I’d given up trying to profile the candidates as they entered the race because, well, it both exhausting and mystifying – in most cases, who are these people and why should I vote for these accomplishment-devoid folks?
But, as Steve Benen @ MaddowBlog noted today, Michael Bloomberg, former mayor of New York City, billionaire, former member of both political parties, now an independent … take a breath … is considering a run for the Presidency. Bloomberg holds an MBA as well as an Electrical Engineering degree (so there’s a bit of an appeal for me, although I know some engineers are, well, crazy) from Johns Hopkins. With the mayoral experience and not knowing much about him, I thought I’d take a look at his biography.
Based on the information found on Ballotpedia and On The Issues, his membership in the GOP (2001–2007) is a bit mystifying. Here’s the traditional chart from On The Issues:
From the standard political quiz, I disagree concerning Iran (he apparently may want to interfere, although the quote is ambiguous) and privatizing Social Security (“To reduce the deficit we must cut entitlements“), and who knows on the questions on which his view is unknown.
Since he’s a billionaire, we can hope he’d be personally incorruptible, but whether or not his Administration would be is an unrelated question. As a mayor of the largest American city, his executive experience is undeniable; however, the fact that he apparently switched from the Democratic party to the Republican party in order to have a better chance to win, and then outspent his Democratic rival in the resulting general election by 5-1 ($73 million of his own money, and then he spent even more on the election 4 years later – although that’s without figuring inflation) does leave me wondering about his motivations. Muddying the waters further, Bloomberg’s third term was obtained only after he lobbied to have the law changed limiting New York mayors to two consecutive terms. He claimed he wanted to lead the effort to address the financial crisis then afflicting the nation (2009).
Based purely on the limited knowledge I skimmed from Ballotpedia and On the Issues, I’d say I find him an attractive candidate, but with the caveats noted before. However, this year the GOP does not appear to have a surviving candidate who I’d consider competent and ready to fill the Executive, although I admit I haven’t looked at Kasich. On the Democratic side, though, we have two very strong, very committed candidates for whom I would feel comfortable voting. Benen observes:
The only people cheering Bloomberg on are Republican officials and insiders, not because they see a great national leader, but because they see him as a candidate who would help split the center-left and make it that much easier for the GOP to control the White House and Congress in 2017 and 2018.
And, based on what my light review of his career and positions indicates, I’d have to agree; his membership in the GOP was undoubtedly a matter of convenience, not of conviction. Perhaps that statement might be the most important. Certainly Presidential wannabes are ambitious, and so I’m probably a little out of line in being worried about his motivations. But there it is. I’m just a little worried about his motivations.
