Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If he loses, well, he loses. That would be the people's verdict.
But I suspect he'll win again if he runs for a fourth time because the politicians lining up to succeed him is, quite frankly, lousy.
The front-runner, for instance, Christine Quinn--doesn't he remind you of Reese Witherspoon's irritating character in the movie Election? I don't think he has ever worked a day of her life outside politics or taxpayer-funded jobs. And that pretty much goes for the other nonentities and hacks who will be competing with her.
New York hasn't been this well-run since the days of La Guardia. Why give up Bloomberg and ruin a good thing?
But if Bloomberg runs for president, that's another thing. What New York loses, America gains.
I read a medical report once that described how the human brain is only capable of receiving a certain amount of awful, whiny frequencies before serious damage occurs. So what you're proposing is borderline criminal.
For the same reason we don't let Presidents run for 4 terms, or 5 terms, or 8 terms...because absolute power corrupts absolutely.
There is too much power in incumbancy and that is the single bvest reason to toss the bums out regularly.. Bad enough we have to have rabid Senators like Strom Thurmond sitting permanently for a half century til age 101, drooling between votes while filling his diapers.
Bloomblerg BOUGHT his last term in violation of the law...time for him to go BUH-bye.
Pat Moynihan was Senator for 24 years, and he was great. And before him, Jacob Javits was Senator for 18 years. Sol Bloom was congressman for the Upper East Side for, what, 30 years, and he was a very good congressman.
Charles Rangel has been congressman for 30-plus year. OK, yes, that proves that power corrupts.
But we're not talking about a situation like the ditator Trujillo in the Dominican Republic or Papa Doc Duvalier in Haiti. If people get tired of Bloomberg or anyone, well, they can easily vote him/her out of office. But so long as they like the incumbent, why shouldn't they be allowed to vote for retention.
And, by the way, the two-term limit on Presidents was the doing of vindictive Republicans who hated Franklin Roosevelt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kefir King
For the same reason we don't let Presidents run for 4 terms, or 5 terms, or 8 terms...because absolute power corrupts absolutely.
There is too much power in incumbancy and that is the single bvest reason to toss the bums out regularly.. Bad enough we have to have rabid Senators like Strom Thurmond sitting permanently for a half century til age 101, drooling between votes while filling his diapers.
Bloomblerg BOUGHT his last term in violation of the law...time for him to go BUH-bye.
His worth is VERY much a matter of opinion. He presided over the single greatest slashing of Social Security since it's inception so in my book he was a slimey two-faced pig. He was in the Senate precisely one term too long. But 2 terms (12 years) for any Senator are quite enough especially since we decree 2 terms are enough for a president (usually 8 years unless his predecessor was removed by death or conviction.)
Quote:
But we're not talking about a situation like the ditator Trujillo in the Dominican Republic or Papa Doc Duvalier in Haiti. If people get tired of Bloomberg or anyone, well, they can easily vote him/her out of office. But so long as they like the incumbent, why shouldn't they be allowed to vote for retention.
Oh yeah, democracy. I sometimes must remind myself that there are still people who belive in fantasies like that. Perhaps it's the influence of the Xmas season.
If he loses, well, he loses. That would be the people's verdict.
But I suspect he'll win again if he runs for a fourth time because the politicians lining up to succeed him is, quite frankly, lousy.
The front-runner, for instance, Christine Quinn--doesn't he remind you of Reese Witherspoon's irritating character in the movie Election? I don't think he has ever worked a day of her life outside politics or taxpayer-funded jobs. And that pretty much goes for the other nonentities and hacks who will be competing with her.
New York hasn't been this well-run since the days of La Guardia. Why give up Bloomberg and ruin a good thing?
But if Bloomberg runs for president, that's another thing. What New York loses, America gains.
Geez, thanks. I kinda threw up in my mouth at the thought of Emperor Bloomberg getting another term. Way to ruin my Sunday, pal ...
Please tell me this entire thread is a joke. I know it's not April Fools for another few months, but come on now... Bloomberg is a billionaire (richest person in NYC) elitist with a nasty attitude who doesn't need to be in politics. Hizzoner doesn't need anymore time in office.
If he loses, well, he loses. That would be the people's verdict.
But I suspect he'll win again if he runs for a fourth time because the politicians lining up to succeed him is, quite frankly, lousy.
The front-runner, for instance, Christine Quinn--doesn't he remind you of Reese Witherspoon's irritating character in the movie Election? I don't think he has ever worked a day of her life outside politics or taxpayer-funded jobs. And that pretty much goes for the other nonentities and hacks who will be competing with her.
New York hasn't been this well-run since the days of La Guardia. Why give up Bloomberg and ruin a good thing?
But if Bloomberg runs for president, that's another thing. What New York loses, America gains.
If he loses, well, he loses. That would be the people's verdict.
But I suspect he'll win again if he runs for a fourth time because the politicians lining up to succeed him is, quite frankly, lousy.
The front-runner, for instance, Christine Quinn--doesn't he remind you of Reese Witherspoon's irritating character in the movie Election? I don't think he has ever worked a day of her life outside politics or taxpayer-funded jobs. And that pretty much goes for the other nonentities and hacks who will be competing with her.
New York hasn't been this well-run since the days of La Guardia. Why give up Bloomberg and ruin a good thing?
But if Bloomberg runs for president, that's another thing. What New York loses, America gains.
Ed Koch's defeat in 1989 shows that incumbents can lose.
Ron Lauder's miserable showing in the Republican primaries in 1989 shows that money can't win elections if the candidate or product is lousy. (Ditto with Ford's Edsel or Cherry Coke.) Lauder spent so much money and got so few votes that the joke was that he should just have taken out to dinner at Le Cirque every single one of his voters.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
