From the Washington Post via TPID:
Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an independent who has considered running for president, declared Monday that an independent has a better chance at succeeding in the White House than a Republican or a Democrat . . . at Harvard University on Monday he endorsed the idea of an independent in the White House. “I think actually a third-party candidate could run the government easier than a partisan political president because the partisan political president – yeah he’s got half the votes, but he can’t get the others – whereas the guy in the middle may very well be able to get enough across the aisle,” Bloomberg said.
Mike Bloomberg spent $105 million to be re-elected Mayor by 51%. He cannot afford to buy votes on a national scale.
Let me correct my comments to say monetary situation as opposed to economic. Perot knew we could not spend forever.
At least Perot had a good grasp of the economic situation.
Not really, as a protectionist, his economics were off the mark.
They both have authoritarian tendencies, so I’m not a fan of either. in ’92 I deemed Bush, Clinton and Perot the three blind mice.
Actually, Bloomberg has already said he’s not running. Of course, he could have been lying, or he might change his mind, but here he is talking about a generic independent/third party candidate, not himself.
I misread it that way the first time, though.
Bloomberg has less going for him than Perot had. At least Perot had a good grasp of the economic situation. They both have lots of dough which is a huge plus. Perhaps if Bloomberg actually read the Constitution…