Bloomberg Indy Bid Would Face Many Challenges

When a handful of centrist ex-politicos begin gathering in Norman, Okla., this weekend to talk about forming a “government of national unity” to end Washington’s bipartisan gridlock, there will be one potential presidential candidate in their midst.

There also will be only one politician there whose record is far more liberal than that of the dozen or so self-described moderates in attendance.

In both cases, that person is New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Much of the buzz about Monday’s meeting at the University of Oklahoma — convened by middle-of-the-roaders such as former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn (D) and former Oklahoma senator and University of Oklahoma President David Boren (D) — surrounds Bloomberg’s presidential aspirations.

He has denied any plans to run but has done nothing to silence a whisper campaign about how well-funded and well-organized a Bloomberg independent bid would be.

But a closer look at his actual record and positions on issues finds that Bloomberg has two strikes against him if he actually plans to present himself as a model of bipartisan competency who could transcend the angry polarization that has paralyzed American politics.

He has a mainstream liberal record almost across the board and a lack of any real unifying issue to draw voters to his potential presidential campaign.

Bloomberg must also look hard at the results of the Iowa caucuses on Thursday in which the two candidates preaching experience and competency — Mitt Romney and Hillary Rodham Clinton — were trounced by Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama, two candidates relying more on inspiration and an appeal to their party’s ideological base.

First, there’s Bloomberg’s record.

He is in favor of gay marriage with no restrictions.

“I think anybody should be allowed to marry anybody,” he said in 2005.

He’s supports abortion rights and has won endorsements from the National Abortion Rights Action League in his mayoral campaigns.

Bloomberg backed the doomed immigration reform plan proposed by the Senate last year, believing that illegal aliens should be granted a path to citizenship — an idea decried as “amnesty” by critics.

He has also sued gun makers, backed a carbon tax to reduce global warming, favors embryonic stem cell research and wrote a letter opposing the nomination of Supreme Court Justice John Roberts in 2005.

He backed the Iraq war but has been notably quiet on that front in recent years as the public went sour on the conflict.

Bloomberg, a pro-business candidate, raised property taxes 18 percent in New York to help erase a $6 billion city deficit.

To be sure, Bloomberg does have a record of fiscal competence as he cut spending, cut other taxes, is an unapologetic advocate of free trade, and he pushed a successful takeover of the city schools.

But overall, his record would be a non-starter with most mainstream Republican voters looking for a third party alternative, and the positions are to the left of the type of conservative Southern Democrats who have won recent elections in red states like Virginia, Missouri and Florida.

From an Electoral College standpoint, Bloomberg’s record on hot button issues would make it difficult for him to win key swing states.

With such a record, he could be a nightmare for Democrats in swing states, however.

“He probably draws more from Democrats than Republicans,” said John Zogby, an independent pollster who has done some polling on Bloomberg.

Even if he can defuse the liberal record on social issues by focusing on fiscal issues, managerial competence and the reduction in crime during his tenure as mayor of New York City, Bloomberg would still need a rallying issue, something that would bring out the passion in voters.

Qualities like competence and problem-solving are nice in a candidate, but don’t bring out the populist anger tht has propelled third-party candidates like Ross Perot and Ralph Nader.

Ron Rapoport, a political science professor at the College of William & Mary who has written a book about Ross Perot and third-party presidential runs, sees the lack of a overarching issue as strike two against the current Bloomberg bubble.

“He needs more than just ‘I’m not a Democrat, I’m not a Republican and I’m competent,'” Rapoport said.
“He can’t just run as a moderate. The Bloomberg of January 2008 is not a candidate who can win the election. His candidacy cannot be ‘I’m a moderate, and I can get things done.’”

Without the passion that drew voters to Perot or Ralph Nader, a Bloomberg candidacy could be more like that of John Anderson’s National Unity Party run in 1980 — a moderate campaign run out of disgust for the two parties' candidates.

Anderson won 7 percent of the vote, and people familiar with Bloomberg’s strategy say he won’t bother getting into the race if he doesn’t think he can win.

“If there’s an opening, Mike Bloomberg will be there,” said Mark McKinnon, a Texas-based Republican strategist who was President Bush’s chief media consultant in 2000 and 2004 and now consults for Arizona Sen. John McCain. “I think the environment is very much like ’92.”

Despite the political hurdles, Bloomberg does have a handful of factors that could make him do some serious damage.

First, he’s worth $11.5 billion, according to Forbes magazine.

“Michael can put up a billion dollars and not miss it,” said David M. Abshire, president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency, who is part of the Oklahoma conference. “It could end up with the unintended consequence of determining the election.”

Second, people familiar with Bloomberg’s staff and his current thinking say that he already has a robust shadow campaign infrastructure that could be up and running very quickly.

While there are no official employees, volunteers, or consultants on board, Bloomberg’s top political strategist, New York Deputy Mayor Kevin Sheekey, has a campaign army ready to spring into action, according to political consultants familiar with the situation.

“He is far more advanced and far more organized than anyone realizes,” said one New York political consultant.

“He calls it the Sheekey Master Plan. He can roll it out when he gets the go sign. He could build an organization, get on ballots, target key states, get out broadcast messages. He could tell you who he has in Missouri.”

Zogby, who is unaffiliated with any campaign but has done previous work for Bloomberg, agrees that getting on the ballot and creating a national infrastructure would be no problem.

“It’s not simply a blue print. It’s a plan with many floors,” Zogby said.

Bloomberg will no doubt continue to deny any interest in a presidential run as he gathers with luminaries like Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), former New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman and former Sen. John Danforth (R-Mo.).

“This is not intended to be a third party movement,” Whitman said in an interview with Politico.

“Bloomberg was a late invite. The idea is to get out a general statement outlining the issues that need to be addressed.”

But that won’t stop the speculation or stoke the desire among some for a third-party run.

“Whatever decision Michael Bloomberg makes, I believe there is a constituency of voters who are deeply dissatisfied with partisanship and are clearly looking for a bipartisan alternative,” said Doug Schoen, a Democratic pollster who is currently unaffiliated and has written a book called "Declaring Independence: the Decline and Fall of the Two Party System."