Vanity, Thy Name is Bloomberg

Mayor Bloomberg has officially announced that he has abandoned the Republican Party that he cynically joined to become mayor in order to become an "Independent." This is widely seen as the first move towards a White House run as an Independent in 2008.

What do we think of this?

First, a little background.

Michael Bloomberg was a billionaire businessman and a lifelong Democrat who decided that he wanted to be mayor of New York. He realized that he didn't have a chance in hell of winning a Democratic primary, so he cynically switched his party affiliation to Republican (of the RINO -- "Republican in Name Only" variety) to order to get on the ballot.

Even with that, and his incalculably deep pockets, he would have been a long shot. A very long shot.

But then 9/11 happened.

Bloomberg owed his eventual election to Osama Bin Laden to such an extent that I'd be surprised if Bloomberg didn't send him a thank-you note. Without the attack on the World Trade Center Bloomberg would never have become mayor. New Yorkers decided that, in the aftermath of the devastation of downtown Manhattan, it would take a businessman to lead the city into the future, and when Bloomberg was practically annointed by Rudy Giuliani (who then tried to use the attacks as a way of staying in power after his term was over), Bloomberg beat out Mark Green and became mayor.

So he was once a Democrat who left that party when it was no longer useful to him. Now he has left the Republican party because he feels that they're no longer useful to him. Does that make him pragmatic and independent, or does it indicate that the man has no principles whatsoever except a simple, cynical expediency?

Now Bloomberg seems to think that he can run and win a third party candidacy for the White House. Once again his deep pockets (he is said to be willing to spend as much as half a billion dollars to buy the White House) will serve him in good stead.

But there are two things that he's not counting on.

1) No third party candidate has won the White House in more than a century -- or even come close. Teddy Roosevelt, a former president, couldn't do it in 1912. H. Ross Perot couldn't do it in 1992, with equally deep pockets. Bloomberg won't be able to do it either.

2) Bloomberg represents everything about New York and New Yorkers that people in flyover country can't stand: he's rich, he's pro-gun control and pro-choice, he's obnoxious, he's pushy, and oh, yeah -- he's a Jew. This is Jesusland, after all, and in a nation where the biggest fuck-up in the history of the White House can still manage to hold onto the blind loyalty of roughly a third of the electorate simply because he "Loves the Lord," I wonder just how many states below the Mason-Dixon line Bloomberg thinks he has a serious chance of winning (answer: none). Bloomberg's administration was a total fluke, and if he thinks he can parlay that into a successful run for the White House then he's delusional.

But if he wants to toss half a billion dollars down the toilet in a vain attempt at becoming president, I say let him do so. After all, it's a free country. Or so they tell me.

Tom Moran