Mike Bloomberg Decides There Are Already Too Many NYC Billionaires Running For President - Dealbreaker

Mike Bloomberg Decides There Are Already Too Many NYC Billionaires Running For President

Bill Ackman cannot catch a break...
Author:
Updated:
Original:

In an editorial published last night on his own news website, Michael Bloomberg put an end to what was the least believable tease in the history of modern politics (Apologies, Bill Ackman).

And, in keeping with the theme of this whole "Will He/Won't He?" affair, Bloomberg drew it out for a bit...

This - after much preamble about Clinton and Reagan and partisan America - is the sixth paragraph:

Over the last several months, many Americans have urged me to run for president as an independent, and some who don’t like the current candidates have said it is my patriotic duty to do so. I appreciate their appeals, and I have given the question serious consideration. The deadline to answer it is now, because of ballot access requirements.

And this is the ninth paragraph:

But when I look at the data, it’s clear to me that if I entered the race, I could not win. I believe I could win a number of diverse states -- but not enough to win the 270 Electoral College votes necessary to win the presidency. 

Which is still not really an answer, making the tenth and 11th paragraphs the buried lede of the whole piece:

In a three-way race, it’s unlikely any candidate would win a majority of electoral votes, and then the power to choose the president would be taken out of the hands of the American people and thrown to Congress. The fact is, even if I were to receive the most popular votes and the most electoral votes, victory would be highly unlikely, because most members of Congress would vote for their party’s nominee. Party loyalists in Congress -- not the American people or the Electoral College -- would determine the next president.
As the race stands now, with Republicans in charge of both Houses, there is a good chance that my candidacy could lead to the election of Donald Trump or Senator Ted Cruz. That is not a risk I can take in good conscience.

Mike goes on to casually, "Bloombrusquely," eviscerate the candidacies of both Trump and Cruz, essentially saying that both men are dangerous demagogues unfit for the presidency.

And while Bloomberg is not the first to allege this against either candidate, it is notable who he doesn't mention by name in his editorial. For all his talk of partisan rancor and rumors that he was disgusted by the anti-Wall Street rhetoric of Bernie Sanders, Bloomberg omits both Democratic candidates from his long explanation, focusing instead on the theme of falling on own his sword to save America from what the GOP has on offer.

Which makes this comment all the more confusing:

However, nor will I stay silent about the threat that partisan extremism poses to our nation. I am not ready to endorse any candidate, but I will continue urging all voters to reject divisive appeals and demanding that candidates offer intelligent, specific and realistic ideas for bridging divides, solving problems, and giving us the honest and capable government we deserve.

So, social liberal, power hungry, pro-business Mike Bloomberg ain't running and he ain't endorsing... What can does it all mean?

Exactly.

The Risk I Will Not Take [Bloomberg]

Related

Everybody Hates Whatever They Think "Wall Street" Is: WSJ

Wall Street has become the Rorschach test for angry voters, but no one knows what they're looking at.

Hillary Clinton Inching Ever Closer To Telling Bernie Sanders "Just Shut The F@ck Up About Wall Street Already"

Hill is done pretending that she hates Wall Street, or that's she's still running against Bernie.

Hillary Clinton Close To Just Flipping A Coin To Decide Whether She's With Or Against Wall Street

Hillary is thinking that she needs to talk tough about cracking down on Wall Street... but not too tough.

Democrats Prove They Are Totally Ready To Fix 2008 Wall Street In First 2016 Debate

Democratic Debate 2015: "The Glass-Steagall Magical Mystery Tour"

Hillary Clinton And Wall Street Are Officially The Ross And Rachel of Politics

Can we stop with the "Is Hillary too close to Wall Street?" already? Of course she is, and it doesn't matter.