Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by clevin, Jun 19, 2007.
Let the speculation begin, and may it run wild and free!
He's jumping ship before everything comes crashing down and the boat sinks.
Ralph Nader couldn't do it, Ross Perot couldn't do it, John Anderson couldn't do it - I doubt Bloomberg can. The machines are just too tough to beat.
I love Bloomberg. I think for people who try to leave parties, wealth and support are an issue. Bloomberg, however, is unbelievably popular and extremely wealthy.
And he'd attract voters like me - who are really moderate and don't give a curse about either party. More elegantly to vote along party lines seems a silly thing to me.
It should be interesting to watch. From what little I've heard about Bloomberg, he wouldn't run unless he believed he could win it.
Is Perot the most successful third-party candidate in, say, the last 100 years? Or ever? I'm just curious about what odds Bloomberg is up against.
the last 100 years? in the 1912 election, T. Roosevelt running on the Progressive Party ticket came in second with 27% of the vote, ahead of Taft who was the nominee of the Republican party. Wilson won the election.
Or ever? I think that would probably be the Republican party which won the 1860 election with Lincoln and has been around ever since
This excites me. I have been very disheartened by the Democrats. They seem to be doing all they can to embarrass Bush and the Republican party but have no intention of seeing the laws are enforced on all equally. If they truly are worried about the crimes committed during the one party rule, perhaps they should assign an independent council to investigate. Otherwise, Bush is right... this is all Political Theater. I digress...
www.bloomberg08.com is a registered website and is linked to Michael Bloomberg's homepage. Interesting enough. He's running.
Also, this could lead to a potential election crisis. Lets suppose Bloomberg, Clinton and Thompson are the three presidential candidates. Suppose the vote percentage is 38%, 33%, and 29% respectively making Bloomberg the winner of the popular vote. But lets suppose his votes are localized to the North East, Clinton carries the west and Midwest and Thompson wins out the south. Thompson wins the election even though he has the least amount of votes. Hey, it could happen.
Well, I don't hate the guy and he isn't as deplorable as most of the other candidates on either side.
But I don't see him winning unless we get 2 really bad choices otherwise.
You make that sound like its unlikely to happen!
You mean like Fred Thompson or Hillary Clinton?
I think the entirety of America is finally starting to be ready for a real choice. I think that this election is going to give such a choice that a third party will really have an unprecedented opportunity for a third party to break big.
I don't find any of the GOP candidates massively compelling and after our current administration any nominee will have a large uphill battle.
If Obama gets the Democratic nomination it might not bode well for third parties, however if Hillary does it, it's going to be wide open for a compelling third party candidate to do something.
Frankly I don't blame anyone who wants to bail out of the party of the American Taliban.
Last I had read, Thompson was way behind Romney, Giuliani, and McCain. There is no way Thompson is going to win the nomination.
Aso, on the Democratic side of things, Obama has been ahead of Hilary in the last few polls I've seen.
Not sure what polls you've been looking at. Nationally, I've seen Thompson in second behind Guiliani, and Hillary far ahead of Obama.
Of course, Hillary trails Edwards and/or Obama in Iowa and New Hampshire (and South Carolina IIRC).
I can't remember where. I guess I'll just retract what I said since I don't remember where I saw the polls.
Still though, I don't see Thompson getting the nomination. He's said some things that might set a lot of people off. Like him saying he'd never really wanted the job of President, but that he'd like to do things only a President can do.
Plus his whole feud with Michael Moore made him look like the biggest jackass ever.
What pisses me off most is that there is no Republican candidate that is least worst. I will be incredibly angry no matter which one gets the nomination. They are all terrible candidates.
polls don't mean crap at this point. where was kerry at this time for the 2004 race (hint: single digits). then two primaries later, he was somewhere in the 40's.
bill clinton came out of nowhere in '92, from what i recall.
I was way too subtle, but that was kinda my point.
as you say, way too early for the polls to mean a whole lot.....earlier in 2003 Joe Lieberman had been the front runner and by this time was starting to fade as interest in Howard Dean increased....and of course neither won the nomination
The polls are deceiving, I don't even know why we bother to take polls this early in the campaign. Most people look at the numbers more then the candidates.
That's because the candidates don't look like your avatar.
And you wonder why people don't care about politics.
Isn't that Ann Coulter?
Now that will ruin a romantic evening.