9 out 10 DC Centrists Agree: Mike Bloomberg Is Way Awesome

Despite repeated denials (including a fresh one this week) that he's not running for President, there remains a strong contingency of DC centrist types fantasizing about a run from independent NYC Mayor Bloomberg. At the forefront of this is a group called Unity '08 which advocates for a third-party candidacy, not necessarily because they dislike either party (they seemingly have no ideology or stances at all), but because they just think it'd be neat. As someone who's as frustrated with politics as the next guy (probably even more so), I'd note what a ridiculous idea this is.

For the record, that's coming from a guy who voted for Bloomberg twice. It's not personal.

As I noted, the Unity '08 group has no ideology, ideas, or proposals of their own. They want a third-party run just for their own amusement, under the banner of supposed 'bipartisanship'... which in DC terms, usually means supporting Republicans, but ones who aren't as horrifying as the usual bunch. The group says the two main parties have failed to...

"address the fundamental challenges facing the nation,"

...and yet the group is compromised of wishy-washy centrist types who get uncomfortable any time someone takes a stand against the status quo.

They seem to have latched onto Bloomberg as their fantasy guy because he occassionally returns their calls and was on the cover of Newsweek once. But, as Glenn Greenwald handily catalogues, despite his very progressive views on social issues and the environment, Bloomberg has been loyal to the Bush approach to foreign policy and constitutional issues. I disagree with his strong assertion that Bloomberg "is basically just Rudy Giuliani with a billion or two dollars to spend to alter the election," but if I were a group looking to get away from the partisanship of the Bush/GOP era and 'address the fundamental challenges facing the nation,' I'd find myself another candidate.

Moreover, it's obvious that the thought of a Bloomberg run has all the wrong people excited. "Liberal Fascism" author Jonah Golberg is giddy at the National Review-

"The more I think about it, the better I feel about a Bloomberg third party candidacy. I think it is obvious he can't win. And while I understand the argument that he could siphon off more GOP votes than Democratic ones, I'm increasingly skeptical that that's how it would work out... Ultimately, having a race where there are two pro-choice social liberals from New York and one pro-life social conservative; two more dovish war-on-terror candidates and one hawkish one; two tax-hikers and one tax-cutter, etc etc is a recipe for GOP success. Of course, a Giuliani candidacy could shake that math up considerably. But beyond that, I think Bloomberg would help the GOP retain the White House in '08. And it would be fun watching Bloomberg lose and spend half a billion dollars in the process."

Somehow, I think his definition of 'fun' differs from most people's.

Amazingly enough, one who makes a solid case against this political fantasy is Time magazine's Joe Klein, well known and mocked for his obsession with faux-bipartisanship. Here he shakes his head at all this-

"Every four years, we get a group of high-minded Mugwumps who are just shocked and appalled by the messiness of the democratic process and yearn for something more pristine. Most of the people on Bloomberg's list are the sort who are more interested in governing than in getting themselves dirty begging for votes. It will be nice to see some of them involved in the next administration, whether Democrat or Republican. But I don't think they have very much to add to the debate right now."

And that's all that really needs to said on this issue. Let's hope it remains a fantasy.