Bloomberg is definitely running for President

[Verily]

Could I ask the more informed members of this forum what would happen (based on the 2004 vote) if Bloomberg polled the same share as Perot in 1992 (about 18%). Would he win any electoral college votes at all or would he take votes from one specfic party?

His best chances at states are definitely New Jersey and Connecticut. I think his support would be a bit more concentrated than Perot's, probably enough to win both of those states on 18% of the vote. The very much pro-independent upper New England (Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine) would also be possible for him on 18% of the vote.

[TheresNoMoney]

Would he win any electoral college votes at all or would he take votes from one specfic party?

Connecticut would probably be his best shot. Socially liberal, financially well-off state that is staunchly anti-Iraq War.

[bullmoose88]

How would he do in the counties in the BosWash Corridor...I see him doing very well there...

[Verily]

How would he do in the counties in the BosWash Corridor...I see him doing very well there...

He could probably win every county along I-95 in BosWash except Essex County, NJ, Philadelphia County, PA and Baltimore City, MD. Hometown love should be enough for The Bronx. Hudson County, NJ would be tough but doable.

Fairfield County, CT, Bergen County, NJ, and Nassau and Westchester Counties, NY would duel for his strongest showing.

[bgwah]

I can definitely see myself voting for him if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic candidate. Actually, Obama is the only mainstream Democratic candidate that I like, so should he not receive the Democratic nomination I would probably go ahead and vote for Bloomberg.

[Wakie]

If he runs (changing party affiliation does indicate he wants to though it doesn't mean he will) he guarentees a President Hillary Clinton.

Re-electing Bush over Kerry guaranteed a President Hillary.  This is just the icing.

[Reaganfan]

How come today he claims he is "not running" again? The title of this thread is a bit misrepresenting.

[Verily]

How come today he claims he is "not running" again? The title of this thread is a bit misrepresenting.

All he claimed was that his "plans for the future have not changed". That's an intentionally evasive answer.

[Likely Voter]

all discussion on this seems to be based around the notion of 'which party will he help win'

I dont think he will get in unless he has a very good chance of winning. He just doesnt seem like the kind of guy who wants to spend half a billion to get out a message but end up with 15% and throwing the election

I bet that if he didnt break through in polls after announcing he would drop out.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Against Hillary, he'd definitely hurt the Republican more. He'd basically be an option for those who can't stand Hillary but don't want to continue the disasterous Republican rule. Otherwise, tough to say, but he wouldn't be that much of a factor. I doubt he'd even do better than Perot '96.

If Hillary is the nominee and Minnesota looks safe for her, I might consider voting for him. Otherwise, I'd suck it up and vote for Hillary. I'd vote for any other Democrat in any case.

[Erc]

Regardless of who else is running, he has my vote if he runs.

+1 Westchester County vote for Bloomberg.

As for who he'd hurt more...I should think he'd relegate the Republican candidate to a deep, deep third place in most of the Northeast (not all--I personally can't see him doing extremely well upstate)...but would also take a fair number of recent Democratic votes as well [stripping the Democrats of the advantages they've had in the northeastern suburbs since '92 or so].

In the rest of the country...his effect on the Republican party might be lessened.

I don't even want to think about how Colorado would work in a three-way race with Bloomberg.

[Eraserhead]

Why are people on here saying Bloomberg is already anti-Iraq? When did he express that view? Whenever I have seen him asked about Iraq, he has dodged the question with some lame excuse.

[7,052,770]

He makes me nervous, as I feel we are very likely to win in 2008 as it is, and I'm not sure which way he'll tilt the thing.  I'd rather just have a 2-way race and be the big favorite.

[TommyC1776]

Now him and Hagel can run on Unity08 together.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Now him and Hagel can run on Unity08 together.

Unity08 is more of the same political elite garbage.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I don't think Bloomberg will actually enter until there is a clearer idea who the Republicrats are running in the general election.  its way too murky to have any idea how well he will do.

[Trilobyte]

I also don't think Bloomberg will actually run. But there's a good chance he'll endorse, finance and campaign for a third party candidate that shares his views.

[Keystone Phil]

Good riddance. I never liked the guy. Republicans better hope that he pulls from the Dems. I have always worried that a Bloomberg run would attract more moderate Republicans than average Dems.

We know he'll pour hundreds of millions - perhaps a billion - into this race and I'd love to see him walk away without breaking out of double digits.

[Conan]

If he runs (changing party affiliation does indicate he wants to though it doesn't mean he will) he guarentees a President Hillary Clinton.

Um no. He will take away votes from whoever the dems nominate. He's much more liberal than Hillary Clinton.

[Conan]

If this guy acts as a spoiler for the Democrats (and thus throws the election to the GOP), I reserve the right to spend 2009-2013 bitching about the result.

He is more likely to hurt the Republican candidate.

How would a liberal as big as Bloomberg is, hurt the republican?

[WalterMitty]

excellent move!

i would welcome a bloomberg candidacy!

[Keystone Phil]

If this guy acts as a spoiler for the Democrats (and thus throws the election to the GOP), I reserve the right to spend 2009-2013 bitching about the result.

He is more likely to hurt the Republican candidate.

How would a liberal as big as Bloomberg is, hurt the republican?

Bloomberg attacts more moderate Republicans. I agree that Bloomberg is a liberal Dem at heart but, as a party switcher, he'd get support from moderates that are not happy with the GOP. Pro Choice, Pro Gun control and being against the Iraq war brings those voters in.

[Conan]

Good riddance. I never liked the guy. Republicans better hope that he pulls from the Dems. I have always worried that a Bloomberg run would attract more moderate Republicans than average Dems.

We know he'll pour hundreds of millions - perhaps a billion - into this race and I'd love to see him walk away without breaking out of double digits.

He will take away from the dems much more significantly than the moderate reps. I need to reread his speech he gave at the RNC Convention again, to review it. I was mad at him, and still am. However if it wasnt an endorsement of Bush, I'd be voting for him. He will in no way take away republican votes. He is a tax raising, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage liberal. If I were a republican, this would be a dream come true.

[Verily]

If this guy acts as a spoiler for the Democrats (and thus throws the election to the GOP), I reserve the right to spend 2009-2013 bitching about the result.

He is more likely to hurt the Republican candidate.

How would a liberal as big as Bloomberg is, hurt the republican?

You seem to have missed Bloomberg's support for fiscal conservatism.

[True Democrat]

I heard Bloomberg opposes a timetable in Iraq, which makes him the perfect fit for me.