Bloomberg's independent streak

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

The Democrats and Republicans have been involved in fractious presidential primaries and caucuses this year. For the first time in recent memory, none of the leading candidates can truly be classified as a political unifier. And the divisions in the party have paved the way for an independent candidate to not only run, but actually do well.

Could this be the silver lining that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been waiting for? For months, Mr. Bloomberg has played a cat-and-mouse game with the media. He repeatedly denies that he's interested in running for president, but keeps releasing signals that often point opposite. For example, Mr. Bloomberg has reportedly talked with two potential running mates, Sen. Chuck Hagel and former senator Sam Nunn, and has conducted polls in all 50 states to measure his personal appeal. If he wasn't running, why would he bother to do this? Even though Mr. Bloomberg wrote in the New York Times in February that he's not interested in running, he also noted, "If a candidate takes an independent, non-partisan approach — and embraces practical solutions that challenge party orthodoxy — I'll join others in helping that candidate win the White House." Fine, but what if none of the candidates take this approach? It's hard to perceive that the opinionated New York mayor will sit idly by and do nothing.

Let's hypothetically assume that Mr. Bloomberg is being coy and really does want to make a presidential run. Could he make an impact as an independent? History is not on his side. Past presidential elections have served as political graveyards for third parties and independents. Some independents have won electoral votes (John Bell, Strom Thurmond, George Wallace), while others simply won a decent amount of popular support (John Anderson, Ross Perot, Ralph Nader). Three former presidents have run as independents — Martin Van Buren (1848), Millard Fillmore (1856) and Theodore Roosevelt (1912) — yet only Mr. Roosevelt made a significant breakthrough, finishing second with 27.4 percent of the popular vote and 88 electoral votes.

Yet a Bloomberg candidacy has the potential to be different — and rather special. This is not your average, run-of-the-mill protest candidate. Rather, this is a man who used to be a registered Democrat, switched to a Republican and won two mayoral races in a heavily Democratic city, and then declared himself an independent. Hence, Mr. Bloomberg can genuinely claim that he is the only presidential candidate to have been involved with both parties, and decided that he would rather make his own political decisions than toe a party line. That's a unique position most Americans — who are traditionally non-partisan in their voting behavior — can identify with.

It's an even bigger advantage for Mr. Bloomberg in terms of picking off traditional Democratic and Republican supporters. He could end up taking a relatively equal number of potential votes away from both parties.

For example, Mr. Bloomberg would win support in large states like New York, California and Florida. Middle Americans of different political persuasions would appreciate his record as a two-term mayor, balanced approach to tax cuts and social spending, moderate positions on guns, religion and marriage, and past achievements as a businessman.

Meanwhile, his good relations with African Americans and Hispanics could build inroads in the South and West. And libertarian-type states like New Hampshire, Ohio and Texas may overlook his social liberal values if they like his fiscal plan for the country.

In terms of the presidential hopefuls, Mr. Bloomberg could have real success against Sen. Hillary Clinton. She carries a fair amount of political baggage, and that could aid him in states with significant amounts of moderate conservative and liberal voters.

John McCain and Barack Obama are another story. Both candidates have cross-appeal in three of Mr. Bloomberg's core constituencies — independents, moderate fiscal conservatives and centrist Democrats. If Mr. Bloomberg has to face one or both of these candidates, he has to do two things: Play up Mr. Obama's lack of experience and Mr. McCain's maverick positions, and position himself as a true independent with business acumen who understands what cities and families want. This would give him an opportunity to play up his political and economic strengths, and possibly throw the election into doubt.

Sure, it's highly unlikely that Mr. Bloomberg would become the next president. But in this strange political season — where the front-runners have completely collapsed and the leading candidates have surprised most political pundits — a successful run from an independent presidential candidate from New York would surely be the icing on the cake.

Michael Taube is a public affairs analyst and commentator and a former speechwriter for Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.