So, Bloomberg is switching to the Independent party with lots of hints about stepping into the ’08 election. I think this officially marks the point in the ’08 election, when every asshole gets the green light to jump into the campaign. It’s the Open Asshole Greenlight. So, Fred Thompson, come on down. Angelina Jolie, come on down. Paris Hilton, you say you’re really smart and that time in the big house has changed you? Come on down. If you have no voting record on Iraq and have a pulse, come on down. Because everyone else sucks.
10 thoughts on “The ’08 Circus”
Comments are closed.
Apt. 11d 
Not sucky: Edwards, Obama, Richardson (in alphabetical order). And personally, the only reason I have any trepidation about adding Clinton to that list is that she’s been dragged through the slime machine so many times that many people’s minds are already closed about her.
There’s a politics question that I’d been meaning to ask here, but there hadn’t really been a good opportunity: Laura, I remember your saying that the allegations of corruption made you worry about voting for Menendez. IIRC, Josh Marshall turned up some evidence that New Jersey was one of the states where the Bush Justice Department was using the law for partisan ends. Have you seen anything along those lines? And would the truth of that allegation affect your views on Menendez?
(On some other possibilities, I do not believe that God will be so good to Democrats as to give us a Newt Gingrich or Fred Thompson to campaign against. Alas.)
LikeLike
I worry about Edwards in the general election. He has the robotic Gore thing going on. Obama has been a major disappointment in the debates. I haven’t paid enough attention to Richardson, though I’m starting to hear some more buzz about him.
Bush nastiness in NJ? Oooh. I hadn’t heard about that, Doug. Thanks. I’ll have to do a little googling. Still, I can’t imagine Bush’s crimes making me feel better about Menendez.
LikeLike
I’ll see if I can find the cite to match the memory. The argument in re Sen. M is that any reputation for corruption is a product of Bush’s crimes because pushed by Gonzales DOJ for just-in-time delivery before the election. Indictments of turnout group in Missouri were another example; more thoughout the year at various TPM incarnations. Partially valid counterargument would be pre-existing condition.
How’s your governor recovering, BTW?
LikeLike
I had read the same stuff about the charges against Menedez (probably also on TPM). Given what we know now about Bush Justice, it seems plausible.
From the perspective of Not in NY, Bloomberg seems quite viable: a competent centrist (Republican only due to the airtight nature of the NYC Democratic machine) who can appeal to the “pox on both their houses” sentiment that seems to be floating around. I’m not sure if that’s sufficient to build a campaign on, though.
I’ve found it interesting, though, to talk to Republicans who didn’t live through the Guiliani years in NY–and they tend to be a wee bit shocked by the details (though not entirely willing to write him off yet).
Is my mild opinion of Bloomberg a product of the same sort of distance?
LikeLike
Oh and on the Dem side, I like Obama and Richardson (as a total dark horse–too bad, because he’d probably be very good).
Hillary would probably be a very good president as well, but frankly, for our highest executive office to be occupied by members of the same two families for 28 years is Bad for Democracy, IMO. Can you tell that I just finished reading I, Claudius?
LikeLike
I’m interested in Richardson, but I think at this point he’s really campaigning for the VP spot (and he’d be great there).
But, is the buzz that Bloomberg would run as an independent? I have no idea what that would do to ’08. It would be a definite monkey wrench. I’d guess that it would pull votes and resources from Hillary and Giuliani, and maybe Edwards. I’m guessing that it wouldn’t pull from Obama (but that’s part of Obama’s problem, that he doesn’t have significant resources to pull from NY).
bj
LikeLike
Yes, supposedly he’d run as an independent, and what a holy mess that will be. A three-person race would make it possible for a Republican to win–something that seems pretty near impossible otherwise. I can’t see any Republican getting a majority of the vote, but a plurality? Well, maybe. I bet the Republican campaigns are overjoyed about this.
As for the Democrats, even if you (and I) have some misgivings about the current contenders, all of them are solid on progressive issues. I don’t know about you, but I’d vote for any of the major candidates. At least none of them are thinking about attacking Iran.
LikeLike
Oh, yeah, I’ll vote for a Democrat. Though I’m waffling a bit about who I like. Someone gave me quite a convincing pro-Richardson speech this weekend, so I want to take a closer look at him.
I’m just amused at this free for all moment in the campaign.
Mrs. Coulter, hubby just watched the complete I , Cladius series. Have you seen it?
Doug, our governor is such a moron. He’s not helping to improve our reputation of being the “armpit state.” I’ll have to read more about the latest revelations, but from what I understand about politics in New Jersey cities, they don’t need a lot of encouragement to get dirty. (I have a very shy friend who reads this blog who knows way more about this than I do. I’m wishing she would comment on this. hint. hint.)
re: corruption in politics. I have a strong progressive streak, which is unforgiving in these matters. But my immigrant roots also appreciates it. It takes more brains to be corrupt than it does to play by the rules.
LikeLike
“who can appeal to the ‘pox on both their houses’ sentiment that seems to be floating around. I’m not sure if that’s sufficient to build a campaign on, though.”
It isn’t, of course. See Anderson, Perot (twice) and Nader, and that’s just my personal memory. Even Teddy Roosevelt couldn’t do it. Though it can, as people have pointed out, really change the dynamics of the race.
Mrs C, I worry about the dynasty thing, too. On the other hand, maybe you make history with the female candidate you have, not with the female candidate you wish you had. (And I do think that’s going to be an important appeal for either her or Obama: Be a part of making history.)
Laura, on corruption, I grew up in Louisiana.
LikeLike
Doug: true point about Hillary. It’s a sad commentary on American political life that I can’t think of any *other* female politicians who are likely to be viable presidential candidates in the near future. If Hillary is the nominee, I will certainly vote for her. I just can’t quite bring myself to vote for her in the primary (at least, I haven’t come around to it yet–a lot can change between now and then), though I voted for her enthusiastically for senator. Honestly, I think that unfortunately a lot of Left Blogistan’s opposition to her is thinly veiled sexism. Who ever criticized a male politician for having ambition? Nice girls aren’t ambitious. Well, a nice girl is never going to be president, because you don’t get to be president by sitting around and politely waiting for people to acknowledge your meek and deserving nature.
I find Obama to be a genuinely inspiring speaker, but I also can’t quite shake the impression of light-weightness.
There’s a lot to like about Edwards, plus we pretty much already know what the attack rhetoric is going to be (rich pretty boy lawyer); hopefully the Edwards campaign has been working on how to counter it? I voted for him in the last round; MD is a late primary, so it was a largely a protest against the ill-fated Kerry juggernaut.
Laura: I have seen the I, Claudius series, though it was years ago. All through the book, I had Derek Jacobi in my mind’s eye.
LikeLike