20 June 2007
Will Bloomberg turn Massachusetts red?
We’ve all now heard interesting news of late about NYC Mayor (and Medford native) Michael Bloomberg’s ditching the GOP for Independent status. Of course speculation is that this signals his serious exploration of an Indy bid for President.
SurveyUSA has just released a 16 State poll of the dynamics of a three-way races with Bloomberg as an independent. What suprises me is that, more times than not, a Bloomberg candidacy actually hurts the Republicans. Since the speculation of his Independent candidacy begins, I’ve been arguing that it would hurt the Democrats the most, especially since independent voters generally trend towards the conservative side of things.
However, according to the SurveyUSA findings, Bloomberg is basically detrimental to the GOP. Here’s the summary from Political Wire:
* Bloomberg siphons enough Republican votes to flip red states Iowa, Missouri, Ohio, and New Mexico blue.
* There are two instances in which a Bloomberg 3rd-Party run flips a blue state to red, compared to 27 instances where a red state flips to blue.
* Should Bloomberg enter the race, and should Bloomberg begin to spend money, and should Bloomberg begin to form non-traditional coalitions, these dynamics may well alter. For now, his candidacy helps color more of the map blue.
As one might expect, even as a native son Bloomberg has little effect on the outcome in Massachusetts. Perhaps because he’s defected to New York, there is only one tested instance in which Bloomberg turns Massachusetts red. Interestingly, these results show that in a three-way race between Giuliani, Obama and Bloomberg, the first New York City Mayor takes our 12 electoral votes.
Since Bloomberg has an overwhelming effect in turning the previously mentioned four red states blue, this Massachusetts outcome may not be enough to actually swing the election to the Republicans. Nonetheless, it would be disturbing to see our state go for the GOP for only the third time in nearly 50 years.
Why this happens with Obama, I have no idea.
I don’t think Bloomberg is going to run for president, he has his eyes set on Albany, at least as a first step. He has been quoted by Fred Dicker from the NY Post as considering a run against Spitzer. I don’t know how much you know about NY Politics, but to say the least, the GOP is officially dead in that state. Word from friend of mine in NY is that Elliot Spitzer is losing popularity fast and Bloomberg is well liked among New Yorkers (both Upstate and Downstate). He wants to get alot of his reforms for NY Passed, but due to the way NY Politics is set up, he faces a huge problem with the machine in Albany and the gridlock between the Senate and Assembly. If he were to run as an independent and win the Governorship, he gives himself alot of leverage in Albany. Joe Bruno who leads the Republicans in NY will probably be in jail soon, so if he were to win as an independent he could use his nonpartisan stance to control both Republicans who are angered at Bruno and Democrats who are angered at Sheldon Silver. This will happen because the next Senate Leader will be a downstater and the most powerful Republican in the Assembly is a man by the name of Jimmy Tedisco who would probably work better with Bloomberg as Govenor then Spitzer (check out the Steamroller comment and you will see why) I personally feel he will run for Govenor because I doubt Spitzer will be there for the long run. NY politics is a stepping stone for reform, and to be honest fixing Albany is something no one has been able to do since Teddy Rooselvelt. Think about it this way, Bloomberg is ambitious, but first and foremost he seems to care about NY. He won’t be able to really get what he wants done in NY unless he becomes governor. If he is succesful there, he has more or lessed learned how to tame the beast of politics and will move on to DC.