Whether he's sporting one of his typical dark colored suits with matching pants, or simply a semi-unbuttoned dress shirt, Michael Bloomberg always seems to speak eloquently to the regular array of journalists, cameras, and others who often belong to the typical assembly of a New York City media event. Despite how he's portrayed by those who see him as something more than a modest metropolitan mayor, Bloomberg by no means comes off as a powerhouse politician, at least at first. Occasionally shifting his weight onto the blue velvet podium that seems to always find its way to these press conferences, Bloomberg is very good at getting his points across. He reminds one of a popular boss, or everyone's favorite grandfather. He speaks at a sophisticated, well-read and well-informed level, yet not so much as to be insulting. The man can obviously communicate. In a way he resembles fellow (and former) New York native Thomas Dewey, having a natural mix of authentic sincerity and humor, with the ability to throw a genuine smile to the crowd, and likewise, never be questioned on his seriousness of the issue(s). Despite the fact that he may travel with the stereotypical entourage of suits like every big city mayor before him, from appearance alone, Bloomberg is no more intimidating than one would find Mr. Monopoly. And that in a nutshell, game board character comparison and all, is the magic of Michael Bloomberg.
But why talk about Michael Bloomberg? This is an article about the 2008 Presidential Race after all. So why not rant about "buzz" candidates? Why not toss names around in a such a fashion that it doesn't appear to matter anymore who becomes the 44th President? Why not go through "the list", yes, the "list, the ever-growing laundry list of possible candidates, a list so large, that the next time you hear a new "possible candidate" being "possible", you probably qualify for a free movie rental? Why you ask? Because despite the fact that the media has done an adequate job on their own conversing about them, all of them, all of them plus some, they also only belong in two categories: those who belong to the party currently in office, and those who obviously don't. Bloomberg, curiously enough, has an awkward time fitting into either. This is usually what would be referred to as, "a good thing".
It's generally accepted that at this stage of the game for the 2008 presidential campaign, Hillary and others are rallying their troops to battle, as well as having undisclosed "connections" (can anybody say "Bill?") most likely calling in old favors. Furthermore, country-bumpkin breed conservatives (who shall remain nameless) are gathering the good old boys down south to get ready for a presidential run that has the potential to be an obscene hybrid of the "West Wing" meets "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" Needless to say, O Brother!
Although attractive, it's doubtful that the voting population will be fortunate enough to see a White House match up as amiable as McCain vs Biden, or Hagel vs Edwards. It's here that we see Bloomberg striking a wonderful balance, a choice, a way out, a person who people will vote for instead of simply voting against someone else.
Bloomberg as a third party nominee would be by far the most prominent candidate ever on a third party ticket. Simply running on the camping slogan of "Competence", or "I'll Clean Another One Up", people would listen, because Bloomberg doesn't have to answer to anyone, that in part is what makes him so attractive. Bloomberg could act as the outlet for those who have gradually become disgusted with the modern day political landscape.
While there may be a plethora of reasons for Michael Bloomberg to run for president, there are 5 Big Reasons Bloomberg needs to be given a serious look:
Bloomberg #1.) His name - It's likely that you could mention the name "Bloomberg" to a tribe of non-English speaking bushmen in Africa, and at the very least, receive a handful of nods and smiles. "Bloomberg" as a name has in effect become bigger the man who lives it. As recognizable as Disney, Patton, and Winfrey, "Bloomberg" has become a household word. This is an exceptionally powerful agent in the realm of politics. Not only does it serve a purpose of identifying someone, but it allows people to feel comfortable. It's a word people have heard, know, and don't feel ignorant or unfit about themselves when it's mentioned. It's a name that people can connect to. Any name, especially a last name, often comes with certain requirements or expectations for society. Few for example would expect much from a Kucinich, Daschle, or Santorum. However, those expectations change with Reagan, Churchill, Powell, and yes, to some extent, Bloomberg. Likewise, Bloomberg is a far more distinguished individual than only a handful of likely or possible 2008 presidential candidates and virtually all members of Congress. Because he already has it, the mayor's last name already puts Bloomberg ahead of the curve in needing name recognition.
Bloomberg #2.) His Generation- Bloomberg was born in 1942, and therefore, born before the era of the baby-boom. As of now, only two baby-boom presidents have held the office: Clinton, and Bush 43, both arguably terrible embarrassments to the age-group, in effect, being 0-2. Based on the last 14 or so years, it appears as though rather than continue with a status quo of electing what resembles to be members of an inadequate epoch who can't run a country, we may need to begin looking elsewhere. The generation X ers are a bit too young, and the G.I. generation, while a generation that produced dynamic leaders and won a World War, are growing too elderly and progressively dying off. That leaves the last possible prospect, but an intriguing one at that: the "Silent" generation. During the controversial "Consciousness Revolution", it was the Silent generation that was subject to accusations and blame by the hippie movement for "owning America", or as took less time to say then: "the man". The Silent Generation was never truly appreciated. They were too young to be credited with winning the war (despite serving in Korea), and too aged to be running around the countryside calling for the advancement of peace, love, and various mind-altering drugs. Instead, the "silents" are accused (as Strauss & Howe put it) as " withdrawn, cautious, unimaginative, indifferent, unadventurous and silent." However, it was this generation that became the authority, both in politics and the workforce, and arguably the generation who laid the essential groundwork for the once rebellious baby-boomers. It was the Silent generation who choose not to be the focus of attention, but rather fill positions with more abstracted, covert dispositions. Such people include William F. Buckley, Martin Luther King Jr., Sandra Day O'Connor, Neil Armstrong, Carl Sagan, Geraldine Ferraro, Phil Donahue, Peter Jennings, Tom Brokaw, Ted Koppel, and of course, Michael Bloomberg. A generation mostly untapped of their resources, the "silents" still have the ability to be heard and make a significant impact, it simply becomes a timing issue of who can get their attention first, if at all.
Bloomberg #3.) His Mind Set- As the founder of Bloomberg L.P, it should be of little surprise that Bloomberg has the mind of a businessman . Bloomberg campaigned and successfully won the important position of NYC mayor with such a mindset. Instead of using normal, cliche tactics, Bloomberg made the promise to bring a business way of doing things to a city in need of an individual willing to play hardball with anybody, as well as agree to negotiate. Unlike Steve Forbes, who didn't seem to know how to be a national candidate, and likely never had such "hands on" experience within his own company, Bloomberg created his business empire from the ground up. All in all, based on his history, it appears as though the mayor has a record for picking up messes where they're most needed. It was Bloomberg who overhauled the NYC broken public school system, Bloomberg who acted as diplomat during the Broadway musician strike of 2003, Bloomberg who brought the Republicans to NYC for the 2004 National Convention, Bloomberg who reformed the NYPD, Bloomberg who significantly improved the city's anti-terrorism force. Instead of utilizing the popular political "spoils" system, it was Bloomberg who created NYC's version of Camelot, forming a city-wide government with the most talented officials he could hire. All Bloomberg.
Bloomberg #4.) His Money-Bloomberg is approximately worth $5.1 billion dollars, and according to Forbes Magazine (ironic, huh), the former Bloomberg L.P. CEO is one of the 100 richest people in America. At the arguably overdue conclusion of the 2004 presidential race, the entire sum total, (that's television ads, debates, pep rallies, production cost for those obnoxious 6x3 foot billboards in your neighbor's yard), was a grand sum of $4 billion dollars. Which means (you got it), theoretically Bloomberg could have written the check for the entire presidential campaign, for everybody. In his successful attempt to be re-elected last year, Bloomberg spent $78 million dollars of his own personal finances, that's roughly $120 per vote received. You probably know where I'm going with this. Bloomberg doesn't need to waste time going to fundraising dinners or seeking public campaign funds. Bloomberg can simply pave his own trail.
Bloomberg #5.) His Popularity over Rudy-Yes, you read this one correctly, Michael Bloomberg is more popular than his "God-sent" predecessor Rudy Giuliani. If you don't think so, ask any New Yorker, including those that didn't vote for either of them. The Republican Party doesn't know this yet, but the only reason Rudy is even bouncing around as a possible candidate right now is because of 9/11. Without that, Rudy has nothing. Once he's ousted as a staunch pro-choice, gay-rights, gun control advocate, he won't make it out the door. The party members will slaughter his chances for nomination before he's even done giving the speech announcing his candidacy. So Rudy being at the top of all the current possible Republican nominee polls will be short lived. Furthermore, many see Rudy has having made the choice in the past to be a puppet of the conservative-right. Sighting that he choose not to publicly oppose a number of unpopular actions taken by the current administration, many view Rudy as a sort of "marionette on call". In addition, when campaigning for mayor in 1993, Giuliani only won by 3%, (albeit he did better in 1997). Bloomberg on the other hand was re-elected to a second term by a margin of 20%, the largest margin for a Republican mayor in NYC history. As you can confidently assume, the 58.5% of those who voted for Bloomberg were not likely all registered Republicans.
While it can be argued that the evidence is formidable to have a Bloomberg Presidency, many sight that the mayor lacks essential political experience needed to hold the office. However, if Bloomberg were to run for President in 2008, by the time of the inauguration he would have run a city of 7.5 million people for roughly 8 years. That said, In 1992 Clinton was Governor of the state of Arkansas with a population of 2 million people. Tennessee (home to the future Vice President), had a population of 5 million. Moreover, no other Presidential hopeful has been chairman of the board on a Fortune 500 company of which they created, few likely have an M.B.A., and just for fun, few probably take a total income of $1.00 per year for their public service, that is, if they've even ever been elected to a public service position.
Bloomberg is a very impressive guy in an age where such people are becoming harder to find. Not only has Bloomberg brought great reforms to a city that has been (at times) in havoc, but he's hired good people who are good at their jobs and has allowed them do what they do best. He's been a mayor who has had a no-nonsense approach, while at the same time, been very approachable. Rather than form a focus-group for every decision that is made, he uses something few politicians have any more, common sense.
It appears to be the time for the third party(s) to step it up. And while Bloomberg may say he has no interest in running, why exactly then would he be commenting on national issues?
A Bloomberg at his best would be a Bloomberg hard to beat. If there were ever a blueprint for a third party candidate, Michael Bloomberg is that blueprint. It is the time, it is the place, it is the now. Not only should Bloomberg want to run for President, but in my opinion, he has a duty. The man has an impeccable record, a brilliant mind, and the ability to attract the largest and most diverse collection of votes in national history.
Bloomberg once said " I am what I am and, you know, I'm a very lucky guy." If he can be convinced to run, it will be the country who in the end is so very lucky.
