5 ms·
It's so obvious he is preparing and advertising himself to run for president. And it's about time. He has something few other presidents have. Success in both
by ChrisNorstrom 13y ago
It's so obvious he is preparing and advertising himself to run for president. And it's about time.
He has something few other presidents have. Success in both Private and Public office.
- sbarre 13y agoDoes he need to go through a stint in the senate/congress first, or could he run directly for nomination? I don't mean "need" as in legal, but just as a path to it? Has anyone ever done that before? Run for president without being a governor or a senator/congressman? (Asking as a Canadian who isn't super familiar with historical presidential politics in the US).
- dbarlett 13y agoYes, although they usually quit early. 2012: Herman Cain (businessman) 2008: Alan Keyes (author/diplomat) 2004: Wesley Clark (Army General), Al Sharpton (reverend/civil rights activist)
- teddyh 13y agoI'm thinking that most simply don't have the intelligence connections to endure the blackmail game.
- endianswap 13y agoAccording to a Wikipedia article, it would be likely be in his best interest to start somewhere bigger: Every President of the United States has served as either: Vice President of the United States a U.S. Senator a Congressman a Governor of a state a Cabinet Secretary a General of the United States Army
- ams6110 13y agoMayor of NYC is probably a better executive experience that many (most?) state governorships. Bloomberg isn't my cup of tea, politically, but he's certainly qualified to run if he decides to do it.
- mikeash 13y agoFor example, as mayor of NYC, Bloomberg governs about three times as many people as Bill Clinton did as governor of Arkansas.
- protomyth 13y agoThe governor of Arkansas deals with both rural and urban issues and has a good cross section of what makes up this country.
- mikeash 13y agoThe biggest city in Arkansas is less than 3/4ths of a million people. To say that Arkansas cities gave Clinton experience with urban issues in America is roughly like saying that the sum total of NYC's parks and gardens give Bloomberg experience with rural issues in America.
- protomyth 13y agoThat's more than a bit of hyperbole. He had to deal with the issues of an urban area typical for US residents. He didn't deal with the super metroplexes, but that is not the typical problems faced by most. NYC is not a cross section of what makes up the US.
- mikeash 13y agoI disagree. Fully one third of Americans live in urban areas with populations of two million or more. Only about one fifth of Americans live in an area that qualifies as "rural". No, NYC is not a cross section of the US, but neither is Arkansas, and of the two, I'd say NYC gets closer to more of the population.
- protomyth 13y agoThe amount of process and rules the White House deals with is not confined to the demographics or where the population is. NYC has a fraction of the overall rules and needs of a state like Arkansas. The absolute number people are not the determining factor.
- mikeash 13y agoRelevant xkcd: http://xkcd.com/1122/ http://xkcd.com/1122/
- geetee 13y agoProbably get more hands on experience being the mayor of NYC than most other positions. Of course, that's not saying much given the current political landscape.
- ykl 13y agoZachary Taylor, Ulysses S Grant, and Dwight D Eisenhower all had held no political position before running for president. They all came from the Army.
- adamnemecek 13y agoThey were also presidents in a bit of a different era.
- protomyth 13y agoI would suggest it could still work fine for a General. They are experienced in leadership, logistics, and dealing with budgets.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- hollerith 13y agoMayor of New York City is a harder and more important job than governor of Arkansas, which was Bill Clinton's highest elective office before being elected president. (Although he ran for Congress, he did not win.)
- dnautics 13y agoZachary Taylor* US Grant* Chester A Arthur (if you don't count VP) Taft (if you don't count appointed governorship of territories) Hoover (if you don't count VP) Eisenhower* HW Bush was barely a representative (2 terms, most well known as CIA director prior to VP). *military generals
- potatolicious 13y agoI don't think it'll work. He's neither Republican nor Democrat (and in fact has been both at one point or another) - even someone as well-known as Bloomberg I don't think can capture the Presidency as an independent candidate. Not to mention his stance on things is too complicated for modern American politics. He's socially liberal (supports heavy social programs, large-scale public education, gay rights, pro-choice), but also largely anti-civil liberties (stop and frisk, crackdowns on demonstrations, pro-surveillance). He's the exact sort of candidate New Yorkers vote for, but I don't think the rest of the country would go for it.
- hyperbovine 13y agoI've thought for a long time that the US political system will someday realign along the lines of urban vs. everything else. The "tough on crime / livable cities / pro environment / social programs" platform resonates with a huge swath of urban America, be it in Pittsburgh, Dallas, Detroit or New York. Bloomberg could well be our first urban candidate for president, and I think he would have broad appeal beyond NYC.
- simonebrunozzi 13y agoI agree. He's a remarkable man. Not sure he's powerful enough to win the race for US President.
- protomyth 13y agoHe won't make it out of the primaries for either party. The state setup at the start works against him, as he has received a lot of "the crazy NYC Mayor banning something else" pieces.
- epc 13y agoBloomberg will never run for President. He's too protective of his private life to subject himself to the circus. Plus he's too conservative to run as a Democrat, and he's a communist compared to the current national GOP.