What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

****OFFICIAL*** Mike Bloomberg for president (1 Viewer)

Righetti

Righetti

Footballguy
really the best option out there if it comes down to Trump or Cruz and Hillary...

old thread from 2008 (https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?/topic/377079-bloomberg-for-president/)%C2'> been archived.. so time for a new one

 
Bloomberg may come the closest of any candidate on either side to representing my POV.

But I'm skeptical that he can win.

Imagine, though, a Sanders vs. Bloomberg election: it's a Jewish contest all the way! :excited:

 
Bloomberg isn't perfect but he hits a lot of the positions I have. Overall he is socially liberal and generally fiscally conservative. Pro choice, gay rights etc.

He is also pragmatic and has been both a R and a D in his political career. He has some questionable decisions including forcing his way back onto the ballot by changing the term limits laws for NYC mayor after a second term. There was certainly some quid pro quo going on in that case as it was all done behind the scenes

But overall, he was a good mayor and (like trump) has the ability to run a campaign out of his own coffers which hopefully means he can't be as easily bought or influenced

He is kind of whiny

 
Bloomberg continues to make noises:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/nyregion/bloomberg-sensing-an-opening-revisits-a-potential-white-house-run.html?action=Click&contentCollection=BreakingNews&contentID=57855781&pgtype=Homepage&_r=1

This on top of a poll that was just released, Hillary and Trump with nearly the same Fav/Unfav (-10 & -12) and Bloomberg sitting at +10. The poll showed Hillary and Trump neck and neck at 37-36 and Bloom going in at 13.

Of course this would make the fourth leading NYC resident to run for president (Hillary, Sanders, Trump...), and the third gazillionaire.

Here's the old thread from 2008 btw.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Been hoping for this for months. Not sure what his chances would be joining at a relatively late stage (or even if he had gotten on board early), but I could at least sleep in peace after casting a vote for him. I'm on board with just about every policy decision aside from his stance on keeping pot illegal. But that's nowhere near a deal breaker

 
Last edited by a moderator:
F yes. I was going to create this thread today too. The middle 60% of this country agrees on a lot more than we disagree on. It's time.

 
My guess is that a Bloomberg run would hurt the Democratic nominee more than the Republican. But it's so hard to predict. And holy crap would it be insane if a Bloomberg run ended up sending the Presidential race to the House of Representatives.

 
I think that a sanders win in Iowa and NH makes it much more likely. Hillary and Bloomberg in the same race would be a dangerous scenario for a trump victory.

 
Jobber said:
Wait, he's a prohibitionist?

Welp, I'm out.
Click to expand...
Right. The attack on Bloomberg is that he's here to take your guns, soda, and trans fat. He's going to be cast as a "nanny state" candidate by the Republicans. Democrats are going to point to the controversial policing tactics in NYC. I think he has a hard time doing well in an election.

From the articles I've seen. His people are really only floating the idea of a Bloomberg v. Bernie v. Trump/Cruz. If Hilary wins one of Iowa or NH, I don't think he gets in.

 
Speaking as a Virginian, if Bloomberg agrees that all his security details will be unarmed, I'll consider him.

 
I will say i'm not a fan of some of the nanny state stuff though like getting involved in soft drink sizes. Absolutely no reason we can't and shouldn't have more reform around guns though. So stupid.

 
I'm all for this. He was a great mayor for awhile but then got a little power hungry at the end. Still better than the other candidates.

 
elbowrm said:
F yes. I was going to create this thread today too. The middle 60% of this country agrees on a lot more than we disagree on. It's time.
Click to expand...
I probably disagree with Bloom on a lot of stuff policy wise but I will sign on with anyone responsible and decent to get us out of this Trump/Hillary trainwreck that is looming. I think a lot of America would agree considering the unfavorable numbers of both Hillary and Trump - which are both at +50% UNfavorable - and so long as Bloomberg can at least pretend to play down the middle of the road he or someone else of his name recognition could walk away with this thing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
elbowrm said:
F yes. I was going to create this thread today too. The middle 60% of this country agrees on a lot more than we disagree on. It's time.
Click to expand...
Which is why I have repeatedly stated going back to July that the Dems should be very worried about a Trump nomination since he is running a nationalist/populist campaign.

 
Anyone who thinks Bloomberg is a greater threat to the Republicans and will hurt the GOP more in the general doesn't understand the dynamics of what is going on in this election.

With Trump not running as a third party candidate...there is no other person in the GOP landscape that would be able to make a third party bid to out Trump Trump. There would need to be a Patrick Buchanan-esque GOPer to do that. But even if there was that person...what traction would they get at this point. Trump has locked that wing of the party down.

ETA: There are other types of Republicans who could run as an independent and hurt Trump. But it ain't the Bloomberg variety.

I welcome a Bloomberg third party run. It will crush Hillary.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
An independent who comes in at 13% and the money to match Hillary and Trump would be a threat in his own right and Trump and Hillary are both pretty disliked maybe equally so.

I also think that Cruz may have triggered something with his New York values bs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just the obligatory "Bloomberg testing the waters" point in the election cycle again, nothing to see here folks.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
cap said:
Enderdog said:
Speaking as a Virginian, if Bloomberg agrees that all his security details will be unarmed, I'll consider him.
Click to expand...
WTF?
Click to expand...
Clearly you do not have any facebook friends that like guns.

The shtick is that the anti-gun politicians have armed security, and that's supposed to be hypocritical. Bloomberg is pretty much the face of the gun control movement.
Click to expand...
What's that have to do with being a "Virginian"?

 
Fennis said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
cap said:
Enderdog said:
Speaking as a Virginian, if Bloomberg agrees that all his security details will be unarmed, I'll consider him.
Click to expand...
WTF?
Click to expand...
Clearly you do not have any facebook friends that like guns.

The shtick is that the anti-gun politicians have armed security, and that's supposed to be hypocritical. Bloomberg is pretty much the face of the gun control movement.
Click to expand...
What's that have to do with being a "Virginian"?
Click to expand...
My best guess is that it just means "somebody from a state with a lot of gun owners." :shrug:

 
If Bloomberg runs and appears to have a chance at actually winning, and if his run would not help Trump, I would switch my support to him. Far more than Hillary Clinton he is my preferred candidate.

But the dynamics don't favor it. My priority in this election should be the same for any sane person: to prevent Donald Trump from being elected. My firm opinion is that the best and perhaps only way to ensure that is Hillary Clinton winning first the nomination and then the Presidency.

 
Chuck Todd just said that 45 states would be in play if this happened and a Bernie Sanders would have a chance in states like Alabama and Mississippi. Fascinating.

 
NREC34 said:
Chuck Todd just said that 45 states would be in play if this happened and a Bernie Sanders would have a chance in states like Alabama and Mississippi. Fascinating.
Click to expand...
Chuck Todd is any idiot if he thinks Sanders has a chance in Alabama or Mississippi. The South would go to Trump in a landslide if Bloomberg joins.

What constituency is Sanders and Bloomberg attracting in the South?

Better yet...can anyone give me some examples of constituencies that Bloomberg would take away from Trump?

 
SIDA! said:
NREC34 said:
Chuck Todd just said that 45 states would be in play if this happened and a Bernie Sanders would have a chance in states like Alabama and Mississippi. Fascinating.
Click to expand...
Chuck Todd is any idiot if he thinks Sanders has a chance in Alabama or Mississippi. The South would go to Trump in a landslide if Bloomberg joins.What constituency is Sanders and Bloomberg attracting in the South?

Better yet...can anyone give me some examples of constituencies that Bloomberg would take away from Trump?
Click to expand...
31% and 41% black or hispanic population one thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SIDA! said:
NREC34 said:
Chuck Todd just said that 45 states would be in play if this happened and a Bernie Sanders would have a chance in states like Alabama and Mississippi. Fascinating.
Click to expand...
Chuck Todd is any idiot if he thinks Sanders has a chance in Alabama or Mississippi. The South would go to Trump in a landslide if Bloomberg joins.What constituency is Sanders and Bloomberg attracting in the South?

Better yet...can anyone give me some examples of constituencies that Bloomberg would take away from Trump?
Click to expand...
He said Sanders would pull all the black vote down there plus some white Trump/Bloomberg would split up what's left. He went to say after that states like Illinois and Ohio would be in play for everyone and not automatically dem.

 
Would Bloomberg really attract voters from both parties? And in particular, enough to have any chance of winning? From the little I know, it seems like he would split the Dem party much more than the GOP, effectively handing the presidency to Trump (or whoever the candidate is).

 
I think he'd have a good shot at every republican who would rather stay home than vote for trump or Cruz - which is a lot of them.

 
The Big Guy said:
His stance that things that are bad for you needing to be banned is a joke.
Click to expand...
It's hard to believe that his smoking ban in bars and restaurants was in 2003 - because almost every major city has followed suit. Diabetes and obesity, like smoking-related health issues, are major public health problems - is a regulation on the size of a soda that big of a deal if it can help address what is now the leading cause of preventable death in the us? (Thanks to the efficacy of things like smoking bans in bars and restaurants)

http://www.examiner.com/article/research-confirms-obesity-is-now-leading-cause-of-preventable-death-u-s

 
Although he is by far my preferred candidate should he enter the race, the more I think and read about this the more I fear his gun control stance and reputation is too open to attack and may wind up delivering the race to the GOP. (As much as I shudder to agree with sida on something)

Here's his USA Today op-Ed after newtown- this all appears to be fairly moderate and common-sense to me, but the NRA has made him public enemy number one as if he is calling for a complete prohibition on guns-

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/12/18/michael-bloomberg-on-need-to-control-guns/1777889/

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kutta
***Official 2025 Footballguy T-Shirt Exchange - SEPT 28 SHIPPING DEADLINE***
2
Replies
79
Views
2K
Kanil
Kanil
Joe Bryant
  • Sticky
FBG Memorial - Honoring Forum Posters Who Have Passed
3 4 5
Replies
201
Views
26K
Paper Lions
Paper Lions
kutta
***Official 2024 Footballguy T-Shirt Exchange - Now Closed with 100% Participation. Great Job All!***
5 6 7
Replies
319
Views
13K
kutta
kutta

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top