Michael Bloomberg and political earthquakes

By D. G. Martin
Posted Monday, June 25, 2007

 E-mail this page    Printer-friendly page

Chapel Hill, NC - “Don’t waste your time writing about Michael Bloomberg!”

I wonder how my friend knew that I was getting swept away by the media attention that came to the mayor of New York when he switched his political affiliation from Republican to independent. Even though Bloomberg denies he is running for President, political commentators say he could be planning a third party run.

“Bloomberg could never get traction in North Carolina. He is divorced, Jewish, Wall Street insider, pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-gay rights, and he doesn’t know how to talk like we do,” my friend continued. “He wouldn’t fit down here. And besides that he has zero charisma.”

Even if Bloomberg were to get a much warmer reception in the rest of the country than my friend thinks he would get in North Carolina, American political history does not give much encouragement to third party candidates. Mostly, they have been spoilers (like Ross Perot, who is credited with taking enough votes from George H.W. Bush to make Bill Clinton the President, or Ralph Nader, who took enough votes from Al Gore to make George W. Bush the President). Or they have been distractions (like Strom Thurmond and Henry Wallace in 1948 or George Wallace in 1972). Even popular former President Teddy Roosevelt could not come close to winning in 1916 when he ran on a third party ticket.

With all these things going against a Bloomberg candidacy, why can’t I shake off this feeling that he might be a very big factor in next year’s election—and perhaps a winner?

A presidential victory by a third party candidate would be a political earthquake. It would shake up everything and end, at least temporally, the total domination by the two major political parties.

But an earthquake should not be such a surprise. The underlying plates of politics have been rubbing up against each other recently. Polls indicate growing public dissatisfaction with the partisan president and the partisan congress. The country’s unsolved problems cumulate, and the bipartisan effort that is required to achieve solutions seems to be a growing impossibility.

Meanwhile the political nominating processes seem to be forcing the candidates of both parties far out of the main steam and towards the less moderate and less tolerant political activists who try to insist on ideological purity for their party’s candidates.

If the mainstream American public ever concludes that the two-party political system is not serving their needs, they will figure out a way to get rid of it, with or without Michael Bloomberg.

If, in 2008, the mainstream public is disenchanted enough with the two major parties to think about another option, Bloomberg’s strengths as a presidential candidate would make him a compelling option.

First of all, he has the money to pay for a presidential campaign and would not have to spend the time, energy, and compromising issue adjustments that are expended in an ordinary presidential candidate’s fundraising efforts. He could spend full time actually campaigning.

Secondly, he is a pragmatic, nonpartisan, cooperative leader. He has shown a willingness to tackle the toughest problems in New York and an ability to bring people from all parties to work out approaches that gain broad public support.

Thirdly, he can explain in a credible way what is worrying many Americans about their government. Here is what he said very recently:

“When you go to Washington now, you can feel a sense of fear in the air – the fear to do anything, or say anything, that might affect the polls, or give the other side an advantage, or offend a special interest.

“This is paralyzing our government – and it’s leading our elected officials to push all the big, long-term problems onto future generations: health care, Social Security, budget deficits, global warming, immigration, you name it.

“Their inaction and partisan gridlock are destroying our relationships and reputation around the world.

“They are hurting our economic competitiveness, driving scientific and medical discoveries overseas, and jeopardizing our future as the land of hope and opportunity.”

If that is the core of the message of a well-financed, experienced, credible, proven manager who is a third party candidate for the presidency in 2008, I would not bet against him, even in North Carolina.

----------------------------------------

D.G. Martin is the host of UNC-TV’s North Carolina Bookwatch, which airs Sundays at 5:00 p.m. Check his blog and view prior programs at www.unctv.org/ncbookwatch/

This week’s (July 1) guest is David Payne, author of “Back to Wando Passo.”

Following the July 4 holiday, NC Bookwatch will air on Fridays at 9:30 p.m. and Sundays at 5pm. Details on the new season in next week’s column.

Sunday, July 1, 5 pm
David Payne
Back to Wando Passo

Friday, July 6 9:30pm, encore Sunday, July 8 5pmJ. Peder Zane The Top Ten

July 13 9:30pm, encore July 15 5pmGov. Mike Easley

Look Out College, Here I Come!

July 20 9:30pm, encore July 22 5pmMichele Bowen Holy Ghost Corner

David Payne—Back to Wando Passo

David Payne has been hailed as "the most gifted American novelist of his generation" (Boston Globe) and has been likened to "Pat Conroy or perhaps a Southern John Irving" (Winston-Salem Journal). Now, in his new novel, Back to Wando Passo, Payne introduces us to Ransom Hill, lead singer of a legendary-but-now-defunct indie rock group who has come to South Carolina to turn over a new leaf. A bighearted artist and a bit of a wild man, Ran knows that his wife Claire's patience with him hangs by a frayed thread. After a five-month separation, he's come south from New York City to rejoin her and their two young children at Wando Passo, Claire's inherited family estate, determined to save his marriage, his family, and himself.

In this episode of North Carolina Bookwatch, the Payne shares his fast-paced adventure story filled with lyrical writing, wicked humor, and unforgettable characters. The Henderson, NC, native reveals how Back to Wando Passo propels its two love stories, linked by place through time, to a simultaneous crescendo of betrayal, revenge, and redemption, that asks whether the present is doomed to ceaselessly repeat the past— or if it can sometimes change and redeem it.