USA: Bloomberg Consistently Finishes Distant 3rd As a 3rd-Party Candidate

[DemocratSinceBirth]

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=a1ddb664-546c-42fa-9844-2d2bb423c622

[rinsd]

1. So much for the Bloomberg effect

The cowards will have to look for a new scare tactic when it comes to Hillary.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. It Seems That Way

~

[Essene]

13. Wrong. Starting with 13% is not a joke...

It would be extremely unwise to be cocky about Bloomberg's potential impact on this race.

[skipos]

14. Yeah, when he spends $1 billion on his independent bid, there will be no Bloomberg effect

:eyes:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. A Former President Running As A Third Party Candidate Could Only Garner 27% Of The Vote

I'd bet my house he doesn't carry one state... I'd have to think harder about how he would effect the two major parties...

[skipos]

26. That former President (who won states and served as a serious spoiler)

didn't have billions of dollars to waste. Even if Bloomy didn't win a single state he would do serious damage to Hillary. Even a lot of DUers say they would vote for him over her.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. The Polls I Cited Suggest He Doesn't Hurt Either

As for DUers not liking Hillary DU is to rank and file Democrats what the Hell's Angels are to motorcycle enthusiasts or nudists are to sun bathers...

[skipos]

29. And the polls are before 1 billion is spent.

So we can agree they don't mean squat. Remember how McCain was polling two months ago? Remember when Hillary was "inevitable." Bloombergs numbers have nowhere to go but up.

[Drunken Irishman]

3. The fact 23% of Americans haven't heard of Bloomberg should be concering.

Because by the time the election rolls around, they will have. And even if only 10% of those people break toward him, that'd put him at 21% of the popular vote, a number which could dramatically change the race.

[Drunken Irishman]

4. On further examination, this poll sucks.

Firstly, only 855 people were polled? That's a small sample for many state-wide polls, let alone a national one.

Secondly, look at the race numbers. 22% of blacks would vote for Huckabee? When was the last time a Republican candidate received 22% of the black population? Hoover?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Huckabee Got Almost Fifty Percent Of The African American Vote In Arkansas In His Re-election

Campaign...

George Bush* got sixteen percent of the Arican American vote in Ohio in 04...

Survey USA has an excellent track record, ergo:


http://www.surveyusa.com/electiontrackrecord.html

[Drunken Irishman]

10. We're not talking states, we're talking national.

When did a Republican candidate garner that big of black vote NATIONALLY?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. Not Since Ike

But I don't see how that invalidates Survey USA's results...

I cited their track record ...Either they are a reliable pollster or they aren't...

[Drunken Irishman]

17. Because it doesn't gel with history.

I know, I know, history is just that...history, but I have a hard time believing 22% of blacks will support a Republican, regardless of who it is. So that tells me there is an error with their sampling and it could have a dramatic influence on their final numbers.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. Either They Are A Reliable Pollster Or They Aren't

The only way you can determine how anybody is good at what they do is to look at look at what they did and Survey USA does a solid job your subjective judgement nothwithstanding that they show Mike Huckabee doing better among African Americans than you think he should...

[Drunken Irishman]

21. I never said you couldn't rely on them. However, it doesn't mean they're right here.

I'm sure if you check the archives, you'll find SurveyUSA has been wrong on many elections. It doesn't mean, as a whole, they aren't credible and reliable. It just means some of their polls could be flawed and this might be one of them. Don't just assume that because the poll says Survey USA, it's right on the money.

I trust SurveyUSA, but I think this poll has some faults. McCain gets 23% of the black vote when going against Clinton, I don't believe that will happen.

[Essene]

25. "McCain gets 23% of the black vote when going against Clinton, I don't believe that will happen."

I do.

I think democrats are moving away from the traditional positions on many things, especially on social matters. Like latinos, many black VOTERS (i.e. older) are becoming more socially conservative and disgruntled with party politics.

After the race baiting against Obama (by Clinton), i have no problem imagining many blacks preferring Mccain against her.

[Essene]

22. I'll be blunt.... many blacks saw through Hillary's race baiting...

and if given a choice between a moderate sounding religious republican and HER?

or given a choice of a jew who is beloved by blacks for being fiscally sound and socially progressive?

Blacks can most certainly lean conservatively on some social issues, and democrats better not take black votes for granted after Hillary's disgraceful race baiting.

[jackson_dem]

30. Nixon

[TwilightGardener]

6. Fred Thompson was the Republican front runner in many polls, until

he actually started running, and then sank like a stone. I don't know if there's any way to predict what happens until someone actually declares and runs and campaigns--I'd pick the candidate who's actually running too, if I was polled, because I would not know enough about the policies, positions and personality of someone who's not running. I think Bloomberg is conducting his own polls to figure out whether and how he should run.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. He Should Save His Money

My friend and I have a running joke... We are in the publishing/marketing business... Everytime a new business opens up in our area we guess if it's going to make it or not... I joke the business would be better off just giving me a couple of thousand dollars to do a study that shows it will fail rather than investing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in a business then watch it fail...

[TwilightGardener]

8. I don't think he's worried about his money. I do think the odds are against him, but he probably

realizes this--he's a businessman, and knows how to crunch numbers and forecast trends. If he thinks he's got a pretty good chance, he'll run. People are focused right now on the primaries in both parties, but once they're over, who knows?

[Essene]

23. this is a man who used to give away $150 million a year in philanthropy

[Thrill]

9. Thats all he needs to influence the election

He'll run if Hillary wins

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. He Seems To Hurt Obama More Now That You Want To Make It Into A Candidate Thing

Maybe those folks earing over $100,000.00 a year see a Bloomberg candidacy as trendy as an Obama one...

[Essene]

20. Bloomberg vs Hillary or Obama?

Either way, he severely punishes the Democrats if they don't move towards the center.

- he's a executive type who's fiscally conservative very socially lefty

- he's a real independent who has been above the fray of smearing

- he's a NEW YORKER that generally is like by... pretty much everybody in the city (which is almost impossible)

- he wont have to deal with a SINGLE special interest for funding and can literalyl outspend every single opponent from his own pockets


He would pull a ton of disgruntled republicans and democrats, plus a large portion (if not all) independents.

Against Obama: he can stick to his message and just feed on those who want to see a fiscally sound guy with amazing executive credentials (this is a guy who lowers crime, improves education, fixes the environment, gives 130 million a year in charity, etc). He really hurts Obama more than Obama hurts him, when it comes to rallying bipartisan independents and energy. Obama ends up looking like the Party Boy with special interests vs the underdog independent. Indeed, irony. Obama may end up beating Bloomberg on votes, but might lose to the GOP candidate as a consequence. Reverse Perot effect.

Against Hillary: he can undermine her on her NY credentials, her centrist message and totally destroy any sense that she's anything but a legislator. The moderates that Obama could fight for, she'd have no chance in getting. She'd be likely to focus on policy issues to differentiate herself, which invariably leads to making her sound more Congressional than Presidential. Almost no matter who the GOP candidate was, Bloomberg would foil the election for her.

I do not think Bloomberg can win, but he can decide the election...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. That's A Nice Analysis

I would have to give it more thought...

He's socially liberal; more socially liberal than even Hillary and Barack...

On fiscal issues he's probably to their right...

I think as of today his impact on the final two party popular and Electoral College Vote is neglible...

And as a transplanted New Yorker I know the further one gets from New York the less popular New Yorkers are...

[Essene]

27. He's a real fiscal conservative, for sure. He's a no-joke businessman.

Indeed, his main limits are:

1. the GOP will call him a liberal and scare independents
2. he's jewish and sounds so "new york" that it scares mid-america
3. new york overload, against hillary
4. he's not very exciting although he's charismatic

But the issue isnt him winning. The issue is what his impact would be on american politics and the election. It all depends greatly on who the 2 parties select and what the tenor of their campaigns are.

It also depends on what he intends to accomplish by running.

[Essene]

12. "Distant 3rd" for a billionaire who few have heard of and who's willing to throw a billion down...

Is more than enough to DECIDE the election.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. He Seems To Hurt Obama More, Ergo:

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=03240275-5901-40ca-b7b2-8edecc7ae14f


http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=a1ddb664-546c-42fa-9844-2d2bb423c622

[Perky]

31. I would love to see the breakout on a state by state basis..

I think however.... that his ability to come across as sensible rather than a cranky crackpot like Perot and his record of pumping his own money into the campaign in the age of microtargeting is something that will be very interesting to watch unfold.

If the nominees are Hillary and Huckabee he has a chance.

If it Hillary and Romney He would have a small chance

If is is Hillary and McCain. It wouold depend on what he wants to do about Iraq.


If our nominee is Obama....I don't think he gets in.