It's All About Me, Man: [CanYoAssDigIt] Re: [progressive] Bloomberg Would Flip Red States Blue

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

[CanYoAssDigIt] Re: [progressive] Bloomberg Would Flip Red States Blue

It's kind of amusing to see the way that people can't let an opportunity to slip by without bashing (or attempting to kill by a thousand cuts) Ralph Nader.

It's a bit like people saying "Albert Einstein never came up with that unified field theory, so he's the biggest fraud and numbskull ever to work in the field of physics" and everybody else piling on - "yes, I have nothing but contempt for Einstein."

"Have you heard that he was an egomaniac? And a womanizer!"

"Yeah, Einstein is worse that Hitler!"

And on and on and on. Well, it was kind of amusing. Now it's really really tiresome.

Maybe if the Dems have both their own candidates and Bloomberg, their candidate can actually win, as they've demonstrated that they have no taste for fighting for what they earned.

No, Ralph Nader did that (like Palast, he doesn't care which white ruling class frat boy is in office, but he still has some regard for democratic principles) - but he couldn't seem to find any democrats who'd stand up for themselves.

Damn that Nader, worse than Satan! But Bill made a video in which he said nice things about Hillary, it really opened my eyes up.

Like a dog to his vomit, a liberal returns to his folly.

On 6/20/07, Andre Kenji de Sousa <andrekenjilistas4@gmail.com> wrote:

A conservative wrote the following coments on the Vivian Page Blog:

http://blog.vivianpaige.com/2007/06/19/bloomberg-running-for-president/#comments

3. Lumen - June 19, 2007

I would have considered voting for him in 2004, due to significant problems with both candidates. I don't think I will this time around. I think the Republicans would gain the most from a Bloomberg run. He has enough of his own money to wage a strong campaign, and I think he would be most likely to win large "Blue" states like NY (obviously) and CA.

6. Lumen - June 20, 2007

Correct you are, Anon. Bloomberg would not just be a Nader-esque spoiler. He spent $73 million of his own money to become mayor. If Bloomberg so desires, he could quite easily outspend both major party candidates even without receiving any donations. That makes the real question not how he effects the popular vote, but how he shifts the Electoral College. Bloomberg could only ever be considered a Republican in New York, and even there for only 6 of his 65 years. His social views will likely preclude him from drawing much support in most of the "Red" states, but not in "Blue" states that frequently elect socially liberal Republicans to statewide office (CA, MD, MA, NY, NJ, WA, etc.). A Bloomberg candidacy might damage the GOP if Giuliani gets the nomination, but otherwise Bloomberg will undoubtedly be bad for Democrats.

I tend to agree with him.

andré