1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Bill Bradley for President

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Boom_70, Jan 9, 2008.

  1. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Watching the ex Senator on Hannity and Combs. It's is a shame that he is not in the race. He would move to the top of the list for canidatez most qualified to be president.
  2. Chi City 81

    Chi City 81 Guest

    Is he qualified? Sure.

    But he couldn't win the nom eight years ago, and his influence has shrunk considerably since.
  3. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

  4. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

  5. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    If Bloomberg had stayed with the GOP he might be cruising to the nomination through that butter-soft field.

    The last thing the Democrats need is more qualified candidates.

    But, Boom, I was a Bradley guy in 2000, if it makes you feel better. He was gone before I had a chance to vote for him, however.
  6. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    See that's the problem with the system as it is now. A lot of good canidates get weeded out before most of country has a chance to vote for them.

    We are all at the mercy of Iowa and New Hampshire.
  7. crimsonace

    crimsonace Active Member

    Bradley and Richardson are two VERY solid Democratic candidates ... I don't agree much with Bradley, but he is a statesman and someone who would be a good chief executive who would govern from center-left.

    Richardson ... same thing. With the star power of Obama & Hillary (and, to a lesser degree, Edwards), he never really had a chance. But as a governor, he's very well-respected, and I think he could manage to heal some of the partisan divide that exists in Washington. I've said it before -- I'm a pretty hard-core Republitarian, but I hope the Dem nominee picks Richardson as their VP candidate, because I think he has a lot to offer the country, and I'd like to see him get his due in future elections.
  8. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    That's the thing about Richardson -- nearly everyone agrees he'd be pretty good at most government jobs that you could put him up for.

    But he's an awful candidate, at least on the national stage. People gave him a chance, they really did, and he just could not move his number at all.
  9. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    Are you drunk? He wouldn't last 10 minutes in a Republican primary, where many voters prefer their candidates right of center on at least some issues. He was a Republican because when he was ready to run for mayor, the Democratic side was already filled with the usual pack of losers, and there was less traffic in the right lane.
  10. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    He can't be any further to the left than Romney or Giuliani, depending on which issues you care about.

    I'm thinking there are quite a few GOP power brokers who would welcome Bloomberg with open arms about now. But I could be wrong. Huckamania and Mittmentum and all that.
  11. ATLienCP

    ATLienCP Member


    Bloomberg as an independent candidate could make things entertaining.

    What side would it hurt most? Democrats?
  12. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    He is. Romney right now did his mea culpa and is as conservative as anyone in the race, probably moreso. Guilliani has his issues in each direction. Bloomberg is an unabashed liberal, though he did negotiate tough against the union and impose standards on the school system. Is that what you mean? Not much.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page