wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Ken Ytuarte from Durham, NY June 20, 2007 - 09:49AM

  I can only guess that Bloomberg is positioning himself for a possible, if unlikely, VP bid, or for a Cabinet position on either side.

  
  
• [2] J-F Vergel June 20, 2007 - 10:03AM

  I agree with the previous post... Bloomberg said he would not run for President but said nothing of Vice-Presidency. Perhaps with Hagel?

  
  
• [3] J-F Vergel June 20, 2007 - 10:05AM

  PS. This is the kick in the A** that the Democrats and Republican need. Enough with partisanship and favors.

  
  
• [4] James Harvey from Brooklyn June 20, 2007 - 10:06AM

  Why didn't he do this before the mayoral election. He might have had my vote. I am not so much a yellow dog Democrat as a yellow dog anti-Republican. I considered voting for Bloomberg, but consider anyone's running as a Republican enough of a judgment error to lose my vote, even if I otherwise like him/her.

  
  
• [5] elle from New Jersey June 20, 2007 - 10:12AM

  Wonder how much Bloomberg's decision has to do with his competition with Rudy Giuliani. He followed him as mayor and now he might compete with him for the presidency (not just for the Republican nomination now).

  
  
• [6] Julie from NJ June 20, 2007 - 10:15AM

  Bloomberg is brilliant, refrains from political doublespeak and tells it like it is! Unafraid to confront difficult issues, he cuts through the nonsense and gets to the point. That would be most refreshing in a president. I would vote for him above all other candidates currently in the race.

  
  
• [7] larry roth from manhattan June 20, 2007 - 10:19AM

  major concern over billionaire candidtate.

  'we' might like Bloomberg for his views today.

  But what do we do with the next billionaire

  when he or she is a far right conservative.

  then all this progressive outside the stagnant parties talk would melt away

  thanks,

  great show

  larry roth

  
  
• [8] Erica from Brooklyn June 20, 2007 - 10:22AM

  I think he realizes that central politics works in New York and he is also making himself relevant to the new crop of voters (the blogging and youtubing population). I, as a young voter, don't have the affiliations with the democratic party that my parents had and so I am the first in my family to be registered as an independent as well. I find myself suspicious of both the democratic and republican parties and their respective agendas and I'm looking for leaders who are just interested in managing and managing well. Perhaps Bloomberg is wants to distinguish himself as a leader minus all the political party drama. That would at least be my hope...for all future candidates.

  
  
• [9] John Celardo from Fanwood, NJ June 20, 2007 - 10:25AM

  Is it possible that Bloomberg is attempting to shake things up in the presidential race? Maybe he doesn't like what's happening among the current candidates, and is trying to influence the race in his own quirkey way.

  
  
• [10] Gary from Brooklyn June 20, 2007 - 10:26AM

  Mike is real good, but the west side stadium still sticks in my craw. It is a big enough error in judgement that I would hesitate to vote for him.

  Hillary?

  
  
• [11] PaxilNation from Manhattan June 20, 2007 - 10:29AM

  I would be very upset if Bloomberg took away votes from the Democratic nominee. And I bet he's afraid of that scenario, too. I don't think he'll run unless the Republican's nominee is extremely socially conservative, in which case he'll be taking votes from that party.

  
  
• [12] Robert from NYC June 20, 2007 - 10:29AM

  I would not vote for any of these folks but with regard to Bloomberg I don't think, as many seem to think, that CEOs and business/men/women make for good civic governing. There aren't very many good government people as it is in government today--two exceptions that come to mind Rep Jerry Nadler and NYS Sen Tom Duane. Bloomberg does well in NYC because there is no real "Government" in NYC, the city "Government" is really the city "Corporation" and that's why he succeeds here.

  
  
• [13] Mia DeLaPaz from New Jersey June 20, 2007 - 10:30AM

  I live in New Jersey and did not have a chance to vote any of the three possible candidates. I am a Democrat and am currently supporting Hillary Clinton but I have to say that Bloomberg is a tempting alternative especially after what he said yesterday. I feel that our politicians are more concerned with marketing themselves and winning elections rather than what should be the most important issue at hand; repairing America's broken soul. Repairing America's moral and economic standing is not a partisan issue and I would surely vote for an independent candidate who recognized this.

  
  
• [14] Marion Fine from Brooklyn June 20, 2007 - 10:30AM

  Ever since Bloomburg's first term when, in mid-winter, he closed two shelters for homeless dogs (reported on the front page of the NY News at the time)I vowed never to vote for him again. No wonder scientist Blaise Pascal said that the more he dealt with people the more he loved his dog! Better had he substituted politicians for "people."

  
  
• [15] Judy Norinsky from Astoria June 20, 2007 - 10:34AM

  Brian,

  Three points: First, While I don't like Bloomberg's privatizing tendencies, I do believe strongly in planYC. I don't know what his intention is with regard to running for higher office, but if he does run, I would question his commitment to acheiving long-term sustainability in NYC. What will happen to the plan if he deserts it mid-term? Why would he start this and then desert the process.

  Second, somehow I think he is too smart to be the perpetrator of yet another Perot/Nader effect on the election process by running as an independent.

  Third, I suspect he always planned to make this party switch. However, the timing of it is interesting.

  Thanks for the opportunity to comment,

  Judy Norinsky

  
  
• [16] Davy from New York, NY June 20, 2007 - 10:34AM

  Ideally, I would like to see Bloomberg as VP with the brief to sort out US policy in the Middle East, and Hagel as Defense Secretary in an Obama administration.

  If Clinton beat Obama to the Democractic nomination (and Guillani wins the Republican nomination), I would vote Bloomberg.

  And I must say a Bloomberg-Hagel or Hagel-Bloomberg ticket would make me reconsider my support for Obama.

  
  
• [17] Brenda Bee from Far Rockaway June 20, 2007 - 10:41AM

  For me to decide on who to vote for really depends on who their running partners are, but I would be more inclined to vote for Bloomberg at this point. How about a Bloomberg/Gore OR a Gore/Bloomberg ticket?! I'd vote for them for sure :)

  
  
• [18] Carol Ingersoll from northern NJ June 20, 2007 - 10:55AM

  I so agree with Julie (also from NJ) that Bloomberg is straightforward and behaves the most non partisan of any political figure I have seen and heard, in years. It amuses myself that I have been so enthused and continuously engaged in following his 'story' although I obviously could not vote for him. His style is so 'logical' and calmly measured and while anyone that powerful has to have a well developed ego, I have not felt the same drive to be adored above the behavior to get things done, that most politicians seem addicted to ultimately. I am a lifelong Democrat and worry that he might derail that candidate and in doing so, help the Republican party....that could be tragic. I also tend to think he would not let that happen in this 2008 election so not sure how this could play out. I do favor him as someone who could get seriously good things done and carry himself admirally Globally...we so need that now.

  
  
• [19] Marlene from Manhattan June 20, 2007 - 11:01AM

  I agree with comment # 6. I would feel reassured as a citizen and more confident of our country's status in International affairs if Bloomberg was in charge. He is a sensible man, a great mediator and negotiator, and I would vote for him as President without a doubt.

  
  
• [20] Sonia from Queens June 20, 2007 - 11:24AM

  I Know why Bloomberg changed parties. It was because of me! In a phone survey I was asked if I would support Bloomberg for President. I said "Yes," then "Definitely yes." Then I said "Wait a minute. He's a Republican. I have to change my answer."

  
  
• [21] Jerry Krase from brooklyn June 20, 2007 - 11:33AM

  he has a great chance of winning as the biggest problem for any candidate is raising enough money and he has no need for that. he also is fortunately up against the worst collection of presidential candidates since the last presidential election. his biggest problem will be getting people out to vote on an independent line if he doesn't get a cross endorsement.

  
  
• [22] timothy from Lower Manhattan June 20, 2007 - 11:34AM

  Excuse me, but after the disasters of the Bush administration, I would hope that amateur hour was over.

  Mr. Bloomberg has yet to fulfill his promise to put the people above special interests. And no PR campaign is going to convince me he's done that.

  New York has become a place for the wealthy to throw their money around. Business and many good people who can't afford Bloombergopolis have fled. The development boom is an ugly nightmare, with "affordable housing" remaining an empty promise. The streets see nothing but noise and disorder, awash with drunken slackers who parade from one tavern to the next, whether they are smoking or not. Hot on their heels are millions of rats.

  Fiorello Laguardia he is not. Mayor Mike will soon leave office; where we we be tomorrow?