sadly, as an uncharismatic, unmarried man, and at this late date, it would have been an uphill battle.
2
What a joke. Mr. Bloomberg is a self-absorbed, calculating individual.
His decision not to run has lass to do with any form of largesse, than the fact that he knows he wouldn't win.
His decision not to run has lass to do with any form of largesse, than the fact that he knows he wouldn't win.
67
He says clearly in the article that he isn't running because he knows he couldn't win.
Nailed it!
1
At least Mike Bloomberg is capable of doing the maths, of being able to calculate the cost and benefit to the country if he ran, and yes, probably to himself as well. Who wouldn't? Hiliary? Trump? What a shame, what a loss to America that we won't have a chance to vote for him.
Bloomberg is dreaming. In a three-way race with Trump and Sanders, he would win Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin and Indiana? That is the heart of blue-collar union country, where working men would stream to the polls to vote for.....Donald Trump!
They smoke and drink big sodas, too!
They smoke and drink big sodas, too!
21
I believe they call it "pop"
1
To Jonathan,
And they own guns, too.
And they own guns, too.
1
Well I would have voted for Bloomberg.
5
Me too
It takes guts to run for President. Trump has guts. All this KKK, Hitler and Bigotry rhetoric is Rubbish and anyone believes that KKK fetches you votes - you are living on a different planet. Its the working class that are supporting Trump. With Trump, Hillary will lose both Ohio and Pennsylvania without a doubt.
Its either Trump or the two Goldman Sachs candidates namely Hillary Clinton or Ted Cruz. Its that simple.
Its either Trump or the two Goldman Sachs candidates namely Hillary Clinton or Ted Cruz. Its that simple.
6
Oh please. Go on Twitter to read the stuff Trump supporters say. They are ignorant xenophobes who have nothing positive to say about anything. Misery loves company, so they've come together to have one big trash talk all day every day. But when asked what is so miserable about their live or whether an illegal immigrant has taken their job, nada. Life is OK and no one has taken their job.
They don't need to be affiliated with the KKK to be bigots.
They don't need to be affiliated with the KKK to be bigots.
trump is more likely to win wo bloomie in th race
2
I think Bloomberg was an EXCELLENT mayor. Im not sure how he would have fared as a candidate. I'm sorry to say I think Trump, Cruz and Rubio really stink. Bloomberg would have been a better option for me. I think Trump has some good ideas but I don't think he should be president - he's much too crazy.
3
Reading these comments it's interesting how Trump supporters are so certain of his victory in November. Just as certain as Romney supporters were in 2012...
10
Bloomberg's aides (sycophants) predicted he could win Georgia, showing the utter lack of reality in this vanity operation. To believe he could take the black vote away from Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders, in Atlanta, and various other major cities, is breathlessly absurd, arrogant and ridiculous.
Billionaire back-of-the-napkin analysis, in a restaurant, over cocktails.
Billionaire back-of-the-napkin analysis, in a restaurant, over cocktails.
18
I am so glad we do not have this billionaire in the race, not least because his running would help ensure the victory of another (supposed) billionaire.
Bloomberg ran in 2001 on the slogan, "A businessman, not a politician!". I blame him in part for fanning what is now happening: a businessman, who supposedly has great experience because he's not been a politician but has instead spent his life accruing personal wealth. I respect everyone's free choice in life but this notion that somehow government is business, or because you become rich you are therefore qualified somehow in public service: I just don't get it. But thank you Bloomberg--it must kill you the idea that another less qualified NY Billionaire could become President, but you are actually putting US interest first here.
Bloomberg ran in 2001 on the slogan, "A businessman, not a politician!". I blame him in part for fanning what is now happening: a businessman, who supposedly has great experience because he's not been a politician but has instead spent his life accruing personal wealth. I respect everyone's free choice in life but this notion that somehow government is business, or because you become rich you are therefore qualified somehow in public service: I just don't get it. But thank you Bloomberg--it must kill you the idea that another less qualified NY Billionaire could become President, but you are actually putting US interest first here.
15
The continuing nightmare here of a businessman trying to run a government like a business, complete with the implicit directive to keep bad news from the boss should give reasonable people pause before casting their votes. Just look at what Snyder has done since his first action as Governor - a 1.6 Billion no strings tax cut for business, union busting. and much more. Now he's going to rob Peter to pay Paul to pay for his astounding disaster in Flint by further slashing already devastated social services funding.
The same is true of the folly of electing people who campaign on their hate for government.
Vote wisely, folks.
The same is true of the folly of electing people who campaign on their hate for government.
Vote wisely, folks.
Michael Bloomberg is the quintessential futurist and visionary. I have great respect for him and would have enjoyed his campaign. But his meticulously measured decision not to run shows his regard for the country is greater than his regard for power or ego.
19
He's a class act. I volunteered for him and would do it again in a heartbeat. He made his own money.
4
He did the math. He had no path to the Presidency.
It's a wonder that Trump in fact does.
Honestly, you can't make this stuff up. No one would believe you.
It's a wonder that Trump in fact does.
Honestly, you can't make this stuff up. No one would believe you.
122
The Republic, chapter 8...
Plato spells it out.
Chilling.
Plato spells it out.
Chilling.
Fact is stranger than fiction.
Round up all the usual subjects.
We will need two.
Round up all the usual subjects.
We will need two.
never believed he would run, just wanting attention.
6
Good choice Mike. You would have Nadered the results and allowed Trump to absolutely win. It's bad enough we have one dumb, entitled billionaire in the race. We really didn't need two.
7
What a shock! He put out feelers to both Obama and McCain to be Veep in 2008 and was rebuffed. His pal Mort Zuckerman sent up a trial balloon for a third party run in 2012 that didn't get off the ground. I am so upset that the mayor who ignored a crisis in affordable housing (while giving tax abatements to builders of luxury condos for corrupt politicians, oligarchs and drug lords to hide/launder their money), an exploding homeless crisis, a major abuse scandal at Rikers, appointed a school chancellor with zero qualifications who actually mocked parents with kids in public schools (she of course sent her kids to private schools), supported an unlawful stop and frisk policy and was MIA on the Boxing Day Blizzard and then when he did show up told people in the "outer boroughs" to take the day off and take in a show (when they couldn't cross the street!) is not doing us the great favor of running for President of the United States. Oh, by the way what about the Citytime and new 911 system scandals on his watch? Mike, do us a favor stay home and count your money.
23
Without nanny Bloomberg, who's going to tell us how to run our lives?
5
You have the "Bern" and Hillary who will either make your life "equitable" [by redistributing] or not outsource your MickeyD job.
Presumably, you just may need those guns to protect your property when they come a knocking. Or the "new" line in the sand is at your front door.
Presumably, you just may need those guns to protect your property when they come a knocking. Or the "new" line in the sand is at your front door.
With all the past and present Presidents dodging bullets and having their lives destroyed by hatred in America, you have to be nuts to run for President.
Smart move Bloomberg. Preserve your legacy and good name as it is now.
You'll notice I backed off from criticism. Have a good life.
Smart move Bloomberg. Preserve your legacy and good name as it is now.
You'll notice I backed off from criticism. Have a good life.
1
It amazes me that the Bloombergs of the world must not to contest just so that a Trump would not be elected ... Sad ... What is really lacking in the environment is a sound Republican backbone ... http://krbabu.blogspot.com/2016/03/has-republican-party-lost-its-moral.html
I admire Mayor Bloomberg's efforts supporting gun control and his work as mayor of NYC; however, as a former NYC metro area resident, I don't see being NYC mayor as a direct path to the White House. Also, as a supporter of Bernie Sanders, entry of another member of the 1% or 0.1% elite into the White House race wouldn't have been a step in the right direction. Adding another self-financed NYC billionaire in the race wasn't the answer to defeating the first, worst one. Now maybe Bloomberg will focus his wealth and effort where they've been, in the constructive, healthy, much-needed cause of gun control. Vote for Bernie.
7
It is a good thing. While unlike Trump, Bloomberg actually ran something that was successful, NYC under Bloomberg by any measure has done well, and he did have some good ideas, like finally banning smoking in public places and trying to help with public health issues. Trump is a gasbag who is afraid of releasing his tax returns because I suspect they will show he isn't as well off as he claims, and also will likely show he has had a lot more failures than he wants to acknowledge.
However, Bloomberg likely would have drawn supporters who would vote for Hillary versus Trump, who fear trump and the entire GOP presidential suite (Ted Cruz? OMG, take a look at who supports him, the religious version of the KKK). It likely would have given Trump the presidency, which is a scary, scary thought, the man is an overblown ego whose one true concern in this world is himself and his brand.
However, Bloomberg likely would have drawn supporters who would vote for Hillary versus Trump, who fear trump and the entire GOP presidential suite (Ted Cruz? OMG, take a look at who supports him, the religious version of the KKK). It likely would have given Trump the presidency, which is a scary, scary thought, the man is an overblown ego whose one true concern in this world is himself and his brand.
1
"Convinced that a restive electorate was crying out for nonpartisan, technocratic government . . . ." Is that what was propelling Mr. Bloomberg to explore a possible run for the White House? Geez, I must be completely missing the mood of the current electorate, a minority of which on any side, as far as I can tell, is actually voting for revolution OR technocracy.
3
Other than Michael Bloomberg, there are many more qualified third party candidates. People may consider drafting Jesse Ventura, the former Minnesota governor, a progressive independent and he is well-known to many electorates. He is not either a billionaire or multibillionaire such as Donald Trump or Bloomberg.
Insofar as the worry that “a three-way race could lead to the election of a candidate who would imperil the security and stability of the United States: Donald J. Trump” is concerned, electorates should not keep that in mind at all, because the Republic establishment has clearly and gravely vowed to abandon Donald Trump as either a nominee or a presidential candidate. The Congressional-Military-Industrial Complex will never elect Trump for any official position.
Irrespective of who the independent third party candidate will be, he or she will ensure a non-Trump candidate to be elected.
Of course, even if Trump would be elected as the president by the establishment, that doesn't mean the sky would be falling. Far from it, Trump would lead people to fight against the corrupt collectives of capital hegemony. Had he fail, citizens of the country would not stay as docile as they had been in the past several decades. Political revolutions, similar to the one that Bernie Sanders has launched, would be unstoppable.
Whether the establishment realizes or not, days of business and politics as usual are numbered by means of the force of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.
Insofar as the worry that “a three-way race could lead to the election of a candidate who would imperil the security and stability of the United States: Donald J. Trump” is concerned, electorates should not keep that in mind at all, because the Republic establishment has clearly and gravely vowed to abandon Donald Trump as either a nominee or a presidential candidate. The Congressional-Military-Industrial Complex will never elect Trump for any official position.
Irrespective of who the independent third party candidate will be, he or she will ensure a non-Trump candidate to be elected.
Of course, even if Trump would be elected as the president by the establishment, that doesn't mean the sky would be falling. Far from it, Trump would lead people to fight against the corrupt collectives of capital hegemony. Had he fail, citizens of the country would not stay as docile as they had been in the past several decades. Political revolutions, similar to the one that Bernie Sanders has launched, would be unstoppable.
Whether the establishment realizes or not, days of business and politics as usual are numbered by means of the force of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.
3
Bloomberg is a patriot. Ralph Nader is not.
11
Amen.
Ralph Nader has done more for the citizens of this country than ANY president in his lifetime, except for FDR. Of course, the Dem machine did its best to shut him out, as it does with all third party candidates, which is anti-democratic. The Green party candidates were handcuffed to chairs for 8 HOURS in 2000 to keep them from attending one of the presidential debates, even though they had valid tickets. Nader was threatened with arrest and escorted away by the state police for trying to watch one of the debates in a trailer OUTSIDE of the debate hall in Boston in the 2000 election, after he tried to enter with a valid ticket. Believe me if I was a third party candidate that was treated that way, I would have done my best to damage the Dem party (not the Republicans) who mistreated those candidates. But the great LIE of the sleazy Democrats continues, 16 years later. To educate you bumpkins, let me remind you that it was the Supreme Court's ruling, by the partisan and corrupt right wingers on the court, who did not even sign the ruling, that gave Bush the election. Gore did not even challenge it, he just rolled over "for the good of the country" as he put it, like all spineless Dems do. For the good of the country. Kerry did the same 4 years later. I'm supporting Sanders, but if Hillary is the candidate, I'm voting Greens.
The simple fact is that but for Nader's siphoning votes away from Gore, Bush would never have become president and we would have escaped the murderous nightmare that was the Bush Administration. Had Nader done good things before that? Of course he had, but he knowingly destroyed Gore's chance to win, and for that he has now and will always have, blood on his hands.
To the contrary Mr Bloomberg a Trump presidency only strenghtens our national security and trade with China and others around the world.
The fact is we need someone who can lead and bring this country together. Trump is not racist, for from it. The media just loves to spread that around. If someone were to check which media companies hold what kinds of stock, it would be the stock that US companies do business over seas, you know all those America lost stocks. Here's my middle finger for Bloomberg and the rest of the establishment.
The fact is we need someone who can lead and bring this country together. Trump is not racist, for from it. The media just loves to spread that around. If someone were to check which media companies hold what kinds of stock, it would be the stock that US companies do business over seas, you know all those America lost stocks. Here's my middle finger for Bloomberg and the rest of the establishment.
5
I wish he would run if it would absolutely insure Trump's victory. But Trump will probably win anyway. Go Donald!
3
an arrogant rich guy is just what this race needs..
2
The anti-Ralph Nader par excellence. Had you been the Republican candidate that would have been great. But thank you for realizing that as an independent you could well have doomed us to four years of Thumpism. Thank you thank you thank you.
3
If he wants to see the agenda he likes enacted he should put his money and clout behind Clinton and Democrats in key congressional races. Also state races where sane people could wrest control from GOP extremist control.
Good to see he does not have the same kind of destructive unhinged ego that drives trump.
Good to see he does not have the same kind of destructive unhinged ego that drives trump.
5
The man who put peaceful protesters at the Republican convention, who were exercising their constitutional rights, in cages. No sympathy for Mike from this camp.
30
Let's not forget the rich guy unleashed his money serving "Private Army" on the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators.
2
Mike, if you reading this, I'm sad that you are not going to run. I wrote in your name the last two times and was looking forward to pulling the lever next to your name. Would have been out in Union Square handing out brochures tomorrow.
I wish you well, you took care of New York City when it needed it and, for that, all Yawkers should be grateful.
Cheers
Roger
I wish you well, you took care of New York City when it needed it and, for that, all Yawkers should be grateful.
Cheers
Roger
2
Mr. Bloomberg did a great job for NYC. But outside of NYC he is hardly known.
The optics are not favorable to Mr. Bloomberg outside of the northeast throughout middle America where he would need support: he's widely seen as a NYC wealthy Jew who enacted nanny-state mandatory soft drink sizes, salt intake, etc. This really unnerved many Americans, not to mention the small amount of Libertarians who would avoid him by going to either side relatively quickly.
The optics are not favorable to Mr. Bloomberg outside of the northeast throughout middle America where he would need support: he's widely seen as a NYC wealthy Jew who enacted nanny-state mandatory soft drink sizes, salt intake, etc. This really unnerved many Americans, not to mention the small amount of Libertarians who would avoid him by going to either side relatively quickly.
Too bad he did not enter. Don't think Hillary is going to be Democratic nominee. Too much legal peril that has only just begun. The FBI granted immunity to the state dept. employee, Bryan Pagliano, who set up her private server.
4
If only the Republican Party could install Bloomberg as their candidate they would actually stand a chance of winning.
1
I was really disappointed to hear that Mr. Bloomberg had decided not to run. I wish Mr. Bloomberg had entered the primaries. He represents the quintessential candidate for the office, someone who has the credentials, judgment and temperament to lead us in a particularly crucial time. Unlike the two leading candidates from each party, he has integrity and is not a chameleon who changes his position with every poll, nor a carnival barker who panders to our basest instincts. There is something wrong with our system that produces two fundamentally flawed candidates for office. I hope that Republicans come to their senses and avoid nominating Mr. Trump, who could actually win a national election.
The corporatist who gave Goldman $1.65 billion in tax breaks to move to NYC. Who said: 2008: Wall Street executives deserve bonuses. Who stopped smoking pot at 30; then became anti-smoking proselytizer. Who wants to privatize social security. Who thought Stop and Frisk was a good policy. Yeah, great guy.
17
Hillary Clinton's team should be considering Michael Bloomberg for VP.
10
Oh, come on. John N. Garner's infamous comment about the vice presidency not being worth "a pitcher of warm spit" applies, unless you see the VP as the understudy secretly waiting for the President to get killed. Bloomberg is too smart and ambitious for that.
Two NYers on the ticket ... not likely. Besides Bloomie does not play second fiddle to anyone.
If only Ralph Nader had been this wise. Sigh.
7
It is usually not in the nature of do-gooders to be so adroit in judging sure failure at the hands Corvair owners and 16oz. soda drinkers.
1
I'm sure Trump is sad in a way that he won't have another target. Well settle for putting HRC in her place.
Trump 2016
Trump 2016
1
Getting behind a draft dodger is not a safe place to be Army...
Biden / Warren ticket
this election would be in the bag
this election would be in the bag
1
Bloomberg's gun control stance - that is, no one but cops and soldiers ought to have them - was a non-starter for me. I'm interested in seeing someone re-institute constitutional government, and, well, there's that Second Amendment...
2
...that you clearly haven't read, and don't know the history of.
Funny I would have thought he would help the democrats by pulling establishment republicans away from Trump.
1
Bloomberg is putting country above party or self. Exemplary and rare in politics.
3
I was hopeful he would run but his rationale makes a lot of sense.
Earlier today I received an email from "Correct the Record" -- a Hillary Clinton associated super PAC funded organization according to various news organizations -- that made a specious claim about Senator Bernie Sanders and now I read an esoteric article about the enigmatic political predilections of another billionaire.
After today's political shenanigans, it is a certainty that I will only vote (ballot marking or write-in) for only Senator Bernard "Bernie" Sanders to be President of the United States.
After today's political shenanigans, it is a certainty that I will only vote (ballot marking or write-in) for only Senator Bernard "Bernie" Sanders to be President of the United States.
9
Michael carries weight in NYC and that's about it- At the end of the day he would have been marginalized as another "political insider" and would have crashed and burned in the general election.
66
Agree. And why, in the year of the masses rebelling against their masters, did he even think he had a chance? Another billionaire? Here's to Bernie!
1
Not so. I live in the Bay Area and know well Bloomberg and would have enthusiastically voted for him. I am not alone in the latter - or in being a non-New Yorker who respects and understands his abilities to govern and lead.
Bloomberg never had much of a chance. At best, he might prove to get a portion of the vote from his own immediate family. But even his own employees don't want Napoleon running the country.
7
Dozens of staffers and strategists, in 22 states, to reach a conclusion that I could have told him within 30 seconds of his announcement that he was considering a run for president.
5
The biggest contribution Michael Bloomberg can make is to develop Bloomberg media into a "non-Murdoch", "non-CNN-Gotcha", "non-MSNBC soft partisan power", true news network.
Having a new news outlet worthy of old luminaries like Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow might truly make American news great again.The Bloomberg network seems almost halfway there, and I'm thankful for that.
Having a new news outlet worthy of old luminaries like Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow might truly make American news great again.The Bloomberg network seems almost halfway there, and I'm thankful for that.
6
Good for Hillary. She'd have received an even more brutal trouncing than she'll get with just The Donald in the race.
5
Sure... That's if The gr8 Donald's face doesn't get him locked up first.
Well folks we all know what really happened: There was no support beyond the single digits in any state in the American Union for Michael Bloomberg as president. Also Bloomberg, who made a multi- billion dollar fortune as a corporate raider and stock manipulator as a wolf of Wall Street, was told by his fellow billionaires not to run for president because he might siphon off enough votes to swing New York state's rich electoral votes to Donald Trump. Tellingly he was also worried about Bernie Sanders and his "soak the rich and big business" tax proposals. Bloomberg believes Hillary Clinton, who is nothing but a puppet of the plutocrats, will win the Democratic nomination and maybe the Oval Office and continue to let the banks, brokerage houses, and insurance companies run wild, beating, cheating, swindling and stealing from their depositors, customers, and the taxpayers----and if she wins she definitely will. Bloomberg is a real back stabber also since Donald Trump endorsed him twice for mayor of New York City! Now he sees a chance to stab him in the back! A true gentleman and honorable political leader---not!
14
In response to all the Bloomberg/Nader comparisons, it should be noted that Al Gore in 2000 failed to win a plurality of the vote in Tennessee-the state that twice before had elected him to the U.S. Senate. It was an epic, inexcusable failure by Gore and his campaign team. Even with all the votes for Nader in Tennessee added to Gore's total, George W. Bush still would have outpolled Gore by more than 60,000 votes out of 2 million plus cast.
It is inconceivable that Hillary Clinton would end up losing New York state in November to either Trump or Cruz even if Bloomberg joined the race.
It is inconceivable that Hillary Clinton would end up losing New York state in November to either Trump or Cruz even if Bloomberg joined the race.
6
A truly unfortunate decision.......for the Country.
Mr. Bloomberg is exactly the kind of man that we need right now to bring logic, order, structure, discipline, and vision to a Country that is veering wildly off course.
Of course, no man is perfect and Mr. Bloomberg is no exception. His silly excursions into matters of individual health sometimes obscured the major achievements of his 12 year stint as Mayor of NYC.
But as a man of principle, self sacrifice, and humility Mr. Bloomberg would have raised the bar as an example of what every American can aspire towards. He would have brought much of this nonsense to a swift conclusion simply by elevating the dialogue.
For those of us who had the privilege to live and work here in the City under his stewardship it is a very sad day.
Mr. Bloomberg is exactly the kind of man that we need right now to bring logic, order, structure, discipline, and vision to a Country that is veering wildly off course.
Of course, no man is perfect and Mr. Bloomberg is no exception. His silly excursions into matters of individual health sometimes obscured the major achievements of his 12 year stint as Mayor of NYC.
But as a man of principle, self sacrifice, and humility Mr. Bloomberg would have raised the bar as an example of what every American can aspire towards. He would have brought much of this nonsense to a swift conclusion simply by elevating the dialogue.
For those of us who had the privilege to live and work here in the City under his stewardship it is a very sad day.
95
100% agree. People have no idea what we just lost.
TO RJD: What "very sad day?", speak for yourself, it is not sad for most of us. I, as a Newyorker, would have been perfectly happy supporting Bloomberg for president had he been a nominee of either party and had started the campaign months ago. But he is correct in not entering the race just to derail one candidate at the risk of derailing his opponent as well. He is letting the most formidable candidate face the most outrageous and beatable opponent.
1
Yes, a sad day.
Let's see what a hung convention brings.
No one alive today remembers.
Let's see what a hung convention brings.
No one alive today remembers.
"A restive electorate crying out for a nonpartisan, technocratic government"? Um, no, I don't think so, Mr. Bloomberg.
Yet another conceited, silly billionaire who thinks he's all that.
Yet another conceited, silly billionaire who thinks he's all that.
6
Great to see someone so able to do otherwise instead decide to work for the common good. Kudos to Mr. Bloomberg for both his decision and his dicing critique of the monster looming as the Republican candidate.
1
BUMMER! He was a great mayor and would have made a great president.
1
The new Mario Cuomo: all Hamlet, no chance.
3
What, the nanny state candidate doesn't want to ban large soda's nationwide.
4
I would have wholeheartedly endorsed Michael Bloomberg as a candidate for president, and I'm a Democrat. But his team's speculation that an electoral college deadlock would result is quite likely. If only Hillary could entertain the possibility of his candidacy as her Vice, I think the contest would be over.
Our country would be destroyed by a Trump presidency. Pray for the peace...
Our country would be destroyed by a Trump presidency. Pray for the peace...
229
The constitution requires that the president and vp be from different states.
I am puzzled by this "pray for peace" and I think you are thinking of Trump and Hillary in terms of their appearance and not in terms of their actions.
Watching the early debates, I became convinced that the two most hawkish candidates were Hillary Clinton and Carly Fiorina. Fiorina is gone but Hillary is likely to be the Democratic nominee and quite likely our next president.
But she IS responsible for destabilizing Libya - she talked Obama into going along with her unrealistic plan whereby Gaddafi was lynched and our ambassador was tortured and then killed.
Even now she is talking about a "no fly" zone over Syria. Now ISIS has no air force so who is this no fly zone against? Russia? Isn't that the first step to WW3?
Cruz is the violent sounding hawk and Hillary is more quiet. But either of them could do an enormous amount of damage. Sanders is our best bet, and I am afraid that Trump is the next best bet, IF we want peace.
Watching the early debates, I became convinced that the two most hawkish candidates were Hillary Clinton and Carly Fiorina. Fiorina is gone but Hillary is likely to be the Democratic nominee and quite likely our next president.
But she IS responsible for destabilizing Libya - she talked Obama into going along with her unrealistic plan whereby Gaddafi was lynched and our ambassador was tortured and then killed.
Even now she is talking about a "no fly" zone over Syria. Now ISIS has no air force so who is this no fly zone against? Russia? Isn't that the first step to WW3?
Cruz is the violent sounding hawk and Hillary is more quiet. But either of them could do an enormous amount of damage. Sanders is our best bet, and I am afraid that Trump is the next best bet, IF we want peace.
2
His team's analysis is wrong. Bloomberg would not have won a single state. However, he might have helped give a few swing states, and the election, to the
Republicans.
Republicans.
What? Someone looked at this tire fire of an election cycle and thought, "Hmm...I don't think I have anything better to add to this?" Sorcery. What's that they say? When you open your mouth, it may remove all doubts about something...
2
Dear Michael,
If you'd like to serve this country, you can begin by acknowledging that George W. Bush, his presidency and his administration were the worst and most polarizing, economical damaging, budget busting of any presidency in the history of America and that you were and are a member of that party and that you were a supporter of that administration. If you can't do that, you aren't qualified to be President.
If you'd like to serve this country, you can begin by acknowledging that George W. Bush, his presidency and his administration were the worst and most polarizing, economical damaging, budget busting of any presidency in the history of America and that you were and are a member of that party and that you were a supporter of that administration. If you can't do that, you aren't qualified to be President.
8
Bush tried to pull up the lower classes through No Child Left Behind and making mortgage money freely available, and cutting taxes for the middle class. He failed not because he hated the poor, but because these were dumb ideas that could not possibly work in the real world.
2
No Child Left Behind... had a lot of rules. A lot of punishment, failure for not making quotas, which in the end could cost you your job. It was a Republican think tank program, designed to destroy the public school system. Teach to the test, teach the ones that could maybe get over the bar, and forget those that were going to get over the bar without your help.
Middle class tax cuts? What $50? Most of the benefits, like waiving inheritance taxes went to the upper echelons.
Dumb ideas from a dumb guy. But the almost near collapse of the financial system was all pretty much a Republican program from which Mr. Bloomberg benefited, because he had more to lose than we did. Mr. Bloomberg should go on his own Bloomberg News and give an interview and acknowledge as much, that without Democrat support for TARP, we'd still be digging our way out the economic turmoil caused by the Republican Party. Plain and simple.
Middle class tax cuts? What $50? Most of the benefits, like waiving inheritance taxes went to the upper echelons.
Dumb ideas from a dumb guy. But the almost near collapse of the financial system was all pretty much a Republican program from which Mr. Bloomberg benefited, because he had more to lose than we did. Mr. Bloomberg should go on his own Bloomberg News and give an interview and acknowledge as much, that without Democrat support for TARP, we'd still be digging our way out the economic turmoil caused by the Republican Party. Plain and simple.
1
Thank you Mr. Bloomberg for not pulling a Ralph Nader and spoiling the chance for a decisive win against Mr. Trump and his ilk. We all learned in 2000 that every vote counts.
278
Excellent point, Bob. At least he made his articulate argument for all to behold as he closed that door. He is the antithesis of the three remaining calamitous candidates for the GOP: measured, intelligent, and prescient.
"We all learned in 2000 that every vote counts."
No, only the votes of a corrupt and partisan Supreme Court counted.
No, only the votes of a corrupt and partisan Supreme Court counted.
1
Bernie will dispose of Trump in short order. It will be nice to have someone in the White House who is not a billionaire or bought and paid for by special interests.
Democracy will Trump special interests.
Democracy will Trump special interests.
60
We are a Republic lady
1
Thank you for not being Ralph Nader
109
nader isnt responsible for gores loss
gore surrendered to bush at th last
im still not sure what that was all about
gore surrendered to bush at th last
im still not sure what that was all about
@THX, you are missing the point. Counterfactual is counterfactual, no more and no less. However, a great person would consider ramifications and a lesser mind cares only personal gratifications. That is the difference between a class act like Mayor Bloomberg and the attention seeker
Yes, Bloomberg is hardly the good human being Nader is. He is an establishment politician, incapable of thinking about helping others. Nader is a hero.
1
Wow. As a lifelong NYC resident, thank you Mr. Bloomberg for not entering the race. Between Trump's candidacy and the the abysmal performance of the Knicks and the Nets, I don't think NYer's could take much more national humiliation.
The fact that Bloomberg ever thought he had a chance to be POTUS, despite not having campaigned, is a real testament to his main leadership qualities: arrogance and patronizing.
The fact that Bloomberg ever thought he had a chance to be POTUS, despite not having campaigned, is a real testament to his main leadership qualities: arrogance and patronizing.
57
Mike, I really miss you here in NYC!! People who blasted you with criticism are singing a different tune now with our current mayor.
8
That does not necessarily mean that Bloomberg was great....
Too bad. Bloomberg would make sure that Cruz became President.
5
Good riddance. The public is in no mood to elect a rich guy who thinks he is entitled to dictate to the public anyway. He would just be a distraction and a minor one at that. One narcissist is enough.
52
You'll get HC in the house, good luck with that. Hope you live in a gated community and have unlimited wealth. You will need it come 4qtr 2017.
"The public is in no mood to elect a rich guy who thinks he is entitled to dictate to the public anyway". It appears that is *exactly* what they are in the mood for, as it appears Mr. Trump is going to take the Republican nomination.
I will pretend I am a political genius and just say that Bloomberg had no chance to win several diverse states. But a campaign gave him a big opportunity to build up his ego and publicize his brand. Trump supporters are all noting how some really really rich people do not want to lose control of the war party. And why is that? It is not save the country, but their own egos and power base.
17
How different might the world look now if only Ralph Nader had given the same scrutiny to his run in 2000?
290
it might look different had gore not given up to bush
In case folks don't know what Kayemtee is referring to:
In 2000 Nader ran as a third-party candidate against George W Bush and Al Gore. In the crucial Florida vote, Nader pulled enough votes from people who later said that in Nader's absence they would have voted for Gore to give Bush a victory (after some Supreme Court meddling).
We can never know the road not taken, but for sure no pointless Iraq war, no ISIS, no triumphant Iran without the counterbalance of Iraq.
What we need is a system of ranked voting, where you can say Bloomberg is my first choice, but if no one wins my vote goes to Clinton. There are many ways to achieve this, too complicated to go into here. Both parties oppose such mechanisms, because they do encourage third party candidacy.
In 2000 Nader ran as a third-party candidate against George W Bush and Al Gore. In the crucial Florida vote, Nader pulled enough votes from people who later said that in Nader's absence they would have voted for Gore to give Bush a victory (after some Supreme Court meddling).
We can never know the road not taken, but for sure no pointless Iraq war, no ISIS, no triumphant Iran without the counterbalance of Iraq.
What we need is a system of ranked voting, where you can say Bloomberg is my first choice, but if no one wins my vote goes to Clinton. There are many ways to achieve this, too complicated to go into here. Both parties oppose such mechanisms, because they do encourage third party candidacy.
1
Or Gore had picked a better rinning mate.
1
Like anyone would vote for him if he did. What's his platform going to be, abolishing super-size soda pop?
17
Ha.
I had forgotten about that. Who knows, maybe as prez he may have been able to ban fast food all together.
I had forgotten about that. Who knows, maybe as prez he may have been able to ban fast food all together.
It sure has been a widdle hard for the oligarchs on the Left and Right. Their stability and security are threatened at every turn by popular political figures who have wide support. It is almost too terrible to bear. For them.
20
He never had any intention of running.. this is big business trying to stop the only candidate that is not a career politician who will not play ball with them because he simply doesn't need to.
8
If Bloomberg seriously wanted to be President then he should have put together an exploratory committee in 2014 and begun to campaign well over a year ago, not months a mere eight months before the election.
More interestingly, Bloomberg's own internal documents suggest Hillary Clinton was likely ahead in probable electoral college outcomes. Indeed, these documents suggest Clinton winning North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin. If his aides are correct, Hillary Clinton will be the next U.S. President, as the Republican cannot will without those states.
More interestingly, Bloomberg's own internal documents suggest Hillary Clinton was likely ahead in probable electoral college outcomes. Indeed, these documents suggest Clinton winning North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin. If his aides are correct, Hillary Clinton will be the next U.S. President, as the Republican cannot will without those states.
8
The good people don't run very often. Of the remaining candidates, only Bernie could be considered a good person.
45
Hillary is also a good person.
4
which means he will certainly l lose
america doesnrt deserve bernie
america doesnrt deserve bernie
But a bad leader for a capitalist country.
There.
There.
1
Bloomberg, like others, found out that this time, his billions will not buy him the white house
11
You mean like Trump? From your mouth to God's ear. As far as their billions buying them the white house, I suggest you take a look at the Koch Brothers.
@Irichins - Trump is successful because of his positions, not because he's spending money to buy ads on TV. As for the Koch brothers, all their candidates have lost so far, so they've taken their money and gone home.
1
Okay, but if Hillary gets dragged down by an indictment he may wish he'd left his options open. The Democrats still have Joe as a "trump" card.
4
Feel the Bern Already! ;)
Bloomberg is absolutely right about the Republicans choosing the next Republican President with a majority in the House of Representatives. It appears to me the Senate Republicans' strategy is to deny a Supreme Court liberal majority that would anoint the Democrat in a tie in the electoral College. With a split court, the decision would go to a vote in the Republican majority House.
It's happened before in Bush V. Gore, and with recent elections being miraculously close, this is a serious consideration.
I still think the "Shock and Awe" outcomes of close elections is deliberate, but that's just me.
It's happened before in Bush V. Gore, and with recent elections being miraculously close, this is a serious consideration.
I still think the "Shock and Awe" outcomes of close elections is deliberate, but that's just me.
2
A tie in the Electoral College goes to the House without passing through the Supreme Court at all. The case of Bush v. Gore did not involve a tie in the Electoral College, but rather a dispute that the SCOTUS had with the decision that Florida's Supreme Court had made with regard to its own state election procedure.
1
rtk.......thanks, but as it is now, the Supreme Court is equally divided and if unable to render a decision in a suit such as Bush JR presented, wouldn't the issue go to the House?
The Supreme Court has no role in the electoral process as suggested by Patrick. A tie in the Electoral College goes to the House, not the Supreme Court. Bush v. Gore was about contested results in Florida and whether or not a recount should have proceeded.
The Supreme Court might still be involved in similar disputes but there is no constitutional role for the Court in the federal process of actually electing a president.
The Supreme Court might still be involved in similar disputes but there is no constitutional role for the Court in the federal process of actually electing a president.
1
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask how many sugary snack treats you can ban in your country.
6
As an avowed Hillary Clinton supporter, I concur with Michael Bloomberg's decision not to run. Although I did not support his first run for mayor, I subsequently voted for him twice and there's no question that he was a most able administrator and would, in fact, make a very strong (in a good sense) president. In fact, DeBlasio as mayor only makes me miss him more. At the same time, I have admired Hillary Clinton since her days as First Lady when, having been elected to no office and running for none she took on the pressing issue of health care reform and was duly pilloried by the GOP Congress for doing so. I continue to be amazed by the visceral reaction people display towards her that is based entirely on an entrenched disdain that has nothing to do with her policy positions or record or character. Michael Bloomberg, being the decent man he is, recognizes this and moreover has shown that, while his was not a perfect record, it's nevertheless possible (albeit rare) that a billionaire can believe in and pursue policies that are progressive and constructive and not regressive and destructive. It's comforting to know that a good billionaire will work to prevent an evil one from ever achieving elected office in this country.
372
Dear William,
You make it sound like being a billionaire immediately casts one in the role of one who is "regressive and destructive" which accusation/appelation needs to be redeemed. I suggest you look at some other Billionaires (Buffett and Gates come to mind immediately) who are not only progressive but are trying to build a better world. I hope you are doing the same.
EB
Virginia
You make it sound like being a billionaire immediately casts one in the role of one who is "regressive and destructive" which accusation/appelation needs to be redeemed. I suggest you look at some other Billionaires (Buffett and Gates come to mind immediately) who are not only progressive but are trying to build a better world. I hope you are doing the same.
EB
Virginia
2
Whatever I choose to reveal about myself, "John Brown", is unequivocally written in my comment and of course I stick to it unabashedly. Some choose to criticize others without giving one glimmer of their own intent and sit behind their computer like little petty tyrants judging the statements of others in anonymity. I'm no ideological fascist and I'm proud not to be one. What you refer to as "schizophrenia" I consider a free and flexible intellect who can form opinions on individuals based on their merits, meaning that a confirmed Democrat can vote for Bloomberg and be aghast at the inept administration of DeBlasio.
2
" I continue to be amazed by the visceral reaction people display towards her that is based entirely on an entrenched disdain that has nothing to do with her policy positions or record or character."
Well, she was in fact a very ineffective Sec. of State, did raise the wrath of the pols with her secretive approach to healthcare under Bill, is a neoliberal in alignment with the banks, and akin to the martial instincts of the neocons in foreign policy. The truth is that she will be more of the same. A corporate Democrat with a right-wing lean.
Well, she was in fact a very ineffective Sec. of State, did raise the wrath of the pols with her secretive approach to healthcare under Bill, is a neoliberal in alignment with the banks, and akin to the martial instincts of the neocons in foreign policy. The truth is that she will be more of the same. A corporate Democrat with a right-wing lean.
You must attain 270 electoral college votes in order to win the November election? So, if Mitt Romney enters the presidential race as a third candidate, he could win enough electoral votes to deny Clinton or Trump the outright win and push the decision to the House of Representatives? Who could then appoint Romney as president? Am I reading that right?
Those are unsettling questions, if true.
PS, if the House of Representatives majority switches to the Democrats in the November election, I suppose the "lame duck" GOP, as per their SCOTUS machinations, will have to leave the presidential decision to the next Congress to decide.
Those are unsettling questions, if true.
PS, if the House of Representatives majority switches to the Democrats in the November election, I suppose the "lame duck" GOP, as per their SCOTUS machinations, will have to leave the presidential decision to the next Congress to decide.
3
It's even worse than you think. If it goes to the House of Representatives, each state gets only one vote
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_C...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_C...
5
@Lynn - Yep, that would virtually ensure that the GOP candidate would become president. How many states have a Dem-majority House membership? Maybe fifteen or twenty?
1
LOL -- Mitt Romney -- that's hilarious.
Mitt Romney could not get elected dogcatcher, in an all Mormon village in Utah.
Mitt Romney could not get elected dogcatcher, in an all Mormon village in Utah.
1
Anybody else really, really tired of people with too much money commandeering our political process?
If Mr. Bloomberg is really a statesman, he will work very, very hard to implement campaign financing reform. If he uses even an iota of the energy he spent "reform"-ing the working lives of NYC teachers, I imagine he may bring some change to bear. Some useful change, that is.
If Mr. Bloomberg is really a statesman, he will work very, very hard to implement campaign financing reform. If he uses even an iota of the energy he spent "reform"-ing the working lives of NYC teachers, I imagine he may bring some change to bear. Some useful change, that is.
30
Yes, I am really tired of it; however, they have done it for a very long time. People are just getting around to noticing now, which is sad.
He is dreaming that he has any real appeal outside NYC.
36
He has a lot of appeal to me and I'm certainly no fan of the Republican candidates and I'm in Washington state.
1
He he should have entered the race last year before Trump did. This was too little too late. Now, go out and launch a movement to stop that demagogue.
4
Still anonymously sourced? It's already been a couple of weeks since his preferred Hillary Clinton stopped the freefall on Super Tuesday that Bloomberg pronounced the chances of his running "near zero."
The fact of the matter is that Bloomberg would probably lose four boroughs of New York City.
Nationally, his hostility to the Scalia reading of the second amendment and his fervent opposition to sugary sodas and trans fats would NEVER play in red state America. Similarly, his hostility to the free speech, free assembly and redress of grievances portions of the First Amendment (his actions during the 2004 Republicant convention and his rabid response to Occupy Wall Street), and his hostility to the fourth amendment (stop and frisk) made him unpalatable to liberals. This was, like the Joe Biden insurgency that wasn't that also (dis)graced the Times' front page, simply anonymously sourced clouds in the coffee of some ink stained wretches.
The fact of the matter is that Bloomberg would probably lose four boroughs of New York City.
Nationally, his hostility to the Scalia reading of the second amendment and his fervent opposition to sugary sodas and trans fats would NEVER play in red state America. Similarly, his hostility to the free speech, free assembly and redress of grievances portions of the First Amendment (his actions during the 2004 Republicant convention and his rabid response to Occupy Wall Street), and his hostility to the fourth amendment (stop and frisk) made him unpalatable to liberals. This was, like the Joe Biden insurgency that wasn't that also (dis)graced the Times' front page, simply anonymously sourced clouds in the coffee of some ink stained wretches.
5
And to further drive his case against Trump (this is presuming that Trump will be the nominee), Bloomberg should campaign with the victor of his original party, the Democrats. He would be a great contrast to The Donald: a successful businessman who does not further himself by playing to peoples' worst instincts.
5
MB could run as VP on the Hilary ticket as an independent. This would isolate Trump. Remaining an independent as VP could allow him to act as a sort of mediator between the polarized parties in congress and demonstrate Hillary's willingness to go outside her party to chip away at Washington gridlock. MB could then run for POTUS in 2024.
2
Well, polling probably showed no one was itching for a national ban on large sodas. But a Trump-Clinton or Cruz-Clinton or Trump-Sanders or Cruz-Sanders matchup would certainly make any reasonable person think twice about an independent or third party presidential candidate. If only there were a successful 2-term governor and businessman running, someone with a proven record of balancing the budget and vetoing spending hikes while protecting civil liberties.... someone like say, Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson....
Maybe, I am reading a lot into this withdrawal by Michael Bloomberg. But his move seems to be shrewd and calculated in his decision to avoid splitting votes and an electoral college tie. He is trying to avoid any possibility of a Trump or Cruz Presidency. Guess he loves his country more than any kind of personal fulfillment or vanity. Also, perhaps he does not want Hillary to lose because let's face it, she is the most pragmatic with a real plan. And though a billionaire he and his billions are doing great things for the unfortunate among us and single-handed taking up controversial, unpopular issues bringing them into the public forum. Bloomberg, a really classy guy, understated, smart and above all a True American.
22
Clinton is also a pretty unappealing and precarious candidate. Bloomberg would definitely pull votes and elect Trump or Cruz. You betcha.
1
Could you genuflect more. Seriously. Because the homeless and blacks are not really city residents or citizens whose concerns count right. They are scum and 'rabble' and don't need the protection and right described in the Constitution. And the rich are lovely selfless folks who loves us and care about us as they send their extreme wealth into tax free shelters to avoid paying taxes while turning NYC into a international playpen for the global 1%.
And if they cheat the voters like another billionaire Romney wants to do, well that's good and necessary. Democracy is for those who vote 'correctly' otherwise it's coup time (see Honduras, Ukraine, Angola, Egypt, Iran, Argentina, Libya).
All great successes for the Elite! Not so much for the other 99% though!
And if they cheat the voters like another billionaire Romney wants to do, well that's good and necessary. Democracy is for those who vote 'correctly' otherwise it's coup time (see Honduras, Ukraine, Angola, Egypt, Iran, Argentina, Libya).
All great successes for the Elite! Not so much for the other 99% though!
1
If only Ralph Nader had this much sense in 2000!
In my book, Nader deserves the blame for the entire wretched Bush years. Bloomberg deserves our thanks and praise.
In my book, Nader deserves the blame for the entire wretched Bush years. Bloomberg deserves our thanks and praise.
59
The only person who deserves the blame for the Bush years is Bush himself. And Rove, if you need a second name.
Nah, I blame Gore for picking Lieberman.
Yes, Nader has the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent people on his hands, aand shares culpability for all of the harm caused by the GW Bush presidency. I hope Nader is reading these comments.
Not sure he's actually very well-known at all outside the tri-state area and DC. He'd have to do a huge (or, I should say, "Yuge! Yuger than yuge!") amount of groundwork to introduce himself to people outside the Northeast.
One down one to go, Donald will banish all foe.
3
What I want to know is how he knows that MrT. is going to be the guy to oppose MrsC. - mayhaps he has a real inside passage to the thinking of us mere peons!!
It's unfortunate that ballot access happens so early in the computer age. Sounds like a configuration file change in computer world. September 1 should be the deadline.
I heard a strange noise today, like an enormous groan from across the East River. It turns out it was thousands of parasites, toadies, sycophants and entrail readers learning they wouldn't be able to get in on Bloomberg's billion dollar gravy train. Oh well, other worlds to conquer, other cities to wreck.
21
Best comment of the day !
3
Sad news. We all lose here.
1
Bloomberg's decision not to run eases my mind. I believe it was an unusually unselfish decision, and I thank him for making the choice he did. Nothing about the 2016 election makes me enthusiastic....the enthusiasm was rampant in 2008. And even in 2012 I was happy to vote again for President Obama. The main feeling I have about this election is chagrin. Donald Trump is frighteningly unqualified to be the President of the United States. But the alternatives on the Republican side are, if anything, even worse. Rubio is an empty suit, a Ken-Doll candidate, and a guy without any real substance. Cruz is all substance....but that substance is odious indeed. He is just plain scary. Then there is Hillary Clinton. I was glad when she got pushed out by Obama in 2008 and I'd love to see Bernie Sanders do the same thing this year, but the magic isn't going to happen twice. So I am going to mail in my vote from France in November for Hillary Clinton. She is qualified. She will not be a disaster. She will hopefully surprise us by being an outstanding President. And the alternative is unthinkable.
22
For once, Mike's ego didn't win over his common sense (and I speak as a former Bloomberg employee). Now how about his pledging to spend all that money & use all the already marshalled political resources to make sure a Democrat is elected president, and not Trump, Cruz or Rubio. He's a Democrat on most issues - only switched to the GOP and then "Independent" for political expediency - again, that ego thing.
2
Bummer. That would have definitely put Trump in the White House. Now Trump's chances have fallen from 95% certainty to 90% certainty. Reconsider, Mike!
1
Great decision by Bloomberg. While I would have supported him over any of the current candidates, I was also very concerned about the increased prospect of a Trump presidency which could result from a three way vote split. It's an extraordinarily selfless decision, and I'm extremely proud of Michael Bloomberg for making it.
3
Oy! Why didn't he wait until Hilary was indicted to decide? Was he the last hope for non-wacko contender from any party?
According to the FBI, they will be presenting their final report in early May. That would be too late for Bloomberg to enter the contest.
1
What Difference Does it Make? None. Trump will be our next President. Brave Smart Committed to USA American Man.
2
Brave?
See his David Duke reply.
Smart?
See his 4 bankruptcies, USFL debacle, etc.
Committed to USA?
See his immigrant construction labor, Romanian housekeepers, et al.
American Man?
I'll give ya that one.
See his David Duke reply.
Smart?
See his 4 bankruptcies, USFL debacle, etc.
Committed to USA?
See his immigrant construction labor, Romanian housekeepers, et al.
American Man?
I'll give ya that one.
1
Rubmeo give it up.
Senator Sanders should take a clue if he loses Michigan, Florida, Ohio, Illinois and N. Carolina next week. If he loses those states, his continued campaign and attacks on Hillary would do nothing but help Trump. Thank you Mr. Bloomberg for your selfless decision and true love of our country.
10
And just what makes you think that Bernie is going to lose these contests? He has won three of the last four.
I have been wondering about and waiting for the white knight, but he is a thought leader in business, and I get what he is saying about the cold hard math. something no one knows better. His has subsumed his goal of becoming president to something he cares even more about now--keeping Trump away from the Oval Office.
I would support his candidacy next time. even when he is 78, if the US still exists as we now know it.
I would support his candidacy next time. even when he is 78, if the US still exists as we now know it.
3
I am profoundly disappointed that Ralphnader Bloomberg will not be entering the race to offer the American people the same agenda as Clinton, Cruz, Rubio, etc. How will we survive?
18
Oh, yes, Clinton is *just like* Cruz and Rubio (what happened to Trump in your comment? Too sui generis?)
Except that she is not a Dominionist crazy like Cruz and would not let a woman die for lack of an abortion like Rubio. And that her economic positions are utterly unlike theirs, and that she would not repeal the ACA, and that she would nominate liberals to the S. Ct. And, so on.
Except that she is not a Dominionist crazy like Cruz and would not let a woman die for lack of an abortion like Rubio. And that her economic positions are utterly unlike theirs, and that she would not repeal the ACA, and that she would nominate liberals to the S. Ct. And, so on.
2
@chris: the President of the United States has no power to make abortion laws, pro or con.
the focus on the personality, policies and record of mr. bloomberg is a familiar and reflexive reaction. it's also superficial.
the important subtext is the stranglehold that the parasitic twin political parties have on our institutions of government, and the strength of their entrenched election operations to choke off any third party candidacy.
it's one thing to run a meretricious vanity campaign, as perot and nader and others have done in the past. it's something else to challenge the entrenched crony capitalism of the two parties and overcome their combined electoral turnout. that feat is essentially impossible, even for a multibillionaire candidate.
essential to the two party hegemony is the pseudo religious fervor and symmetrical demonization that the two parties use to blinder the citizenry with emotion, empty promises and lies -- and to distract the electorate from a focus on factual discussion of actual problems.
"all work and no party" seems like a government that would serve all the people rather than special interests. but the electorate is conditioned to think of politics in religious and moralistic terms: appeals to pragmatism and reason fall on deaf and deadened ears.
the important subtext is the stranglehold that the parasitic twin political parties have on our institutions of government, and the strength of their entrenched election operations to choke off any third party candidacy.
it's one thing to run a meretricious vanity campaign, as perot and nader and others have done in the past. it's something else to challenge the entrenched crony capitalism of the two parties and overcome their combined electoral turnout. that feat is essentially impossible, even for a multibillionaire candidate.
essential to the two party hegemony is the pseudo religious fervor and symmetrical demonization that the two parties use to blinder the citizenry with emotion, empty promises and lies -- and to distract the electorate from a focus on factual discussion of actual problems.
"all work and no party" seems like a government that would serve all the people rather than special interests. but the electorate is conditioned to think of politics in religious and moralistic terms: appeals to pragmatism and reason fall on deaf and deadened ears.
1
So it's official. I have no candidate.
1
Won't you come Cruzin' with me on a Sunday afternoon?
1
Cruz is a vote for gridlock x 10
1
While I don't think Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Giuliani have similar policy prescriptions on many issues, in one way they are similar - they both saw themselves as the "Dad" of all New Yorkers, and Mr. Giuliani certainly was hoping to expand that responsibility so that he would have the ability to tell everyone in the US, if not the world, what they could and couldn't do and when to be home at night. Bloomberg is 1,000 times less horrible than Trump (who isn't?), and smarter and more honest than Hillary, but I'm not looking for a national Dad - I want someone who's more willing to listen to the citizens of the US than he would likely be.
If only Ralph Nader had been this noble and intelligent in 2000 we would have been spared the 8 most disastrous years of this country.
73
Or, if only the Supreme Court hadn't deemed Jr. President.
2
Thank yo uMr. Bloomberg. You are a real patriot to give up personal gain for the good of his country.
7
Thank yo uMr. Bloomberg. You are a real patriot to give up political gains for the good of his country.
1
I love Michael Bloomberg and would've loved voting for him again, but I too was afraid that his candidacy would've elected Trump or even Cruz, the most thoroughly disliked man in the Republican Party (I still haven't forgiven you Ralph Nader!).
Maybe next time...
Maybe next time...
18
Cruz is the most popular Republican in the country.
A real profile in courage.
2
Mr. Bloomberg, had he decided to run, would have been another establishment candidate. A politician, who bent rules when he was the mayor of New York, to become mayor the third time. Therefore, he is not above self-interest when it comes to changing the rules instead of playing by the rules.
Also, we must keep in mind this whole high minded about "trade wars" with China and Japan. No one said anything about trade wars. First, we do not have a balanced trade between the US and China hence the yuuge trade imbalance. Second, who is actually benefiting from this trade? People like Mr. Bloomberg who are running billion dollar companies and pocketing millions and sometimes billions. So, it serves Mr. BB's self interest to condemn such strong trade negotiating tactics. Mr. BB should visit Slippery Rock, PA one of these days to figure out where America is headed, instead of flying in his private jet to his private Caribbean island every weekend.
Regarding banning Muslims from entering the country. Mr. Trump never said he wanted to ban Muslims from entering the country. He said that let us figure out how to handle the issue of terrorists entering the country before we let Muslim visitors. So, Mr. BB is guilty of twisting words, just like other politicians.
Is it possible that Mr. BB realized that he had no realistic chance of winning? So he made such statements before he bowed out of the race - a race which he never entered and the one he had no chance of winning.
Also, we must keep in mind this whole high minded about "trade wars" with China and Japan. No one said anything about trade wars. First, we do not have a balanced trade between the US and China hence the yuuge trade imbalance. Second, who is actually benefiting from this trade? People like Mr. Bloomberg who are running billion dollar companies and pocketing millions and sometimes billions. So, it serves Mr. BB's self interest to condemn such strong trade negotiating tactics. Mr. BB should visit Slippery Rock, PA one of these days to figure out where America is headed, instead of flying in his private jet to his private Caribbean island every weekend.
Regarding banning Muslims from entering the country. Mr. Trump never said he wanted to ban Muslims from entering the country. He said that let us figure out how to handle the issue of terrorists entering the country before we let Muslim visitors. So, Mr. BB is guilty of twisting words, just like other politicians.
Is it possible that Mr. BB realized that he had no realistic chance of winning? So he made such statements before he bowed out of the race - a race which he never entered and the one he had no chance of winning.
3
Bravo. A Common Man.
1
A trade deficit just means our consumers are choosing to buy products from overseas. You wanting to deny them that choice is anti-freedom and a big losing issue in the general election. The voters don't want to hear that the price of everything they buy is going to go up. And Walmart will most likely have to go out of business. Trump will cause an economic collapse, unless 2/3rds of Congress overrides his vetoes, which is likely, or Trump's lying about every issue and will just pass whatever Congress hands him and call it a great deal, which is even more likely.
People like you are the problem. The few meaningful things you try to argue include factual inaccuracies and personal opinions to which you have no support for. Maybe you are "a common man" since you are actually ignorant of what you speak of and appear to simply relay information you are told without actually looking into it.
Furthermore, you appear to be one of those people who hates rich people simply because they are better at making money than you. You think Bloomberg's success was handed to him on a gold platter? Do you even know what Bloomberg's business does? I bet he has worked every day of his life harder than you work in a month.
Furthermore, you appear to be one of those people who hates rich people simply because they are better at making money than you. You think Bloomberg's success was handed to him on a gold platter? Do you even know what Bloomberg's business does? I bet he has worked every day of his life harder than you work in a month.
Mike Bloomberg was never going to run for president, like Romney, his popularity is too limited to win and he knows this.
11
Let's hope Cruz's popularity is limited as well ...
1
Funny, Bloomberg's ad sounds just like Mr. Trump.
It's probably fair to say that if Bloomberg would have been nominated as the candidate for the Republican Party, he would win the election handsomely. The same would have been true for Romney if the Republican Party would have allowed Romney to run in 2012 as the almost quasi intellectual New England governor he was during his term before 2007. But no, the party and large portions of its electorate is apparently in a state where it now rather decides on the candidacy on the basis of certain male body parts. Every country gets the president it deserves.
4
Who are all the moderate Republicans going to vote for? My guess some will begrudgingly vote for Hillary, others like the main stream Conservatives I know, just won't vote. They may have voted for Bloomberg-- but he is doing the right thing, looking out for the Country rather than his personal ego.
5
Trump is probably the most liberal Republican presidential candidate of the past 40 years. He is more liberal than Bloomberg in many ways.
His place on the ideological spectrum is not the cause of his problems.
His place on the ideological spectrum is not the cause of his problems.
1
Bummer, it would have been nice to have a real billionaire in the race.
7
There's nobody better suited to represent the hard-working lower and middle classes than millionaires and billionaires.
1