[myspacepro]

I heard a guy passing out DN rags in front of GCS and he was shouting something about Bloomberg calling it quits with the GOP, anyone else hear of this?

[betraaaus]

Yeah, I "heard" about it too. On the front page.

[icerrelmCam]

Republican. Democrat. These are mere labels. Is Bloomberg a competent administrator? The answer is yes.

[extessarere]

They are indeed labels and he chose Republican. He is trying to shed political labels and it is all very disingenuous. I'd like to note the tremendous support and cheerleading Bloomburg got from Right-wing, war hawk, Israel lobbyist, Senator Joe Lieberman. If he supports Bloomburg, you can bet I'm turning as far from him as possible. In this case, I am definitely judging Bloomburg on this case of association.

[GogaMegaPis]

Yeah, I "heard" about it too. On the front page.

>snip

[ppfpooghn]

He really should have done this the day after he was elected in 2001, he is a life long liberal democrat ( see his plan to pay people to act like good parents) and just registered as a Rep to pave a easy way to the mayoralty as he didnt have to go up against 5 other canidates in the dem primary.

[Tuqofiw]

Few observations:

1. If Bloomberg were to run for the presidency I do not think he would do it a la Nadar, or Perot, i.e. to act as a spoiler. I think he will make a genuine assessment on his odds, and if he thinks he can win, he will go for it. If not, he'll take a pass
2. Although the odds remain against a successful independent run, the timing of this season's Dem and GOP primaries could work to his advantage. By Feb of next year both parties will have completed their primaries and chosen their candidates, and the candidates will have spent all their cash on the nomination. So, they will be broke until after the Sep. conventions when they become eligible for additional Federal funding. That leaves a solid 7 month void allowing someone like Bloomberg who can spend upwards of $1bn over that period to monopolize the airwaves. That is a lot of time and a lot of money
3. Personally, I am less concerned about his party affiliation than perhaps others are. Where is he on the issues, what is his vision for the future,what plans does he have to address the growing economic and geopolitical influence of China and India, what about the middle east? Does he have a plan to address global warming, energy dependence, education, healthcare? How competant an administrator is he? What is his intellectual capacity for managing multiple complex domestic annd foreign policy issues? These are all matters that are far more important to me.
4. An added benefit: I would love to see someone break the 2 party system to pieces as I believe it is the root cause of Governmental corruption and divisiness. That Bloomberg would not be beholden to major party politics or K street.. that would be awesome. The timing is just right too... This could very well be the point in our history where we most need an unencumbered President. Frankly, if he were to run, I would take a hard look.

[soyclocky]

This point is what I think as a business man he will do

"If Bloomberg were to run for the presidency I do not think he would do it a la Nadar, or Perot, i.e. to act as a spoiler. I think he will make a genuine assessment on his odds, and if he thinks he can win, he will go for it. If not, he'll take a pass"

[fluoxet]

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg never quite fit in with either major party

The Associated Press
Thursday, June 21, 2007

NEW YORK: Mayor Michael Bloomberg lived most of his life as a Democrat before switching to the Republican Party when he ran for mayor, yet he never really fit in with either party.

Now, Bloomberg has apparently shaken off those labels and found the one that suits him, announcing this week that he has become an independent because it is more in line with his beliefs and gives him freedom to promote his agenda for the city.

To understand his motivation for leaving the Republican Party, and what it could mean if the billionaire former CEO were to mount a self-financed bid for president — something he denies he wants to do — one must look at how Bloomberg has governed and what he believes.

As mayor, he has both raised taxes and cut them, he has fought with unions and won their support, he has supported the Iraq war along with gay marriage, abortion rights, gun control and stem cell research. There are Republicans and Democrats in the highest levels of his administration, and he has given money to candidates of all stripes.

Throughout his time in office, he has cast himself as the adult in a room full of squabbling children, taking great pride in promoting a pragmatic, no-nonsense style of leadership. More recently the mayor's aides and cheerleaders have been trumpeting this trait as the basis for a possible presidential campaign.

"He's a manager who sees himself as a problem solver, that there are technical and managerial solutions to problems and that politics shouldn't intrude on this," said Doug Muzzio, professor of public affairs at Baruch College.

Bloomberg has won praise, for instance, for his cool, businesslike approach in the often fractious area of race relations, no easy feat for a New York mayor. Some say he's the opposite of his predecessor, and potential presidential rival, Rudy Giuliani, who refused to meet with the Rev. Al Sharpton and had contentious relationships with other black leaders.

"When you think of how much race had dominated New York politics for a generation before Bloomberg became mayor, it's quite amazing that he had such a calming and unifying affect," said Kenneth Sherrill, a political science professor at Hunter College. "He was hardly a typical Republican."

Some observers try to box him in as a social moderate and fiscal conservative, but even that does not neatly contain all of his positions.

Despite the straight-talking image, Bloomberg has been hard to pin down on one of the most important issues of the presidential campaign: the Iraq war. During his first term, which began in 2002, he mostly avoided speaking out on international issues, but more than once he indicated he supported the decision to go to war.

In 2004, during a news conference with first lady Laura Bush in lower Manhattan, he came to her support on the topic of Iraq, suggesting that the invasion was justified by the Sept. 11 attacks.

"Don't forget that the war started not very many blocks from here," he said.

A year later, while Bloomberg was running for re-election in this overwhelmingly Democratic city and doing everything he could to distance himself from President George W. Bush, he insisted the issue was about supporting the troops.

When asked at that time if he felt the president had lied to Americans about the reasons for going to war, Bloomberg said he didn't have any idea. At the time, he said, there appeared "a distinct possibility of weapons of mass destruction."

More recently, he has harshly criticized those who advocate pulling out of Iraq, siding with many Republicans who say it would hurt troop morale. He has also slammed the proposal put forth by Sen. Joe Biden, a Democratic candidate for president, to divide Iraq into three semiautonomous regions of Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis, saying it would result in "genocide."

Speaking with reporters on Wednesday, Bloomberg did not offer an Iraq plan but noted that the public "clearly wants to know how we're going to move forward and what's the resolution."

He has made a point to befriend both Democrats and Republicans, and he has crisscrossed party lines to lend his monetary support and endorsements for campaigns. Last year he helped Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill win her Senate seat and donated $44,600 (€33,291) to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's re-election campaign. He also contributed money to Bush.

Bloomberg has said the country's immigration policy is a disgrace and should be fixed, but he ridicules those who want to deport illegal immigrants, saying they are the backbone of the economy.

In the face of the city's highest budget surplus in its history, thanks to soaring tax revenues from Wall Street and real estate transactions, he has sternly warned there will be no wild splurging.

He has just proposed a package of tax cuts, but years ago he raised property taxes to help repair the city's tattered post-9/11 economy. Those rough days also saw city services pared down, with higher fines and fees for everything from marriage licenses to cigarettes.

He has railed against the National Rifle Association, raising the hackles of gun owners and conservatives with his second-term crusade about illegal guns.

During an interview last year on Fox News, Bloomberg was asked whether he was at odds with his own party. Back then, that meant the Republican Party.

"With which party?" Bloomberg shot back. "I'm not a partisan guy."

[halyshitzob]

They are indeed labels and he chose Republican. He is trying to shed political labels and it is all very disingenuous. I'd like to note the tremendous support and cheerleading Bloomburg got from Right-wing, war hawk, Israel lobbyist, Senator Joe Lieberman. If he supports Bloomburg, you can bet I'm turning as far from him as possible. In this case, I am definitely judging Bloomburg on this case of association.

Disingenuous? Please. Take one look at where the two-party system has come in the past 10 years or so (starting with Clinton's impeachment trials) and tell me you'd prefer competent administrators to hold steadfast allegiance to whichever party comes closest to representing their beliefs.

The Republicans are meddling too much in moral affairs, and war-mongering like it's their favorite post-Sunday service topic of discussion. The Democrats, on the other hand, are being reactionary to the point of making themselves sound as if they're from another planet. The problem is, most Americans are somewhere in the middle, and there's no one out there to represent them! Why? Because no pragmatic politician would consider going middle-of-the-road into an election, inviting both parties to label him "soft on the issues." That's why people like Bloomberg are so rare and thus so precious: their allegiances, however questionable, are not held hostage to parties and campaign finance.

The support from Lieberman was probably a Jewish thing.

Any reason why you keep misspelling Bloomburg's [sic] name?