CNN: Bloomberg more likely to run if Hillary is the nominee!!!

[BluegrassDem]

John King just said that sources close to Bloomberg say that he will likely jump in if Hillary is the nominee.

This is NOT good news for our party at all. A lot of Edwards and Obama supporters who don't like Hillary will vote for Bloomberg in a minute. Actually, Bloomberg is more progressive than Hillary. We need Obama or Edwards to be the nominee. We can't afford a Hillary nomination. The whole damn party is going to hit an iceberg and go down if she's the nominee.

[BringBigDogBack]

1. you got it. nt

[skipos]

70. Clinton vs Bloomberg vs Nader vs a Repub? Hello President McCain/Huckabee!

I guess we can try to get it right again in 2012.

[maddiejoan]

2. Bloomberg is more progressive than Hillary?

excuse me a moment --

:rofl:

[TwilightGardener]

On some things, yes.

[robbedvoter]

17. "Make your client think he's getting laid, when in fact he's getting f*ed"

There is more asthma in poor neighborhoods - because of poor hygiene"
Any more "progressive"?
And let's not forget arresting (and spying on) anti-bush protesters in 2004.

[maddiejoan]

20. yeah but he got rid of Trans Fats

He's a sick joke....more progressive than Hillary?

hahahahahaha


I'm still laffing

:rofl:

[robbedvoter]

37. I am actually POed every time out of towners praise him...

Not that some NYC-ers aren't fooled by the 100% positive coverage he gets - it's good to have your own media

[maddiejoan]

39. I miss Dinkins

there --I said it.

[robbedvoter]

95. Not a great mayor, but the last decent guy we had there in MANY years...

[maddiejoan]

127. hehehe

When's the last time NYC had a GREAT Mayor?

LaGuardia?

[AlCzervik]

i bet and i don't blame you, i feel the saem way when people tell me Arnold

is doing a great job here in ca. when of course they do not live here.

[robbedvoter]

96. I sympatise with you on that - and of course I'd NEVER say that...

[Emillereid]

61. It wouldn't take much -- HIllary is NOT PROGRESSIVE at all!

[Evergreen Emerald]

129. you are wrong--check her record.

[Emillereid]

137. Kucinich is a progressive; I am a progressive; Edwards is almost a progressive.

But Hillary is at best center-right. If she is considered progressive then the repuke 'thought' machine has won.

[Joe the Revelator]

14. You're laughing without doing much research

You must live in upstate NY if you think that Bloomberg wouldn't be the more progressive person in a race that has Hillary as the nominee

[maddiejoan]

18. I live in Brooklyn

But thanks for playing.

[Joe the Revelator]

21. Then you're wearing your partisan pants and whistling past the graveyard.

[maddiejoan]

25. Nope

But I sure know more about Bloomberg than you do apparently.

:rofl:

[robbedvoter]

26. No. I'm living in his bought and paid for mayoralty. He is Rudy with media ownership

hence the positive coverage and people 's delusions about him. He's about as progressive as Dick Cheney.

[Nedsdag]

44. Laugh all you want.

Bloomberg will have the last laugh come November.

He'll really give Hillary something to cry about.

[1corona4u]

67. He'll give Obama something to cry about as well...

[TwilightGardener]

81. He met with Obama--I think they're buds, so...no.

[1corona4u]

94. It doesn't matter if they are 'buds' or not...

Obama will lose voted to Bloomberg.

[TwilightGardener]

100. Bloomberg won't run if he's the nominee. He'd have no reason to.

[1corona4u]

105. Don't kid yourself...

[robbedvoter]

119. Buds huh? With a shark billionaore? Good luck with that.

[ihavenobias]

51. Well maybe, but that's not saying much

[antiimperialist]

3. Sources told another newspaper that Bloomberg wants Obama vs. Huckabee n/t

[robbedvoter]

8. Well then, let's give Mike what he wants - he's so very good, powerful, scary.

wise, rich,.....:wtf:

[jasmine621]

Did they forget to add: so Obama can lose? nt

[Mojorabbit]

28. Why do you think he would lose?

I haven't chosen my candidate yet but it seems to me he would win that match.

[robbedvoter]

32. Point is - it's what Bloomberg would want

[LisaL]

4. Wouldn't he run as a third party?

And that would be bad news how exactly?

[KingFlorez]

Yeah, right

Bloomberg would probably get less the 1% of the vote, nobody wants him as President and no real Democrats would vote for him over the Democratic nominee.

[TwilightGardener]

12. Perot got something like 19%, and he was nuts.

[LisaL]

15. And who benefited in the end because Perot was running?

LOL.

[TwilightGardener]

31. ??--I don't think Bloomberg is out to hurt our party. I was just saying

that it's not implausible for him to take a respectable percentage.

[LisaL]

34. He'd take republican votes as well.

Sure worked well when Perot was running.

[ihavenobias]

52. I don't know about that

Isn't he pro-choice, pro-environment? That's not a very popular conservative platform.

[robbedvoter]

97. Oh,no? last time I checked - he was a REPUBLICAN! Turned in 2000 - after the THEFT

Why would he wish the best for us????

[TwilightGardener]

103. He's been a Dem all his life, before that--he only ran as an R

because there were too many D's in the race. There's a guy in Nebraska who just switched from R to D to run for Hagel's seat against Mike Johanns.

[robbedvoter]

109. "Life time Dem" - of the C_Span variety. He ran like a mob guy in that election

silencing newspapers and intimidating potential donors of his adversary in the primary...Some democrat...I guess one can say that about Raygun too! He also was a democrat when it was convenient..."Democrat" Bloomberg attempted to make mayoral elections non-partisan...In a Democratic city...

[TwilightGardener]

110. Not bad for a first run--sounds like a born politician.

[robbedvoter]

111. Yes, but of the BFEE stripe...Why the love here - Baffles me! Is Rove as popular too?

[TwilightGardener]

114. I like the guy--not sure I would vote for him, until and if he campaigns.

He's undoubtedly a social progressive, is pragmatic, knows how to manage, and is very direct and forthright. I respect that. I don't hate rich people, though, and I'm not really a populist. The word "elite" doesn't get me all worked up, I'm not into class warfare. So, I don't have an automatic hostility towards him. He might run and be the ultimate bore and loser, who knows--I'm not worried. More choice is always better than less choice, IMO. I'll watch with interest.

[Joe the Revelator]

19. You're kidding yourself

The man is a social liberal, fiscal conservative who's said that he's willing to spend over a billion dollars of his own money on the race. That kind of dough buys away the party advantage. Bloomberg would be a serious contender under the right circumstances.

[maddiejoan]

30. hahahahahahahaha

stop it!

you're killin' me here!!!

:rofl:

[Joe the Revelator]

48. Why don't you set me straight then?

I've done my research...change my mind. Why is he worse then Hillary?

[earthside]

22. You're Dreamin'

Bloomberg could spend a half billion dollars, hire the best advertising agencies and consultants in the world, and campaign on a message of unity and reform.

The power of very sophisticated advertising coupled with a nearly unlimited budget will probably convince even you to vote for Bloomberg by November.

He would win.

Clinton(s) would come in second ... and the good news would be that the Republicans could very well be diminished into almost third party status.

[Nailzberg]

23. I don't know anything about him.

I consider all candidates, although the last repub I voted for in any major race was Jim Edgar for Governor 14 years ago.

[robbedvoter]

5. Quick! Jump in the lake! Another NYC mayor a-comin"!!!!!

Hide your wives! Convert to GOP! leave the country! Bloomy is coming!
:rofl:

[usregimechange]

6. I would consider him if she is the nominee.

[TwilightGardener]

13. Yep.

[goldcanyonaz]

7. Bloomberg isn't going to tell me who to vote for.

[antiimperialist]

9. One anonymous source's interpretation of Bloomberg's desires n/t

[Thrill]

10. Nothing will fire Republicans up like Clinton winning the Nomination

[Yael]

132. Why is this so hard for people to believe?

Too many years of snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory has the mind juiced.

[BlueStater]

11. Says who?

I don't care for Hillary but I sure as hell am not going to vote for Bloomberg over her.

[jasmine621]

16. I all activist women see this as more "piling on" Hillary.

History can be made in more than one way.

[ShortnFiery]

Some of us activist women see this as just another power player helping the Clintonian DLC Machine.

win another 4-8 years within the Executive Branch. :shrug:

Oh, us "clueless broads" won't know what hit us. :wow:

[Yael]

133. Yep

[goldcanyonaz]

59. The Edith Bunkers of the world will bring this election home for her.

They're sick of listening to this shit and they will speak up!

[ShortnFiery]

72. So the Hilarities are idealizing "a woman" who was lovable but essentially a DOORMAT to her husband.

THIS persona is "nice" and "thoughtful" but, I submit NOT a representative sample WOMEN Voters in The United States of America.

I'm stunned that this repetitive touting of the "Edith Bunker persona" is now HRC's feminist appeal to women. :crazy:

[goldcanyonaz]

78. A true woman wouldn't stand for this sexist shit, the Phylis Schlafly type embraces it.

And, most women are taking notice of the way she is being signaled out because she is a woman, and they're not going to stand for it.

[AlCzervik]

24. imo it seems wrong to jump in and get to skip the primaries and the hard work

thats what i think will sink Guiliani and what did Fred Thompson in. flame away or don't, whatever.

[TwilightGardener]

33. He has no primaries to run in. He's an Independent.

:shrug:

[AlCzervik]

35. i'm sure thats why he opted out of being a republican--ust to avoid primaries and

doing the leg work, i don't like him and i don't respect that at all.

[TwilightGardener]

42. I don't think he could have run in the R primary even if he wanted to--

too pro-gay, pro-choice, etc. They're having conniptions over Rudy, so Bloomberg would really push them over the edge.

[AlCzervik]

45. no way could he have made it through and he knows it and i think it's wrong

he jumps in and writes a check.

[TwilightGardener]

49. I never was of the opinion that money could buy an election--

otherwise we'd have had President Perot, and President Romney would be next. The way I see it, he's got every bit as much right to run as Hillary, Romney, Obama or anyone else in either party--and we have every right not to vote for him, no matter how much he spends. I don't think he's out to wreck it for Dems, anyway.

[Milo_Bloom]

107. Perot never wanted to be president...

Which is why he dropped out of the race as soon as he pulled ahead in the polls and then jumped back in when he didn't have a real chance anymore.

Perot saw a few issues that he wanted to have an effect on and wanted to influence the national debate on.

Unfortunately, no one really listened, but what is fascinating is if you go back and read his book, you will see he pretty much hit it dead on.

[TwilightGardener]

112. He was just a strange bird, that one.

[Milo_Bloom]

113. He wanted to be a kingmaker, not a king.

About a year ago I re-read his book and just kept shaking my head wondering why no one listened.


Its funny, if we had gone with his gas plan back then (increasing tax on gasoline by three fold) by now we would have completely removed ourselves from foreign oil, as prices would have mandated the innovation.

[ShortnFiery]

27. No, Bloomberg has openly stated that he likes HRC. He wants the Perot Effect that helped her hubby.

Yes, it's more than disgusting how the "power elite" seemingly pull all the strings. :(

Projectile Vomiting anyone? :puke:

[robbedvoter]

36. Actually, only Perot's withdrawal from the race helped Clinton, not his entrance

These were RW talking points - to say Clinton only won because Perot took Bush's votes. But the opposite is the case. Anyway, Bloomy is a gasbag and can't but a nation the way he bought a city (lowest turnout in history, BTW)

[ShortnFiery]

43. I, et. al, beg to disagree. Perot bled more points away from the BushBots.

http://www.counterpunch.org/kuzminski08182004.html

Why Perot Was the Last Serious Challenger of the Politcal Duopoly
The Death of American Politics
By ADRIAN KUZMINSKI



"The minority status of the Democratic Party was disguised by its lingering control of Congress (until 1994) and the fluke election (thanks to Ross Perot) of Bill Clinton."

snip/

"The minority status of the Democratic Party was disguised by its lingering control of Congress (until 1994) and the fluke election (thanks to Ross Perot) of Bill Clinton. Social activists and progressives of various sorts remained the party's base, even as party leaders, embodied in the Democratic Leadership Council, sensing the limited electoral appeal of the progressive agenda, steadily drifted to the right. Their failure to rearticulate a compelling vision of social justice and democracy sealed the party's fate. Conservative attacks on 'big government,' and their promotion of 'deregulation' not only of much of the economy but of campaign financing, solidified the corruption of the political process. As early as the Carter years, conservatives captured the leadership of the Democratic as well as the Republican parties, and created the two-party, right-wing duopoly which now confronts us."

[robbedvoter]

115. Counterpunch! That bastion of credibility! As anti-Clinton as Tweety...

Is that your source? :rofl:

[Essene]

29. fine with me

Hillary on the ticket is already going to be a disaster. Maybe Bloomberg prospect will make people wake up.

[Me.]

38. He Said A Long Time Ago That If She Got The Nom

and her negs were high, he would jump in.

[ShortnFiery]

47. I honestly recall Bloomy telling Wolfie on CNN that he would NOT run if HRC received the nod ...

because he felt confident in her leadership. Go figure? Those power elites just can't stay put. :crazy: But it's not like he's a major MONEY an BLOATED CORPORATE CRONY. Right? :eyes:

[TwilightGardener]

50. Well, maybe he's helping her then?

[ShortnFiery]

55. Yes, he's helping HRC and all other Americans who happen to be millionaires.

But if you don't have a large chunk of change to live as and independently wealthy American ... well, you're screwed. :shrug: By the end of 8 more years of media and corporate consolidation we truly will be working for our masters within The Corporate United States of America. :(

[defendandprotect]

40. Bloomberg is more progressive than Hillary . . .?????

Isn't this a heavy dollop of elitism into our system?

Don't worry . . . he's also short --- !!!

[AlCzervik]

41. lots of like for Bloomberg here, it makes a person wonder.

[defendandprotect]

73. don't get it . . ..

why would anyone think that a member of the elite will solve their problems?

[AlCzervik]

85. exactly! And he's the super elite, he has a shitload of money and a media company

but i guess what he really wants is power, real power and thats just a tad scary.

[IndianaJones]

46. Obama is as moderate as Clinton. nt.

[ShortnFiery]

53. One *very important* difference: Obama will not bring The DLC and other corporate crony INSIDERS

into his Executive Branch. Go forth and "party like it's 1995" except from 2008 on The Clintons will usher in Recession and Legislative Gridlock instead.

But no worries, they will not fail to serve as true lighten rods for scandal ... and as we all know it's not ALL the damn media's invention but serves all "power elites" and their goal to keep us distracted. In other words, the continued Clintonian Soap Operas will once again serve as "bread and circuses" for us (keep our eyes on government financially sucking the middle class out of existence) lowly chattering classes.

[IndianaJones]

54. yeah...he'll bring his deeply religious morality to such subjects as....

abortion and gay marriage.

[ShortnFiery]

57. Well, I'll settle, for now, with no further media/corporate consolidation and work from there

to ensure FULL Civil Rights.

[IndianaJones]

58. Obamas religions values do not support full civil rights for a certain group. nt.

[ShortnFiery]

60. You're hooked on "wedge issues" when the true evil is corporate consolidation.

Let's work from there?

[IndianaJones]

62. Civil rights is not a wedge issue....to some. nt.

[ShortnFiery]

64. If our country realizes FASCISM, then we've fully pissed away any hope for civil rights.

With The Clinton's DLC "old guard" re-established in The Executive Branch, most of us won't have time to worry about Civil Rights because we will be made DIRT POOR by absolute corporate control of our country.

You're sadly IMO, "putting the cart before the horse."

[IndianaJones]

66. so..obviously you support Kucinich. thats admirable I guess. nt.

[ShortnFiery]

69. so ... obviously this discussion has devolved into absurdity. eom.

[IndianaJones]

71. when you tried to claim civil rights is a wedge issue? yeah. nt

[ShortnFiery]

83. No, you are misrepresenting me. For all the happy talk HRC exudes ...like the Clinton before her

DON'T ASK DON'T TELL! Translation: Bill Clinton did NOT deliver and neither will HRC. ;)

In other words, if you want the SAME OLD CRONIES in the Executive Branch under a recession as was in Bill Clinton's cabinet during the 1990s, then have at it and vote for HRC. However, you will not get CIVIL RIGHTS but merely increased media/corporate consolidation that will suck the life out of Our Middle Class.

Nothing is perfect in this world, but NEW PEOPLE in the power positions within our Executive Branch is "the only hope" for CHANGE.

Especially with an Obama/Edwards ticket, I am confident that civil rights will be upheld.

[IndianaJones]

87. Obama opposes civil rights on religious grounds for some groups. nt.

[ShortnFiery]

92. With respect, I disagree. This is SPIN, not fact. Plus, new executive branch members

can discuss this with Obama. His positions are NOT static and he is, IMO, a true, vice DLC type "progressive."

[IndianaJones]

93. read his book. the chapter on Faith. nt.

[ShortnFiery]

104. Have a good evening. eom.

[AX10]

63. So civil rights don't matter when it comes to the beliefs of your candidate.

There is some kind of mania going on with Obama. No matter what this jackass says or does, sheeple just follow him blindly and don't criticize him.

[defendandprotect]

76. Just how religious is Obama . . . and how much is he talking it up?

[defendandprotect]

79. Is Obama anti-homosexual? Anti-choice?

Or has he entered the "Twilight Zone" that HRC embraced a while back where everything should be
a matter of "compromise" with the right-wing fanatics?

HRC was on the edge of suggesting that we "compromise" re abortion --- !!!

[IndianaJones]

89. read his book. the chapter on Faith. nt.

[defendandprotect]

77. Just how religious is Obama . . . and how much is he talking it up?

[defendandprotect]

74. Clinton is a corporate=DLC candidate . . . . that makes her a "moderate" . . . ????

A corporate-agenda makes Hillary "moderate" . . . ????

[IndianaJones]

90. I'm a moderate. I can recognize one. Obama is to the right of me.

the DLC is a boogyeman for the fringe left.

[ShortnFiery]

99. Yeah, anyone who is not 100% behind the "status quo" DLC candidate is labeled

"fringe left." :eyes:

It didn't work out for Gore, nor for Kerry and it won't work for HRC.

It's time to wretch the power from the "old guard" before we must say "President McCain."

[IndianaJones]

101. Good luck with Kucinich. not a lot of support...unless you mean the deeply religious candidate. nt.

[defendandprotect]

75. Clinton is a corporate=DLC candidate . . . . that makes her a "moderate" . . . ????

A corporate-agenda makes Hillary "moderate" . . . ????

[TwilightGardener]

80. Geez, you have a bad case of doublepostitis.

[Hieronymus]

56. I agree. 58% of those favoring Hillary said they would prefer Bill.

[1corona4u]

65. Love the scare tactic, LOL...

OMG we HAVE TO vote for Obama!!!!! Ahhhhhhh the sky is falling!!!!!

[robbedvoter]

116. Because Rudy is so scary, wait when you see his duller, uglier successor!

Voice like a frog, as arrogant as Rudy and malapropisms every other word...BE VERY AFRAID!

[DivorcingNeo]

136. Or...

OMG we have to vote for Hillary or the cocaine addicted, crack dealing, street hustler will drive our country into the ground!!! :hide:

and Al Quaeda will attack us again.:eyes:

[Yuugal]

68. OMG not Bloomberg!

[robbedvoter]

102. I noes! I is scared! (but love Stay Pufft !)

[Tom Joad]

82. America gets a choice. 3 supporters of the Iraq War.

damn. Is this 1978 Poland?

[ShortnFiery]

86. Both Edwards and Obama want to end the occupations of both Iraq and Afghanistan.

:shrug:

[Tom Joad]

91. Neither one has pledged to remove all troops out of Iraq by 2013

2013!!!
My little nephew will be near draft age by then.

[AtomicKitten]

84. Yep, that is the conventional wisdom.

And it would be disastrous.

[BenDavid]

88. Bring this ex democrat, ex republican on.....see below

New York
Clinton vs Giuliani vs Bloomberg
Clinton42% Giuliani33% Bloomberg17%Not sure9%

Clinton vs Romney vs Bloomberg
Clinton46% Romney22% Bloomberg22%Not sure10%

Clinton vs McCain vs Bloomberg
Clinton42% McCain27% Bloomberg20%Not sure11%

Last national poll November 30th 2007
Hillary Clinton (D)
43%

Rudy Giuliani (R)
38%

Michael Bloomberg (I)
11%

[Milo_Bloom]

108. He does pretty well for someone who has so far stated he is not running.

[bonito]

98. As it stands now a third party is welcome

I don't know anything about Bloomberg but I'd definitely look into any progressive candidate to displace these two Lieberman wet dreams.

[robbedvoter]

118. Bloomberg/progressive in one sentence - you DON"T KNOW ANYTHING about him

How's about read a bit BEFORE welcoming him?

[bonito]

126. How about reading my post

before replying.

[Milo_Bloom]

106. He'd run against Edwards too.

Both Clinton and Edwards suffer from the same problem... they are part of the establishment that got us into this mess and helped enable this administration.


I think Obama is the only candidate who would really keep him out, because Obama would be running on the same general platform of real outsider change.

[OHdem10]

117. Boren Group who will probably sponsor Bloomberg, .

Most of these people are Conservative Democrats and I mean Conservative
Edward's Populism no doubt makes him an extremist to them.
I hope anyone who may be working with them really understands
what he or she is doing.

They make Hilary look like a lefty.

Just so you know there is an agenda here.

[robbedvoter]

120. People who tried to block all Clinton's progressive legislation

[Milo_Bloom]

122. As long as it isn't a (D), it is a long term win.

The problem we have been facing is that the DEMOCRATS have been moving to the right, which in turn has shifted the republicans more to the right and made real progressives look fringe.

The goal for me isn't to put a dem in the white house at any cost... The goal for me is to participate in shifting the country to the left, which be done 1 of 2 ways.

#1) A REAL progressive wins the democratic nomination AND the presidency. I am not talking about a "johnny come lately" progressive, I am talking about someone with real progressive convinctions who we can count on to follow through. This would force the GOP to come back to center so as not to appear quite so radical and in turn would keep the democratic party to the left as well.

#2) An actual centrist winning on an independent ticket. Democrats have been trying to run as centrists for some time now. Its time they actually started running as DEMOCRATS. To distinguish themselves from a real centrist winning, the democrats would be forced to actually appeal to their base... even the GOP would be forced back towards the center, so, again, as to not appear so radical.


So in the end, I don't care if conservative democrats work to elect a centrist, because it will serve the long term interests of the democratic party and the country.

[mzmolly]

121. Bloomberg and Nader.

:eyes: I don't support Hillary but these threats are ridiculous.

[ProudDad]

123. He probably thinks he can cut out the middle-person

a true corporate capitalist master like Bloomberg can run the show and be 100% certain things will be done his way...

With hillary, there's always a chance she'll misunderstand her orders and screw up somehow...accidentally do something beneficial for the working class instead of doing her duty to the owners...

[TheDonkey]

124. Seems very obvious and of course would doom our chances at the WH

we must not let HRC or Bloomberg run unless we feel comfortable with President Hickabee.

[fujiyama]

125. He's an egomaniac

What a douchebag.

I think Hillary would still take NY state (so I hope), but NJ and CT would be tougher...Maybe PA and FL as well...

[BootinUp]

128. The funny thing to me is

that this spin is not going to help Obama win the Dem primary. Its not going to gain him the kind of voters he is needing, the lunch box Dems.

[ordinaryaveragegirl]

130. It's an ego thing...

What a slap in the face that would be. He'd be virtually giving it to the Repugs if he did that. Bloomberg needs to stay far, far away from this election....

[Yael]

131. We can't afford a Clinton nomination on a host of fronts

This just adds to that list...

[DivorcingNeo]

134. Hmm

I am not privy to his politics and policies but if I like what I hear and Hillary gets the Dems nomination, I would consider voting for him. I would've considered also voting for McCain if it wasn't for his die hard war stance and the Republicans he would surround himself with in his Cabinet (*barf*)

As it stands, if the Dems nominate Hillary and Nader runs, I'll vote for him.

[Didereaux]

135. Pure BULLSHIT! Bloomberg will run if a non centrist gets the nod or is WEAK.

[calteacherguy]

138. I will take a close look at Bloomberg if Hillary is the nominee. nt

[terrya]

139. Bullshit.

The party is NOT going to "hit an iceberg and go down if she's the nominee". That's ridiculous. Stop acting like such a drama queen.