Source: Free Market News
The mathematics are quite simple. More and more, American presidential politics in 2008 is about one man: the limited government, constitutional candidate Ron Paul. By running under a free-market, constitutionalist banner, Ron Paul (R-Tex) has placed himself in opposition to seemingly every other presidential candidate and given the Washington power structure the shimmies and shakes.
The recent “mass donation day” that just netted the candidate around $6 million or more in 24-hours is likely the last straw. The mainstream media surely cannot continue to pretend that Ron Paul is anything less than a leading Republican candidate, one who may finish high in both Iowa and New Hampshire, and then go on to do well in the Super Tuesday primaries.
Could he even become the Republican candidate for president? What about a brokered convention? As such, with a low tax, anti-war platform, Ron Paul would probably be difficult for any of the current crop of Democrats to beat. No doubt all of these contingencies are being discussed at fairly high levels in the political establishment.
Enter Mike Bloomberg, the founder and owner of the financial data and news company Bloomberg. Forbes says the mogul is contemplating spending up to 20 percent of his $11 billion fortune to run as an Independent candidate for president.
http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2007/12/15/bloomberg-mayor-independent-oped-cx_daa_1215bloomberg.html
An “activist” mayor, Bloomberg has run New York City more or less from the left, banning smoking in bars and planning to tax residents and visitors exorbitant amounts of money to discourage them from driving into downtown Manhattan. He obviously sees the role of political leader as a transformative one.
$2 billion can buy a lot of TV time – and perhaps even drown out the increasingly successful message of Ron Paul. Would blitzing the airways with a “mainstream” message paper over “Mayor Mike’s” fairly radical New York City political record? That may be what his backers are hoping.
Though nobody will say so, Bloomberg’s candidacy, if it comes to pass, would likely be aimed – to begin with, anyway (certainly if momentum builds) at Ron Paul. The more successful Ron Paul is, the more desperate his opponents are to stop him. Even if it means hauling in a Wall Street business mogul to spend up to $2 billion of his own funds to do so.
Filed under: Democracy, Politics, Scandals | Tagged: bloomberg, corruption, democracy for sale, forbes, Ron Paul
BOOKMARK
I can’t see it happening. Bloomberg could never garner the widespread support in Mid-Am that Dr. Paul could. He could go toe-to-toe with him on economics, but his lack of congressional experience would be held against him, as would be his wealth. Americans are currently too angry to vote for a wealthy man. I love his smoking restrictions, which are in full compliance with my Libertarian views on the defense of property rights (which includes assault against your body), despite what the “anarchist” Libertarians may say. Outside of that, is he as great a scholar of American history as Dr. Paul? Bloomberg is another vain hope of the anti-Paul panic.
“I love his smoking restrictions, which are in full compliance with my Libertarian views on the defense of property rights (which includes assault against your body), despite what the “anarchist” Libertarians may say.”
Libertarians defend property rights, which means that libertarians believe the government may only restrict smoking on its property, namely public property. No one has a legal right to eat in a private restaurant, so since smoking is legal, it must be unrestricted on private property. If you don’t like smoke, go to a restaurant that bans smoking on their private property – don’t pretend that an attack on private property rights protects private property rights.