Bloomberg for President?
"After dining recently with NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is.. . considering a run for president as an independent, (Nebraska Senator Chuck) Hagel said people might want to consider the two on a ticket." (1)
As if ten Republican candidates and eight Democrats are not enough for the 2008 election, we might also have a Bloomberg-Hagel independent ticket too. Considering that the NY mayor is a billionaire, such a ticket could probably afford a serious nationwide media campaign. But could they win? Here are some drawbacks:
Third Ticket History: The structure of the American political system makes third parties and tickets extreme long-shots. Because of the electoral college, a candidate earns no electoral votes unless he is first in some state, an extremely high bar for new parties and candidates. Ross Perot, almost as rich as Bloomberg, garnered 19% of the popular vote for president in 1992, but not even one electoral vote. Only two third-party candidates received significant electoral votes since World War II, and both did so by appealing to white racism in the South (2).
The New York Problem: Bloomberg's only chance (if any) would be to carry the state of New York, but right now the front-runners in the polls in both major parties happen to be New Yorkers: Giulani and Clinton. Just to qualify for state ballots, a new ticket must file papers before the nominees of the major parties have been selected. If either party nominates a New Yorker, let alone both, it will be virtually impossible for Bloomberg to carry his home state.
The Jewish Problem: Most ethnic and religious groups support members of their own group that have a serious chance of winning the presidency; for example, John F Kennedy benefited from overwhelming support from fellow Catholics. Jews, on the other hand, will not unite behind a Jewish candidate (like Bloomberg) because a large portion of our people fear having a Jewish president! Some fear that a Jewish president would "bend over backwards" to avoid seeming too pro-Israel; others fear that those who oppose the Chief Executive's policies will turn against all Jews and foment anti-Semitism. The record of Jews in high public office does not seem to support either of these fears (3), but they are a significant hurdle for Jews seeking the presidency.
At the same time, many devout Christians would prefer a president who embodies and advocates the principles of Christianity, which a Jew would not. That leaves Muslims, whose support I would not count on.
The Issue Overlap: Unlike political parties in Europe, Israel, or Latin America, our Democrats and Republicans are not bound to party ideologies. Our major parties are flexible, and they are not far apart on major issues. For example, Hagel is strongly opposed to US involvement in Iraq, but it is virtually certain that the Democratic nominee will feel the same way and will attract anti-war voters. Bloomberg is the consummate Wall Street insider, but then so is Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giuliani was also mayor of the same city.
Can the proposed Bloomberg-Hagel ticket overcome all these obstacles and win the White House next year? Maybe, but I would hold off on ordering the white mezzuzas for now.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Associated Press, May 14, 2007.
(2) The ticket of Thurmond & Wright (Democratic States Rights, aka Dixiecrats) of 1948 and that of Wallace & LeMay (American Independent) in 1968 carried about the same Deep South States. In 2001 then Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R, MS) said that he wished Thurmond had been elected president, after which he lost the leadership position to Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, who presumably favored Repulbican nominee Thomas E Dewey in 1948.
(3) The first Jewish US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, was also the most friendly to Israel. Ditto for Foreign Minister Ion Georghe Maurer of Romania and Premier Pierre Mendes-France of (guess what) France.
As if ten Republican candidates and eight Democrats are not enough for the 2008 election, we might also have a Bloomberg-Hagel independent ticket too. Considering that the NY mayor is a billionaire, such a ticket could probably afford a serious nationwide media campaign. But could they win? Here are some drawbacks:
Third Ticket History: The structure of the American political system makes third parties and tickets extreme long-shots. Because of the electoral college, a candidate earns no electoral votes unless he is first in some state, an extremely high bar for new parties and candidates. Ross Perot, almost as rich as Bloomberg, garnered 19% of the popular vote for president in 1992, but not even one electoral vote. Only two third-party candidates received significant electoral votes since World War II, and both did so by appealing to white racism in the South (2).
The New York Problem: Bloomberg's only chance (if any) would be to carry the state of New York, but right now the front-runners in the polls in both major parties happen to be New Yorkers: Giulani and Clinton. Just to qualify for state ballots, a new ticket must file papers before the nominees of the major parties have been selected. If either party nominates a New Yorker, let alone both, it will be virtually impossible for Bloomberg to carry his home state.
The Jewish Problem: Most ethnic and religious groups support members of their own group that have a serious chance of winning the presidency; for example, John F Kennedy benefited from overwhelming support from fellow Catholics. Jews, on the other hand, will not unite behind a Jewish candidate (like Bloomberg) because a large portion of our people fear having a Jewish president! Some fear that a Jewish president would "bend over backwards" to avoid seeming too pro-Israel; others fear that those who oppose the Chief Executive's policies will turn against all Jews and foment anti-Semitism. The record of Jews in high public office does not seem to support either of these fears (3), but they are a significant hurdle for Jews seeking the presidency.
At the same time, many devout Christians would prefer a president who embodies and advocates the principles of Christianity, which a Jew would not. That leaves Muslims, whose support I would not count on.
The Issue Overlap: Unlike political parties in Europe, Israel, or Latin America, our Democrats and Republicans are not bound to party ideologies. Our major parties are flexible, and they are not far apart on major issues. For example, Hagel is strongly opposed to US involvement in Iraq, but it is virtually certain that the Democratic nominee will feel the same way and will attract anti-war voters. Bloomberg is the consummate Wall Street insider, but then so is Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giuliani was also mayor of the same city.
Can the proposed Bloomberg-Hagel ticket overcome all these obstacles and win the White House next year? Maybe, but I would hold off on ordering the white mezzuzas for now.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Associated Press, May 14, 2007.
(2) The ticket of Thurmond & Wright (Democratic States Rights, aka Dixiecrats) of 1948 and that of Wallace & LeMay (American Independent) in 1968 carried about the same Deep South States. In 2001 then Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R, MS) said that he wished Thurmond had been elected president, after which he lost the leadership position to Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, who presumably favored Repulbican nominee Thomas E Dewey in 1948.
(3) The first Jewish US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, was also the most friendly to Israel. Ditto for Foreign Minister Ion Georghe Maurer of Romania and Premier Pierre Mendes-France of (guess what) France.
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 10:42 AM
1 comments
