Bloomberg out is good news for Bernie.

[thesquanderer]

By now you've probably seen that Michael Bloomberg has ruled out an independent bid in November.

Bloomberg had said he would only run if Sanders were the Democratic nominee. Head-to-head polls show Sanders doing great against Trump or Cruz (better than Clinton does), but all bets were off if Bloomberg entered as an independent. This could have provided more reason to support Clinton over Sanders, as she might be the safer bet in a 2-way general than Sanders would be in a 3-way. With that variable removed, one point that may have swayed some potential Sanders people to Clinton has been removed.

If Bloomberg had announced that he WAS going to run, but would drop out if Hillary were to go on to get the nomination, I think that would basically have ended Sanders' candidacy.

[stevenleser]

1. Nope. It means he is convinced Hillary will get the nom. That's definitely not good for Bernie nt

[JRLeft]

4. ^ This

[thesquanderer]

5. Of course Hillary is likely to get the nom, but it's not a lock.

Last edited Tue Mar 8, 2016, 12:49 PM - Edit history (1)

If it were entirely about being certain Hillary will get the nomination, I'm kind of surprised Bloomberg didn't at least wait just until next Tuesday, when the picture may be even more clear in that regards.

There's still also an unpredictable element, the possibility of another shoe dropping in the email scandal. I'm not saying it's likely, but it adds some uncertainty.

So I don't think he is necessarily 100% convinced that Hillary will absolutely get the nom... but he may feel it is at least likely enough that he no longer is tempted to invest his money in the alternative.

ETA: as I mentioned elsewhere, he also could have decided that, even in the slight possibility that Bernie could somehow manage to get the nomination, he wouldn't want to risk a President Trump or Cruz.

[Adrahil]

6. Yup... one of his advisers said so.

He said Bloomberg is convinced Hillary is going to get the nom, and that pushed him towards not running.

[thesquanderer]

7. Since that's still not 100% certain, I wonder if there could have been another factor...

...that maybe he decided that, even on the slightest chance that Sanders could manage to get the nomination, he'd still rather have Sanders in the WH than either Trump or Cruz, so his candidacy, even in that unlikely scenario, could still produce what he considered the most undesirable result.

[Adrahil]

8. Well, if he was going to get started, he'd have to do it about now....

So I think he probably ran the scenario and figured Sanders' chances are fairly slim.

Of course, her victory is not yet assured, but Sanders' path is beginning to look really unlikely.

[thesquanderer]

9. Yes, I had read he'd have to move on it by mid-March.

That's why I figured he'd at least wait for "next Super Tuesday," but maybe that would already be too late. Though there would be nothing (AFAIK) that would prevent him from starting the process of getting on ballots in the mean time, and deciding to pull the plug later. Either way, I agree with you, Sanders is unlikely to get the nomination. I guess the only question is what level of certainty one ascribes to that!

[morningfog]

10. That's it folks. Bloomberg is convinced. Pack it up.

Go home.

[thesquanderer]

12. Is that like the new pope being signaled by smoke?

Bloomberg the divine and infallible has sent us a sign!

[thesquanderer]

40. I wonder if he wishes he had waited one more day...

Obviously, the math still favors Hillary, but things look slightly less certain after that unexpected Michigan win.

[liberal_at_heart]

2. Hmmm. I wonder who is going to be the more corporate friendly candidate?

Bloomberg wants Hillary in there so bad and to keep Bernie out so bad he is willing to jump in just to make sure she wins.

No, all those donations from all those financial institutions don't mean anything.

[Hortensis]

3. Imo, it's good news for Bernie because his message won't

get lost in all the media hullaballoo over Bloomberg's entry. Bernie will presumably stay in right up until the convention as he said, and my guess is that Bloomberg's entry wouldn't have changed that.

[H2O Man]

22. Right.

Bloomberg planned to run as an independent, which would have zero impact on the Democratic -- or republican -- primaries.

[Hortensis]

35. Is this a knee-jerk disagreement or did you forget to consider

what Bloomberg's entry would do to media coverage? The impact would have been enormous and especially damaging to the lesser-known candidate.

[H2O Man]

36. Nope.

Bloomberg would have made no impact if he entered -- none in the primary season, as he would not have been in any primary -- and none in the general election. He could not have bought himself a place on stage at the general election's debates.

His version of Hamlet has played on other stations in the past. A non-factor, beyond his imagination.

[Hortensis]

37. Ok, opinion noted, H2O Man.

[thesquanderer]

38. I disagree. His candidacy could have had an impact on the primaries.

Bloomberg had said he would only run if Sanders were the Dem nominee, and that he would not run against Hillary.

An entry by Bloomberg as an independent, with a statement of intent to abandon his candidacy if Hillary were to win the nomination, would have persuaded some people to vote for Hillary rather than Bernie, if they felt that the Dems' chances were better in a 2-way with Hillary against the Republican than in a 3-way that included Bernie and Bloomberg.

[H2O Man]

39. I respect your right

to your opinion. But the scenario you describe would have described, at most, a dozen people across the US.

[CajunBlazer]

11. No, that means taht Bloomberg is convinced that Bernie will not be the nominee

Articles citing numerous sources close to Bloomberg pointed out that he would only jump in if the match up was going to be either Bernie and Trump or Bernie and Cruz. Those same articles, again citing those same sources also stated that Bloomberg would have to make his decision in early March in order to be able to get on the ballots in all 50 states due to upcoming deadlines.

So it is early March and Bloomberg has made his decision not to0 run. Since Trump looks like a shoe in for the Republican nomination, and since the only person who might catch him is Cruz, that must mean that Bloomberg firmly believes that Bernie will not be the Democratic nominee.

[morningfog]

14. I disagree that Trump is a shoe in and that Bloomberg has any special basis to firmly believe

that Bernie will not be the nominee. It is highly likely that it will be Hillary, but is is not a given.

[thesquanderer]

16. I agree. There is strong likelihood, but still uncertainty.

Which brings me back to wondering, is it just that Bloomberg now feels Bernie's chances (even while not zero) are too small for him to bother with the effort and expense of his plan, or might he actually also be factoring in a greater hesitation about possibly facilitating a Trump or Cruz win.

[CajunBlazer]

17. You can disagree all you want

That doesn't change the underlying facts:

1) Bloomberg was looking to get into the race if both parties nominated "extreme" candidates - meaning Bernie and Trump or Bernie and Cruz. This was verified by numerous articles long before now.

2) Those same contacts verified the Bloomberg would have to make a decision as to whether to run in early March because after that point state deadlines would prevent him from ensuring that his name appeared on all 50 state ballots.

3) It is early March and I understand that Bloomberg has announced that he will not be a candidate for President.

4) If you have been paying attention to the Republican nomination process you know that while it may be possible for Cruz to catch Trump (not at all likely, but possible, Rubio has no chance of catching Trump before the Republican convention. The only Reason why Rubio is hanging in there is that he is hoping the Trump's three opponents combined can keep Trump from getting enough delegates to win before the convention and he is hoping against hope that he can come out of a brokered convention the nominee regardless of how few delegates he ultimately wins.

Conclusions: Bloomberg cannot predict the future any more than you and I can so he has to take the facts as they currently stand.

Conclusion 1) In all likelihood Trump or Cruz will be the nominee on the Republican side.

Conclusion 2) In all likelihood Clinton will be the nominee on the Democratic side.

My assumption: (And I think that is a dang good one) Trump or Cruz being the Republican nominee satisfies Bloomberg's original condition on the Republican, Bernie doesn't look to be nominee on Republican side so he is not throwing his hat in the ring. This assumption is verified by previous statement form several of Bloomberg's close contacts that he would not oppose Clinton if she were in the race.

QED

[thesquanderer]

20. I mostly agree

except most of the reports I saw said he'd need to make a decision on whether to proceed by mid-March, not early March. So then, if it strictly depends on Sanders' viability, why not wait one more week (to next Super Tuesday) when the situation will be that much more clear? That's why I thought maybe--as relevant as Sanders' status was--there may have been an additional aspect to his decision, i.e. growing trepidation about being a spoiler that could possibly toss things to Trump or Cruz. Along those lines, his new statement also mentioned Trump and Cruz, but said nothing about Sanders (whereas his initial announcement of the possibility of running did mention Sanders).

But yes, while I don't like the word "convinced" that had been tossed around (which sounds certain), I will grant you your "in all likelihood" scenarios.

[CajunBlazer]

21. Bloomberg actually made his decision later than expected.

His close contacts originally told the press that he would make his decision right after the 1st of March primaries which was about as late as he could wait and press on with getting his names on the ballots of all states. I guess that since at that point he was leaning strongly towards not running he could afford to wait a bit longer - after the Saturday primaries and caucuses - to see if anything changed before making the actual announcements.

I know from the articles I read at the time that he didn't want to run against Hillary because to do so would give the election to the Republicans if he didn't win and he only thought he could win in a Bernie vs. Trump or Bernie vs. Cruz situation.

I actually think that Bloomberg might have won running against Sanders and Trump or Sanders and Cruz. He could have attracted middle of the road independents and moderate Democrats and Republicans who were not eager to vote for candidates that they viewed as "too extreme".

[thesquanderer]

23. I do remember references to early March early on...

...but subsequently, it seemed to morph to mid-March.

But it's a minor point regardless.

And I agree, he expressed no interest in running against Hillary.

[CajunBlazer]

25. From all reports...

... is is a man that is careful with his money and his reputation. He only wanted to run if he had a very good chance to win.

[lumberjack_jeff]

13. It's good news for democrats. n/t

[thesquanderer]

15. That's true.

It's just that Hillary had less to be worried about to begin with!

But yeah, I think it's good overall. Good to remove another source of uncertainty, good to not have to worry about splitting the Dem vote in any scenario, good not to have another big mouth stirring up discontent with typical Dem positions.

[NCTraveler]

18. It clear to him that Clinton is getting the nomination....

[oasis]

19. Bloomberg favors Hillary over Trump. I see big time contributions

coming her way.

[CajunBlazer]

24. Oh dear, more accusations of taking money from the 1%

When are people going to wise up to the fact that some of the 1% are on our side and a candidate would be a fool not to take their money. Some of the very rich actually have a conscious. Some would willingly pay higher taxes. Others don't need the government tax breaks and cozy deals; they have too much money to worry about such BS. Some are teaming up with other 1%'er to give away most of their fortunes to charity.

Bottom line: Not all of the 1%'ers are like the Kochs and fossel fuel executive.

[oasis]

27. I'm not accusing. I'm pushing back against those who say

Hillary's campaign is low on money. Hillary will be in great shape for the GE battle w/ Trump.

[CajunBlazer]

28. Don't worry about it...but Bernie should be happy he won't be in the GE

Without a PAC he would be toast.

[oasis]

29. Major miscalculation to depend on $27 donations to get into the WH. nt

[thesquanderer]

30. OTOH, he can go back to those donors again and again.

And he seems to have an awful lot of them.

Regardless, if by some chance he were to win the nomination, he would also have the resources of the Democratic party at his disposal.

[oasis]

31. Sheldon Adelman, Koch Bros. etc. will crush the penny ante donors.

[thesquanderer]

32. Three things...

1. Money isn't always everything. (See: Jeb!)

2. I'm not convinced that the usual suspects (Adelman, Koch, etc.) are so enamored of Trump. (Or Cruz, for that matter.)

3. While Bernie has no SuperPAC of his own, the Democratic Party has lots of financial muscle (and related PACs) of its own, and those resources will be made available to the Democratic nominee.

[oasis]

33. One thing we know for sure, it's going to be crazier from

here on with both parties. There is talk of a brokered GOP convention, and Trump may not emerge victorious.

[thesquanderer]

34. True. (n/t)

[saltpoint]

26. Bloomberg's being out of

possible contention for the presidency is good for me, too.

Never cared much for the guy, really. The presidency thing seemed like an ego trip.