I have just had an interesting discussion with someone close to New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
This person says that Bloomberg isn’t giving away anything regarding whether he might run for the presidency — or whether he’ll pour into concrete his non-denial denials.
But speculating, my friend thinks Bloomberg is definitely intrigued by a third party run and knows he can get on the ballot in nearly all of the states. The structural aspects of America’s two party system still make it a Herculean task to win a plurality — but the possibility exists, though most serious analysts still think his chances of winning are very low.
This source told me though — just knowing how he thinks — that Bloomberg may be making a calculation that runs something like this. . .
If either Giuliani or Huckabee win the Republican nomination, Bloomberg’s interest in entering rises. If Romney or Thompson win, Bloomberg’s interest declines.
And on the Dem side, if Obama wins the Democratic nod, Bloomberg is less likely to enter — but he may be more inclined to run if Clinton pulls off the nomination.
According to this source, he may think that in a Clinton vs. Huckabee race or a Clinton vs. Giuliani race leaves room for a third party candidate to come in mid-year, like a storm with a lot of drama and attraction, just as both parties may be feeling some potential buyer’s remorse for the candidates they picked.
I don’t endorse this scenario. I’m just reporting what someone close to Bloomberg thinks.
And I’m intrigued that Bloomberg is being tutored in foreign policy and keeps meeting Chuck Hagel.
I’ve been recommending to Dems and Republicans alike to absorb Hagel’s template for national security decision making — and it would be well worth their time for either Barack Obama and/or Hillary Clinton to do what Michael Bloomberg has been doing — and have Chuck Hagel over for dinner.
— Steve Clemons