The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Bloomberg vs. Trump?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The morning of the New Hampshire primary, Donald Trump, being interviewed on “Morning Joe,” said that he would welcome his “friend” Michael Bloomberg into the presidential race.

Which is probably the understatement of 2016.

The three-term mayor of New York and media mogul whose fortune is estimated at $39 billion, making him one of the richest men on earth, told the Financial Times on Monday he is considering a run.

Bloomberg had earlier confided he was worried about Hillary Clinton’s ability to turn back the challenge of Bernie Sanders, regards Trump’s rise with trepidation, and is appalled by the pedestrian character of the campaign rhetoric.

“I find the level of discourse and discussion distressingly banal and an insult to the voters,” said Bloomberg; the public deserves “a lot better.”

This haughty disdain calls to mind the late Adlai Stevenson. Yet, if Bloomberg runs, his electoral vote tally would likely make Adlai, by comparison, look like Richard Nixon on his 49-state romp in 1972.

Republicans should give Mayor Mike every encouragement to enter the race. For though he threatens to spend a billion dollars of his own money to buy the presidency, his name on the ballot as a third-party candidate could send the Democratic nominee straight down to Davy Jones’s locker.

With Bloomberg siphoning off millions of liberal votes, Democrats would not only lose red states they customarily write off, winning solid blue states would require a far steeper climb.

Third Party candidates have played crucial roles in presidential politics. Ex-President Theodore Roosevelt killed the re-election hopes of his successor President William Howard Taft in 1912, by running as the Bull Moose candidate and delivering the nation to Woodrow Wilson.

Strom Thurmond carried four Deep South states in 1948 and George Wallace carried five Deep South states in 1968. Both sought to throw the election into the U.S. House. Neither succeeded.

Ross Perot got 19 percent of the popular vote in 1992 and 8 percent in 1996. Though he did not carry a single state either time, as a candidate of the populist center-right, Perot peeled off a third of the votes George H. W. Bush had won in 1988 — to sink Bush in 1992.

Why would Bloomberg, who has great wealth and is willing to part with it, not be able to beat Trump, or another Republican nominee, if he plunged a billion dollars into his campaign?

Though he may be a pioneer in modern media and a man with a golden touch, Bloomberg is 74 years old this week, uncharismatic, and does not fill up a room the way the Donald does. He lacks a common touch and is a social liberal, pro-abortion and pro-same-sex marriage.

Moreover, he is a compulsive nanny-stater who outlawed smoking in New York bars, restaurants and public places, prohibited the sale of cigarettes to anyone under 21, forbade trans-fats in restaurants, sodas larger than 16 ounces, chain restaurant menus without calorie counts, cellphones in school, non-fuel-efficient cabs, greenhouse gas emissions, and non-hurricane-proof buildings in coastal areas.

While not well-known nationally, Bloomberg is a zealot about tougher gun control laws and his candidacy would produce a deluge of contributions to the National Rifle Association. This obsession, along with his social views, would sink him in Red State America.

Nor is Bloomberg, despite three straight victories running for mayor, a great political athlete.

In his last race, as the Republican and Independent candidate, Bloomberg spent $102 million to defeat an underfunded Democrat comptroller, but managed to win only 51 percent of the vote.

If Clinton, or even Sanders, were at the top of the Democratic ticket in New York State, either would crush Bloomberg in his home town, especially with the GOP nominee, say Trump, siphoning off all of the Republican-conservative votes Bloomberg received to become mayor.

Now only would Bloomberg lose the Big Apple, his statewide vote would come mostly from the Democratic nominee, giving Republicans the best opportunity to carry the Empire State since Ronald Reagan coasted to re-election in 1984.

By spending a billion dollars, Bloomberg could blanket the nation with ads. But once Republican oppo research groups defined him for Middle America, perhaps 4 in 5 of his votes would come out of the basket upon which Democrats rely.

For example, as a Jewish-American, Bloomberg might do well in the Dade-Broward-Palm Beach County corridor, taking votes that Clinton or Sanders would need to carry Florida. Yet, where would Bloomberg get the rest of his votes to win the Sunshine State?

Clearly, Bloomberg is envious of the success of the Donald, since he descended on that escalator at Trump Towers on June 16.

ORDER IT NOW

The problem for Bloomberg is that, while this is the year of the outsider, with populist revolts breaking out in both parties, Sanders and Trump caught the lightning early, while he was restructuring his media empire. And, to be candid, Michael Bloomberg is no barn burner.

So all together now: “Run, Mike, Run!”

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

Copyright 2016 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2016 Election, Donald Trump, Michael Bloomberg 
Hide 22 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. I would vote for Bloomberg. I confess, I need help with portions.

  2. Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    “cellphones in school”

    If he banned that, Todd bless him.

    It was also good of him to have banned transfat.

    http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2686/whats-the-truth-on-trans-fat

  3. At some point I’m hoping someone in Trump’s sphere of influence convinces him he’s winning IN SPITE of his crude antics, not because of them.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @tbraton
  4. Why in the world does this short little egomaniac who wants to take everyone’s guns think he’s even remotely electable? This is one of the perils of spending too much time in Manhattan, Bermuda and London. With armed guards, of course.

  5. LondonBob says:

    I know someone who knows Bloomberg, very likely he will run. Delusional nut thinks he would do well!

    Keeping quiet about what I think, don’t want to discourage the loon.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  6. utu says:
    @boogerbently

    Good point. But can Trump be influenced?

    • Replies: @24AheadDotCom
  7. Willingness to thumb his nose at political correctness is one of the main reasons Trump is winning.

    I guess you should never take lessons on what is crude from someone named booger.

  8. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Bloomberg holds the same liberal social views as Bernie, but not Bernie’s fiscal or foreign policy. Bloomberg supports Trump aggressive strong military policy but only if it is used and directed at the imagined enemies (i.e., refuse to kowtow) of Israel. I don’t see anyway Bloomberg running could not help elect Trump in a Trump v. Sanders matchup. But I think it’s too early to write off Hillary. Bloomberg could dump his billion into supporting her and get everything he wants.

    • Replies: @AP
  9. AP says:

    Bloomberg is highly intelligent and has the money and resources to thoroughly investigate whether it would be feasible for him to run. If he runs, it will be because he has a chance, not of winning the election, but of becoming president.

    His path to the presidency would involve getting about 15%-20% of the popular vote (Republicans who dislike Trump but won’t vote for Socialist Bernie; centrist Democrats, plus independents), carrying a state or two to prevent either Bernie or Trump from getting the majority and thus kicking the election to the House, and then getting the House to choose him rather than either Bernie or Trump. Why would the House choose him? All but the extreme left among the Democrats would understand that Bernie would have no chance and would view Bloomberg as a lesser evil – so most Democrats would choose him. A minority of moderate or establishment Republicans who hate Trump, but would never vote for a Democrat, would probably choose Bloomberg also. He’d be chosen as a “non-partisan” “centrist “unity President.”

    Bloomberg is probably having his people talking backchannel to House members and conducting his own polls. He won’t run if he doesn’t hear that he has a chance.

    • Replies: @Mark975
  10. pyrrhus says:

    Bloomberg is Wall Street, so he will run even worse than Pat thinks. And despite some Nannystaters in the comments here, everybody else hates em….

  11. AP says:
    @Anonymous

    Bloomberg holds the same liberal social views as Bernie, but not Bernie’s fiscal or foreign policy

    Bloomberg also doesn’t pander to the BLM as Sanders does.

    I don’t see anyway Bloomberg running could not help elect Trump in a Trump v. Sanders matchup

    .

    Bloomberg is probably working on these possibilities now.

  12. Gapeseed says:

    I live in New York City as a Catholic Libertarian, which is a far faraway ideological enclave from Camp Bloomy. That said, I come to praise Bloomberg, not to bury him.

    What does Michael Bloomberg bring to the table? Yes, he is a nanny-stater and cultural elitist, but he also understands business and is an extremely competent administrator. The contrast between Bloomberg and his successor DiBlasio is disturbingly stark in this regard. He is smart, works hard, and has as much a chance as anyone of bringing the Leviathan bureaucracy to heal.

    Bloomberg is also very calm. Obama fakes at being no trauma, but he actually stirs the pot quite a bit by being perhaps the biggest sneak ever to hold the Oval Office. As such, the nation is polarized in a way not seen since at least Woodrow Wilson or perhaps even Abe Lincoln. Somnolent Mike Bloomberg will cool the boiling froth a great deal and won’t point at the scoreboard and talk trash like Obama.

    And finally, in case you haven’t already heard, Mike Bloomberg is filthy stinking rich. That is a feature and not a bug, because he truly cannot be bought. What’s more and unlike Trump, he won’t have eminent domain atrocities hung around his neck, and he won’t have to fend off attacks that he is a bored kid spending his daddy’s inheritance. Bloomberg is self-made and appreciates the entrepreneurial ethic more than all the Dems and even probably a few of the Republicans.

    He should run, regardless. He might not win, but if he did, it would be a far better scenario than any Dem victory and not a terrible situation for Republicans.

    • Replies: @Mark975
  13. Trump for Pres
    Elizabeth Warren for VP

    unbeatable.

  14. alexander says:

    Dear Mr Buchanan,

    I think Mayor Bloomberg would make an excellent President.

    He is a highly intelligent , thoughtful individual, who is able to see the big picture, and distinguish right from wrong.

    Intelligence combined with strong moral character is in short supply.He has both.

    As the POTUS he would run a very tight ship….

    ….And since our National Debt just officially crossed over the ( obscene) 19 trillion dollar threshold, our ship needs quite a bit of tightening….and fast.

    He would be the man to do it.

    My only caution would be that he utilize strong counsel before attempting some of his more dubious, banana republic-like reforms….I think his banning of all 16 oz Slurpy’s was a little over the top.

    My goodness man, if some mason’s helper has been mixing and pouring concrete , like a mother for a 10 hour day, he should be entitled to treat himself to a 16 oz Slurpy at the end of it.

    I think on the issue of the second amendment…he should consider it most wisely…My understanding is that our forefathers didn’t really like the red coats kicking down their doors while they were in bed with their wives…so our forefathers keep a gun by the night table..to shoot the red coats in the face, when they came in.

    Mr Bloomberg needs to decide if he is a red coat or not…. to have a chance to win this election.

    But aside from that…he would be aces.

    Since one can be reasonably certain he wouldn’t be on the take, he wouldn’t get pushed around by the lobby….not at all……he might just do some tough pushing himself.

    I think he would be in it to be effective and helpful in ways that matter most to our nation.

    We need smarts to get us out of the big mess we were dumb enough to get into…..and there is no doubt that Mike Bloomberg has got plenty of smarts.

    I think he would do a great job.

    • Replies: @greysquirrell
  15. Bliss says:

    If Bloomberg runs as a third party candidate and if Trump and Hillary are the candidates of their respective parties, the General Election will be an all New York affair. Even Bernie Sanders has a NY connection, he was born in Brooklyn and still speaks with a new york jewish accent.

    If you think about it this election marks the peak of new york jewish power and influence. Bloomberg and Sanders are new york jews, so is Clinton’s son-in-law, and Trump’s beloved daughter Ivanka is married to an orthodox jew from NY and has converted to orthodox judaism herself.

    Cuban Cruz is probably going to double down on his tactic of attacking “new york values”. Won’t work. Even in Texas. Except with the riff raff. It says a lot that no one really cares anymore…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  16. MarkinLA says:
    @LondonBob

    In his mind Trump is a clown and he can’t imagine how someone as cultured and brilliant as him wouldn’t do better. He doesn’t have a clue how he is viewed outside of the New York society world.

    • Agree: tbraton, Realist
  17. tbraton says:
    @boogerbently

    In case you haven’t noticed, he’s starting to tone it down. Even Cokie Roberts of ABC News remarked after Saturday’s debate in NH (carried by ABC) that Trump had acted “Presidential.” Now Cokie Roberts is a Washington liberal, but her background makes her words worth listening to. Her father was the former Democratic House Majority Leader Hale Boggs (killed in an airplane crash in Alaska), her mother was Lindy Boggs who succeeded her husband to the New Orleans House seat and held it for many years, and her brother was the late legendary Washington lobbyist Tommy Boggs. So she is steeped in politics from an early age and worked first at NPR and later ABC covering Congress before becoming co-host with Sam Donaldson on “This Week.” I think her comment was a serious assessment, and the lady does know politicians, having spent her entire life around them. BTW Karl Rove, no Trump fan, tonight on Fox praised Trump’s speech last night following his victory in NH.

  18. @alexander

    Bloomberg would make a terrible President. He will attack the 2nd amendment while simultaneously pursuing an inverventionist MidEast foreign policy that will see the US getting involved in more wars.

    Essentially the worst of all worlds, a big government liberal at home and a war hawk abroad.

  19. Mark975 says:
    @AP

    You’d have riots in D.C consisting of about 10 million people or more if that happened.

    But I’ll tell you what…he’d have to win a lot more than 1 or 2 states to prevent a majority for either candidate because Trump would destroy Sanders everywhere else.

  20. Mark975 says:
    @Gapeseed

    Trump inherited about $30 million from his father in 1999, when his company already was worth about $3 billion. It’s not his fault he was born into a wealthy family. Holding that against him is idiotic. Every indication is that he was brought up to work hard and take nothing for granted. That is not the caricature of the spoiled rich kid you claim he is. Enough with the BS obsession with “self made men.” Sure, it is a very admirable thing, but if Trump didn’t work hard, he wouldn’t have built what he built. He took an already successful business and expanded it to make it even more successful. Nothing wrong with that.

  21. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Bliss

    Yeah, but ironically, the least Zionist of the group– Sanders, Hillary, Trump, and Cruz– is Sanders. And Sanders can push back, while the others would not be allowed to.

  22. @utu

    Your chances of influencing Trump are slim, although he seems to RT the occasional (neo-Nazi) nobody from @RealDonaldTrump.

    The better bet is to put the squeeze on his helpers, like @DanScavino. If enough people made the point to him that Trump’s antics and his crazy plans* aren’t helping, he might sway The Great One. Tweet me for more Trump helpers.

    * The idea that Trump is going to build a Trump Wall, deport all illegal aliens, and keep out Muslims is insane. If anyone believes he could do that, the best I can say is that they’re completely ignorant of how the Constitution and DC work.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS