Bloomberg '08?

The journalistic powerhouse that is Page 6 is reporting that John McCain may be considering Michael Bloomberg as his running mate. McCain, who could all but wrap up the Republican nomination today with friendly winner-take-all states like New York, Connecticut, and his home state of Arizona casting votes (he leads the polls in almost every state voting today), didn't comment for the story.

Bloomberg's reps are denying that the mayor is interested and, although they have kept his presidential (and, apparently, vice presidential) aspirations under tighter wraps than the identity of J.R.'s shooter, I tend to believe them on this one. I have a couple reasons for thinking this:

1. Bloomberg's ego is too big to accept the vice presidency. To be extremely cliche, he goes big or goes home. He thinks second place is the first loser. To him, winning isn't everything, it's the only thing. A bird in hand is worth two in the bush (wait, I don't think that one applies. I'm not sure, though, since I have no idea what the hell it means.) “There’s a reason his name is on the company, on the terminals, and on the foundation,” a Bloomberg insider was quoted as saying in this New York Magazine article. “Don’t underestimate the ego involved.”
2. McCain/Bloomberg = political suicide for McCain. Bloomberg is liberal. Actually, as far as would-be national politicians go, he's extremely liberal. He's pro-choice; he supports gay marriage, stem-cell research, gun control, environmental issues, and offering citizenship to illegal immigrants; and is opposed to the death penalty. McCain is already distrusted by many Republicans, viewed by his party's base as too liberal and too frequently splitting with Republican ideals (a maverick, I think they call him. Or maybe Iceman). Joining forces with Bloomberg would be like Clinton choosing Pat Buchanan as a running mate to appease the Democratic Party's liberal base.

Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that Bloomberg was willing to be vice president. For the reason stated in bullet No. 2, he couldn't pair with McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee (or any other Republican, for that matter). But let's say he was on a ticket with Obama or Clinton -- it could work out famously.

With Clinton, you get her experience and moderate social politics mixed with Bloomberg's liberal social ideals and business and economic experience, a perfect storm to grab the whole Democratic base and a lot of independents. It may not work, however, since they're both from New York and that's too many eggs in one basket.

Since Obama and Clinton are, by and large, the same politically, you have a very similar situation if Obama were to get the nomination and choose Bloomberg as a running mate. Obama, however, already has vast appeal among independents. Combine his independent supporters with those fiscally-conservative-yet-socially-moderate voters who feel betrayed by the Republican Party and would be very drawn to Bloomberg's economic experience, and you have a recipe for victory. The only drawback here is that they both lack the experience of McCain and Clinton (more to come on the importance of experience later).

And what if Bloomberg's ego gets the best of him and he does decide to run for president? He could actually win, but he would need the perfect circumstances (i.e. the right opponents) and a lot of luck to pull it off. Ideally, he would run against Clinton and Romney (or, better yet, Huckabee). Clinton and Romney would get somewhere in the neighborhood of four independent voters each; they would each get their parties' base -- approximately 35 percent each -- allowing Bloomberg to steal the election with the independent vote and just two or three percent from each party (this is assuming the a-lot-of-luck thing pans out really well). If, however, it's McCain and/or Obama, that puts Bloomberg in a much tougher spot -- actually competing for independent votes.

But the issue most likely isn't if he could win, but which other candidate he would deliver the election for if he did. The U.S. is a two-party country; we all know that. In 1992, Ross Perot came the closest any independent candidate has come to the presidency by nabbing 19 percent of the vote -- and essentially handed the presidency to Bill Clinton by doing so. In 2000, Ralph Nader placed a big bow on the White House and gave it to George W. Bush by pulling a measly 2.7 percent.

But does it even matter? Will Bloomberg even run? My guess is no. He may have a huge ego, but he's not stupid -- it's an uphill battle for any independent candidate (even one with eleventy-twelve bazillion dollars). Taking down Clinton, Obama, or McCain is a hell of a feat, let alone taking down all three -- especially without the backing of a national party. The sad thing is, he just might be the best candidate out there.

Related
Bloomberg's Enabler
Could an Independent Candidate Win the Presidency of the U.S.?