Do people from other states even get to run for President?
Apparently not.
The New York Times speculates wildly about a possible run by Michael Bloomberg, perhaps based on the theory that anyone with an opinion on national politics must be running for something. Either that, or it was a slow day for the newspaper of record's new tabloid business.
Urban Elephants reports that some people in Iowa are quite taken with George Pataki. Seriously. Note to Iowa: if you want him, you can have him. Just don't inflict him on us – we've suffered enough.
There are unconfirmed rumors that our junior Senator – her name escapes me at the moment – may be considering the same lofty goal.
Not to be outdone, former mayor Rudy Giuliani is beefing up his PAC. My personal take is that Rudy is smart enough to know that his scrawny in-with-gay-people-moving, mistress-at-Gracie-mansion-shtupping butt would get fried in the primaries, so that his flirtation should be seen as a promotional gimmick for his consulting business, but that's just me.
Then, I had a semi-serious conversation the other day gaming out scenarios for a White House run by Eliot Spitzer. Most likely outcome, as determined by us: he runs in 2016, when President Warner retires and Eliot's in the middle of his third term. Alternate scenario: After President Gore's retirement, Eliot battles Vice President Warner for the nomination, winding up with the Veep spot.
Of course, Eliot would also have to contend with Chuck Schumer, but that's a whole other can of worms.
Heck, even David Yassky is probably pondering a run, given the way he is sucking in developer money. He wouldn't even need a Sister Souljah moment, considering how pissed off the Congressional Black Caucus is at him even today.
Did I forget anyone?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
2008 Elections | New York | Charles Schumer | Eliot Spitzer | George Pataki | Hillary Clinton | Michael Bloomberg | Rudolph Giuliani
One more
Submitted by Green in Brooklyn on 30 May 2006 - 10:01am.
You forgot Marty Markowitz - he's gotta run for something after he's term limited out of Brooklyn.
Guiliani? Pataki?
Neither Guiliani nor Pataki are going to be the GOP Presidential nominee, for two reasons:
1. Both have long records of being consistently pro-choice. If the GOP nominates a pro-choice candidate they will lose their own base in the general election. The evangelical right wing will not support a pro-choice candidate under any circumstances. It would be even less likely than the Democrats nominating a pro-life candidate, which isn't happening in this life time either.
2. It makes no sense strategically for the GOP to nominate somebody from a solidly blue state they can't and won't win in the fall.
One possibility though is that Guiliani drops his presidential bid early on and becomes John McCains intended runningmate. Then Romney, Frist, Allen, and the others are running against a McCain/Guiliani ticket. But even that ticket would cause many evangelican right wingers to stay home or vote third party, because they hate McCain and Guiliani is, as stated, pro-choice.