Hagel hints at independent White House bid

[oberliner]

Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel on Sunday hinted at the possibility of running for the White House as an independent, saying a credible third party ticket would be beneficial to the country.

“I am not happy with the Republican Party today,” Hagel said, adding that the party is not what it was when he joined. “It’s been hijacked by a group of single-minded, almost isolationist insulationists, power-projectors...”


The senator, who has most notably strayed from his party and President Bush on the Iraq war, said he would make up his mind about whether to run by the end of the summer.

Hagel met recently with New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, who some say is also weighing an independent bid for the presidency. The senator said no deals were made at the meeting but, in an interview Sunday with CBS’s “Face the Nation,” he expressed admiration for Bloomberg.

“It’s a great country to think about a New York boy and a Nebraska boy to be teamed up leading this nation,” Hagel responded when asked about joining a ticket with Bloomberg, who has the resources to fund a presidential run.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/hagel-hints-at-independent-white-house-bid-2007-05-13.html

[TwilightGardener]

1. Well, I just watched the video on CBS (meant to watch this morning

and missed it), and he essentially gave Bloomie a big fat wet kiss (ew, sorry) about how Bloomberg may be the guy America is looking for. I expect to see this ticket emerge in some fashion, unless they can't work out their diff's on gun control and abortion.

[madfloridian]

2. And it will give the GOP the WH.

Period.

[TwilightGardener]

3. I am afraid you're right--I think it will pull more Dems than R's, and

if they win? It's a Republican admin. And if they lose? They split up the Dem/Indy votes and give the WH to Rudy McRomney (egads) and it's a Repub admin.

[Lobster Martini]

6. Respectfully disagree. Hagel is more likely to split the GOP vote.

Apart from his position on the war, Hagel does not have much that will appeal to Democrats. I think he'd hurt Guiliani more than anyone else.

(I cherry picked this list, but the link is below. )

Rated 100% by the Christian Coalition: a pro-family voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)
Voted NO on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on $3.1B for emergency oil assistance for hurricane-hit areas. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress. (Mar 2006)
Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Chuck_Hagel.htm

[TwilightGardener]

8. I think a lot of "loosely tied" Dems would like him, especially if

he teamed up with Bloomberg. People vote for whom they like and trust, not necessarily for their Senate voting records--that's how we ended up with "Mr Have a Beer With", because he seemed like more of a fun, likable guy than Gore or Kerry. That's DEMOCRATS who put him into office--so I am wary of assuming Hagel won't appeal to Dems or Indies. Hell, I like the guy, myself. But I think Obama can certainly beat him, so as long as he's the Dem candidate, I am not too concerned.

[WCGreen]

4. Both are republicans....

So how is that going to be a true third party...

History has not been kind to Washington Insiders running as third party candidates....

John Anderson comes to mind...

[madfloridian]

5. Bloomberg meetings with Al From and Harold Ford bother me.

I wonder what it has to do with Bloomberg running possibly, and then my mind takes in what Hagel said.

Why are the leaders of the Democratic Leadership Council meeting with Bloomberg when running is discussed? Curious minds want to know.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17439758/site/newsweek/

"Publicly, Bloomberg is focused on his second term and leaving the city in better shape than he got it. Privately, Bloomberg and political adviser Kevin Sheekey are meeting with pollsters and consultants to assess the mayor's chances as a third-party, independent candidate. "There is no Bloomberg campaign," Sheekey tells NEWSWEEK. "But we have certainly reached out." At a dinner last year with Al From, founder of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, Bloomberg was candid and self-deprecating, wondering what chance a 5-foot-7, divorced Jew has in the celebrity-sweepstakes presidential contest."

So there was discussion about Bloomberg's run.

And now to Harold Ford's meeting with Bloomberg.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/04/19/ap3631187.html

"Bloomberg wasn't expected to focus on any specific campaign on Thursday. Rather, he planned to remind his lunch guests at the Four Seasons that national candidates who ask New Yorkers for money should only get financial support if they side with the city on a checklist of issues.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is mulling a run for president, and former Democratic Rep. Harold Ford Jr. were to join the mayor at the event."

Doesn't say his meeting was about running. But you never know.

Note from the article that Maureen White, former finance chair of the DNC, and her hubby Rattner...attended last year.

"Guests invited to last year's event included GOP fundraiser Georgette Mosbacher, investment banker Steven Rattner, and his wife, Maureen White, the former finance chair of the Democratic National Committee."

If Bloomberg runs, it will give the GOP the WH. There is no doubt where his votes would come from. So why are so many Democrats sticking with him? Some were part of the Democrats for Bloomberg campaign.

We are supposed to be perfectly loyal and kiss the rings of the leadership of our party whatever they choose to do. Yet they can support folks who might keep our Democrats out of the White House.

[Captain Hilts]

7. Bloomberg is a VERY serious threat: From the Daily Telegraph [Torygraph]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/05/12/ccom12.xml

[Ian David]

9. Yes! Yes! Ralph Hagel '08!

Tell every Repuke you know that they should vote for this third-party candidate!

[tinfoilinfor2005]

10. So let me get this straight...the republicks will have a convention

to elect their candidate, and they will also have a second candidate, just in case not everyone in the country is crazy for the first candidate. In that case I think we should be able to run two candidates as well. Mr. Gore...paging Mr. Gore...

[opihimoimoi]

11. Hagel can do himself a favor...mea culpa and quit the Pub Party...JOIN THE DEMOCRATS

[MasonJar]

12. Well, he does own the machines!