Bloomberg For President

I am full circle back to where I started on the Presidency.

We need someone who isn’t hostage to either political party. We need someone who deeply understands markets and global economics. We need someone who has actually governed a large group of people.

McCain is allright but he doesn’t show any inkling that he understands economics. Hillary might be the best of the three but her own party has deep reservations about her. And Obama, as inspiring as he is, is looking more and more like the politician that he is.

I realize its not going to happen. Bloomberg has stated definitively that he’s not running.

But if you think about our country’s problems, our weakening balance sheet, our red ink stained P&L, our gridlock in washington, our quagmire in the middle east, and our decline in geopolitical standing, who would you choose out of the four of them to lead us out of the mess?

It’s no contest in my mind.


Comments (Archived):

  1. jasoncalacanis

    couldn’t agree more. The country is facing very hard times, and mike is the most qualified. Run Mike Run! It’s not too late!

  2. Dave Tong

    Could never happen. Politicians talk big about democracy and freedom but in reality the US election process is tightly controlled by the two ruling parties. If any Middle-Eastern country adopted the US system they would be rightly criticised for unfairly excluding candidates.Just look at the tactics the Dems have used against Nader.

  3. stone

    I couldn’t agree more, Fred. We’re are in serious trouble economically and this is not hyperbole. Talk to any person that fully understands Wall Street and they will tell you that no one really knows how low we can go. When white-glove firms like Bear Sterns all but go under things are treacherous out there. Someone like Michael Bloomberg has the credibility and intellectual capacity to fix some of these problems.I’ve been arguing on this blog for months now that Obama isn’t qualified to be president. This is obviously an unpopular opinion. Our economic condition now makes me question my candidate — McCain — for the same reasons you’ve described.We need a real business person to help fix these problems. I’m afraid for the first time in my life that even my cash hiding in muni-bonds or cash-equivalent instruments aren’t safe. I’m thinking about alternative places to hide my money.

    1. S.t

      Imagine how many ‘Ashley’s’ Bloomberg has in his closet.

    2. fredwilson

      I know how you feel but I still believe in treasuriesFred

  4. Krish

    The chances of Bloomberg running for President is non existent. If I have to select from the three, I would definitely not consider the war monger in the name of McCain. Between Hillary and Obama, I will tend towards Obama, in spite of his shortcomings, because Hillary is very divisive. We don’t need another divisive person in the white house.

  5. S.t

    Bloomberg?Wrong again Fred. Soory.Anyone who wants a bullcrap ’emissions tax’ has no shot.(p.s. — you gave up pretty quickly on Senator Obama. You wanna talk about? Haha.)

    1. fredwilson

      I didn’t give up on anyone

  6. Andrew Hoppin

    The President doesn’t need to be the Economist in Chief. She or he needs to:1) Hire brilliant principled economists and managers for the top economic jobs at the Fed and Treasury, and2) Avoid creating new policy (war) that wastes hundreds of billions and makes the job of the economic professionals more difficult, and3) Avoid undermining sound economic policy by caving in to special interests that may be particularly threatened by specific policies, and4) Keep national morale high as potentially painful consequences of sound long-term economic policy measures are implemented.I trust all four candidates on item 1) above– we don’t need Bloomberg in order to have great economists running the country again. I trust Bloomberg and Obama on 2) and 3). Neither has shown much propensity to pander, in spite of one being a businessperson and the other being a politician. And I trust Obama alone on 4)… Bloomberg lacks the charisma required to pull off the role of de facto Chief Morale Officer of the nation– and I think we’re going to need it.

    1. S.t

      Andrew, you ‘…trust Obama on …’ you’re kidding, right? The guy’s been going to hate rallies for 20yrs.The title of Obama’s book “THE AUDACITY OF HOPE” was lifted from a ‘Rev.’ Jeremiah Wright sermon.Sen. Obama should withdraw from the race for president, and resign from the US Senate.

      1. charlie crystle

        Ridiculously said, S.t. You’re calling sermons hate rallies? Nice.

        1. S.t

          when a preacher rails agaist “The US of KKK-A”, etc., etc., …why? are you down w/ the movement?

  7. Why am I reading this?

    Isn’t eight years of Corporate America’s last pick enough? Another four… no thanks. CEOs seldom do well in governing… it’s a different environment requiring a different skill set. Just like the skill and motivation to make loads of money from other people’s labor doesn’t seem to translate into sane political blogging.But, then again, you see something positive in McCain, one of the worst panderers going. God save all the poor souls downstream from the likes of us.

  8. Lee Wilson

    Well our current President – who meets the criteria you spelled out has just worked out swell…Understand global economics – Harvard MBA, Oil Executive – checkGoverned a large group of people – Governor of Texas – checkWe don’t hire Venture Capitalists to do heart surgery – why should we hire a business man to run our country? Its a different skill set and the evidence from the current administration is pretty compelling that it doesn’t work. The way you bully people around in a boardroom and executive suite doesn’t translate to government as well as most business people fantasize it would.Bloomberg has done a credible job in NY, but I’d argue that a city with its focus on retail services is more akin to a large corporation than a nation. It just doesn’t transfer.Besides – he is a Republican. Since 1980 this group of “fiscal conservatives” have been proud authors of the red ink stained national P&L, the mid-east quagmire, and our geopolitical decline through unilateralism. I wouldn’t trust one of them with any shiny and sharp objects, much less our national well being, until they come to their senses as a party. A little time in the wilderness will do wonders for their common sense.

    1. michael

      i tend to agree with your assessment — especially the ‘ceo administration’ meme others have seemed to have forgotten — but i would point out that hizzoner switched to independent in the summer of ’07.

    2. Josh

      I agree — the success or failure of the economy usually exists in a correlative, not causal, relationship to the current sitting President. In other words, the President doesn’t need to be an economist to oversee a successful economy. What the U.S. needs now is a PR person — someone with charisma who will be effective at restoring relations with the rest of the world, and with that, our credibility as an economic and political superpower.

    3. Guest

      Lee Wilson, excellent points! I am afraid that it is exactly the MBA mindset of GWB that got us into this mess. Bush is such a terrible public speaker (like his father) that people tend to paint this carricature of him, which is inaccurate; getting an MBA from Harvard is challenging. Some also say that his degree doesn’t count, because he got it as “daddy’s boy” . That’s not true, either: GHWBush was just an amabassador to China at the time, not such a tremendous distinction, after all all of these HBS students come from upper class families.The “Bush is an idiot” storyline is very simplistic and obscures what is really troubling: the first President formally trained to “manage” in the best management school in the world turned out to be the worst president in history!Thank goodnes we dodged Mitt Romney! What a disater that would have been!

  9. michael

    there’s no doubt that on the pure economic level, bloomberg is a force. his knowledge of monetary arcana alone would make an alan greenspan speech seem like reading ‘dick and jane’. but he’s just not electable, as his exploratory confab more or less proved.that said, he would make an excellent advisor or cabinet member — a role in which he could really flex his muscles. fwiw, there was an interesting article in the daily news about an obama-bloomberg ticket: without it downsides, to be sure, but an interesting thought experiment nonetheless.

  10. McLarty

    I’m Canadian and I agree with you completely. It’s funny how much American votes are going to actually matter to the rest of the world. sigh……the responsibility of being a leader.

  11. David J. Garcia

    Are you friggin’ nuts or just a fool? Bloomberg another “populist” billionaire (remember Ross Perot). Legislative experience-head of a large investment firm, 1.5 terms as mayor of NYC (the latest MBA President has been so successful). Foreign policy- NONE, Military Experience-NONE. Judicial experience- Sued for sexual harassment. “Vision”-Unknown. It is typical for people to believe that those considered “experts” in the same field as them are the best leaders. Doctors think an MD would be an excellent President as do Scientist, economist, bankers, brokers police, firemen, etc. The process of running for President is quirky, foolish, arduous and necessary to properly “vet” a candidate so the electorate can make an informed(and sometimes mistaken) decision. Mr. Bloomberg and his supporters have had plenty of time to make the case for his candidacy, they have also had plenty of time to show why he would be a better candidate than either of the candidates from the Republican and Democratic party, they haven’t done it.

  12. awilensky

    Obama is every bit the machine politician that Clinton is. The hyperbole that has surrounded him is reminiscent of the Jim Jones tragedy. Clinton is an egoist and also a machine politician. Mcain is a deeply flawed man that has such a legacy of corruption, that it is almost a tragi-comedic event, nay a comedia, that he even made it this far a a senator.The fact that any candidate must be bank-rolled to the tune of 100’s of Milions means that the era of citizens being represented by peers has been long ago killed off.We are stuck with a political class of professional politicians that care for nothing, save getting elected, all while burying their troubled past under denials, lies, and half-truths.Obama may be the sharpest blade, but he is disingenuous, an empty suit, and not at all the savior that others make him out to be. it would be far better if he just came clean and admitted to the worst that could be discovered about him, eg, the Rev. Wright debacle.We are in big trouble – with Obama at the helm, that trouble goes beyond just not having a sincere representative of the citizenry, it will extend to tragic economic proportions. We have now reaped eight years of near criminal conduct of the Bush administration, what we have to look forward to is more tragedy if the current field of candidates on either side, is the best we can do.

    1. nickdavis

      >>The hyperbole that has surrounded him is reminiscent of the Jim Jones tragedy.Then,>>We are in big trouble – with Obama at the helm, that trouble goes beyond just not having a sincere representative of the citizenry, it will extend to tragic economic proportions.Hyperbole much?

      1. awilensky

        Yeah, heated, no doubt on my part, but I’m not running for President. The man is chock full of stuff and nonsense. His followers are virtually blind to his troubling legacy. They are, as a group, candidates from a prescient vision of the dissonant future and the end of the America as we knew it.

    2. fredwilson

      I would argue with the tone but maybe not the sentiment of this commentOut of curiosity, do you like anyone for the job?Fred

      1. awilensky

        You are asking, me, Fred? Damn. I’ve had a year of folks rejecting every piece of venture and professional advice, and now, a VC is asking me who should be President of USA. Damn.I want a person who is not from the professional political class. I want someone who is not too tied to the corrupt side of the finance industry, but who knows what makes business tick.I want a retired CEO of a major multinational who didnt cash out with a obscene parachute. Someone who, at a later stage in life, turned to good deeds.I’m thinking Paul O’Neil. But he old now.It seems that I am reconciled, at the age of 49, to seeing my beloved country pass through a phase of becoming 2nd, 3rd, or lower in world standing. After almost a decade where the carefully placed republican machine has tuned the laws and steering of the SEC and all things regulatory to make it so that the earning power of the skilled middle class has been increasingly pushed up the ladder to the CEO suite.All the while, the USA, in past decades after WWII, the LENDER to the world, has become its horrible debtor – 1 billion a day flows from the Chinese Gov treasury into Fed Notes.Every galon we buy from OPEC is partially reinvested by sovereign funds in once august American financial institutions and the flower of our diminishing industrial base – all this mind you, after we have gutted our precious mid-sized specialty manufacturing that actually made this country a net exporter.Paulsen was on CNN; he is a liar, we do not pursue strong dollar policies – we import more than export, and we allow the worst corporate graft in lending that we will ever see. What a horrible legacy of poor republican monetary stewardship.Our educational depth is corroding as EU and Asian countries give away free university education to their best and most ambitious students, while we, America the stupid and expensive, prices some of our brightest out of the higher education market.Who for President – I honestly don’t have an answer – someone wise, humble, and unafraid to serve a sole., unpopular, single term.

        1. fredwilson

          Thanks. Humility and politics have rarely gone hand in hand thoughFred

        2. S.t

          There’s a new guy running the state of Louisiana we should keep our eye on — Gov. Bobby Jindal.My side has high hopes for him, & I know the whole country is rooting for New Orleans.

          1. fredwilson

            Out of curiosity, what is your side st?We all know what you don’t agree withBut its not clear to me what you do agree withFred

          2. S.t

            anyone w/ an (R)

          3. fredwilson

            At least I am open minded enough to think about voting for a republican. Or an indepedent like Bloomberg.Party orthodoxy is like religious orthodoxyVery dangerousFred

          4. lance

            Amen to that. And I am having a hard time making a choice among the three remaining candidates. I would vote for Bloomberg based on what I know today over those running

  13. nickdavis

    Atrios, as usual, put it well:There are certainly elements of our modern political system that we can all object to, but contempt for the wishes of voters by elites is something we should all shun. Voters may not always be as perfectly informed as we would like them to be, but this democracy thing is rather important as the alternative is probably, you know, a Bloomberg Plutocracy.

    1. fredwilson

      Well its true that we get the elected officials we deserveBut maybe we should try for something better given our recent track recordFred

    2. Guest

      Excellent, if the only problem was that “voters may not always be as perfectly informed”. It goes deeper than that: voters are actively misinformed, or rather manipulated. If one can get rid of all the political consultants, strategists, marketing experts, etc. and let the candidates talk in simple words what they think and who they are, I would fully trust the collective wisdom of the American people.Yet, when the methods and strategies that manipulate people’s mind into buying crap that they don’t need for “four easy payments of $29.99” is employed to sell a political candidate…I don’t have a solution, just observing that modern marketing is more effective in manipulating people’s thoughts than even the most despicable Orwellian methods one can think of…

  14. Alex Iskold

    I’ve been saying this for month Fred, and I can’t agree more with you!To all of those who are saying that president does not need to be economist I have 2 points:1) Neither does he need to be a lawyer2) Country should be run as a company, not law office or military camp. So we do need an economist.Alex

  15. Jon Barbour

    No supporter of apartheid regime, gets my vote. Israel is a liability for us Americans. The sooner we cut our losses the better we are.Bloomberg would bend backwards to accommodate Israel’s genocidal regime and its sponsor AIPAC.Screw him and his cohorts.

    1. S.t

      …anybody else wanna touch this one?

    2. awilensky

      Israel is a paradise and an almost perfect representative government for the Jewish populace and the citizen Arabs that live there. They have been incredibly solicitous of the guest Palestinians, whom they have endeavored to kill as few of their terrorist members as possible.What other government allows such an amount of trade and support that israel does with a populace that routinely attacks it citizens? A lesser republic would have long ago paved over the Arab territory.

      1. fredwilson

        I share this view.What’s with the zionist apartheid comments this blog has been attracting in the past couple days?I have mixed feelings about israel’s approach to the palestinian issue to be honest but I don’t agree at all that israel is to blame. I think if the palesinian’s would make real peace with israel, we’d see how good a neighbor israel would beFred

        1. Jon Barbour

          “I think if the palesinian’s would make real peace with israel, we’d see how good a neighbor israel would be”REALLY? so you okay with their ethnic cleansing, brutally murdering Palestinian children and bringing hollocaust to Palestinians as an Israeli official alluded to?or you are just too ignorant and comfortable to go with all encompassing zionist agenda of our media?Last time I checked the ratio of Palestinian to Israeli casualties were 900 to. Repeat after me: for 900 Palestinians who were brutally murdered by apartheid state of Israel, only 1 Israeli died.Sorry dude, no love for a candidate supporting Israel.

        2. Gus

          Fred, These are existential, life-or-death matters for Palestinians and Israelis alike. They deserve dispassionate, in-depth discussion, to ascertain the truth as far as that might be possible — because the U.S. should have learned by now how dangerous it is not to examine such serious charges when the matter at hand falls within the ugly realm of crimes against humanity and other such deviance, inhumanity, and criminality.

      2. a name to comment

        “guest palestinians”, awilensky? u gotta be effin kidding. know your history, boy.on the main topic, the leader in a democracy represents the average, mediocre in that democracy, there’s no way around it. no sane people would run for such a job when they can have a good life making money someplace else. all-in, obama is next in the white house…and at least he could save some face, but the first lady? OMG the humanity…or should I say tha humanity…

      3. David J. Garcia

        “GUEST”? Many of those “guests” families lived in the area now known as Israel for generations. They had there lands taken from them by the British and given to the Israeli settlers. And yes groups like Hamas, and the PLO have shown no regard for the civilians they have killed both Israeli and Arab, but that does not excuse the actions by the consecutive Israeli governments that treats those displaced Palestinians as second class citizens. Why does the “right of return” exist for a Russian who is Jewish but not for a Palestinian forced into a refugee camp in Lebanon. By the way, more civilian Palestinians and Arabs have been killed by the Israeli Defense Force then have been killed by Hamas, the PLO, Islamic Jihad etc. There are elements of both the Likud and Palestinian movements who do not want peace. BTW-AIPAC and their Neo-Con brethren do not speak for all or most Jewish American (see Eric Alterman: The Nation (Some)Jews against Obama 3/24/08)Bloomberg loves the ego stroking of having his name mentioned, but does not want to do the work. He became a Republican because he couldn’t win the Democratic rimary in NYC, the kissed Rudy’s ass after 9-11 to win the election. What beneficial decisions did Bloomberg make that Mark Green wouldn’t have made?

        1. awilensky

          You dummys! Guest Palestinians. Israel seats Arab members of Knesset. They are remnants of the Balfour Declaration. Moses! Jordanians!Get with the program. A lesser democracy would have wiped the whole guest Arab population off the land, but Israel tries and tries to tolerate them, lets in tradesmen and produce, despite repeated bombings and rocket attacks. They even evacuated an entire population from Gaza, for what? More mistreatment for their benevolence.You are too easy. Ive walked that border.

          1. awilensky

            hey, blind men, dont reply to this anymore, just remember:Every historical Jewish community was unceremoniously violently driven out of every Arab country, long before 1948. And Iran, too. So shut up. Or put your hands up for 1 on 1 fight at any place you choose……tel Aviv is a shining city, where Johnny Walker Red flows like the Jordan River…Get myself a condo in Kiriat Gan, with a rifle and a Bowie Knife shiv….er.We are not giving the land up and the apologists for the misguided GUEST Palestinian cause better get real. Then we can be friends. Try me in person. Try me.

          2. awilensky

            You guys will bite at anything. Im as left wing as they come, and I regularly berate my friends that are active in the upper echelons of the IDF for blindly following bad policies.But we are not giving the land up.. Gaza was a test that the Palestinians FLUNKED.

          3. Jon Barbour

            Flunked? or Israel bomb the shit out of that place with UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT AND APPROVAL OF OUR GOVERNMENT?Go back to your med asshat.

        2. S.t

          So, Fred…there goes the ‘Bloomberg for President’ idea, huh?I have nothing against Bloomberg — very successful business man, good chief executive. But do you really want to be having these Israel-Palestinian argument when Americans have to deal with more important ‘American’ problems? The Arab-Israeli thing is never-ending. Seriously, who wants the PLO or Hamas blowing up buses in Georgetown just because the US President is Jewish?

          1. Jon Barbour

            How about AIPAC infilitrating Pentagon and CIA to get access to the classified documents to get more leverage in killing more Palestinians? or completely changing the foreign policy of our sovereign country to accommodate an illegal occupation that MUST END?Hamas is an elected party; If we believe in democracy we should respect the choices of Palestinian people. NO IF and BUTS.No vote for Israel supporter(s)

          2. S.t

            but it was OK when the UN was giving up Israeli positions to Palestinian military?

  16. Yaacov

    I’m writing Bloomberg in especially since we all know NY is going to go Democratic.

  17. poetslife

    Bloomberg is an aristocrat who wants to enjoy the perks of office without getting dirty with the commoners. He’s a New Yorker who would never measure up beyond the Hudson. Let me be the king of New York where they can toast him in Manhattan and feel superior. The aging New York Times will celebrate him.

  18. S.t

    Bear Stearns sold to JPMorgan for a lousy $2/shrUnReal

  19. an observer

    McCain is very excited about spending blood and treasure on new wars, and wishes to continue the plutocratic economic policies of the current administration. No deal there.Bloomberg, like any other businessperson turned politician. would wind up effecting no more change than any conventional politician. CEOs don’t get consensus and coalition building. Bloomberg has had an easy job in NYC, like his predecessor, for one reason – flush city coffers thanks to the economy (no thanks to mayoral policy).Clinton or Obama at least bring to the table mainstream public policy proposals that more or less balance the interests and power of regular people, the private sector, and government. You don’t get that with the current right-wing of the R party, nor do you get that with CEOs like Bloomberg.

    1. fredwilson

      What people forget about Bloomberg is he’s not really a CEO. He’s an entrepreneur who risked a lot to get where he isFred

      1. stone

        I agree completely having seen him upclose for many years. Michael Bloomberg is a guy that likes to fix things. He’s an entrepreneur, not just a CEO. He’s also pragmatic, not political. And, he doesn’t have any strange real estate deals with crooks I promise you that. He’s an extremely schrewd person. I think his brand of politics would be welcomed in DC.

      2. nickdavis

        Great, but how do entrepreneurial skills translate into presidential skills? I’m not convinced on that link.We have chosen a political process in this country to accomplish our goals. Political processes need politicians or people with great political skills – love them or hate them. Sure, many entrepreneurs can get things done, but in an environment like DC? Our system is far from perfect, but it’s the system we have, and the system within which the President must work (unless you want more of what we have now).My guess is that doctors think a doctor would make a great president. Engineers think an engineer would. You get the point.So, take an extremely complex environment like our current one, and tell me the entrepreneurial skills that would make Bloomberg so effective? If anything, the whole Unity08 movement shows that Bloomberg wasn’t popular enough to make it, and in the end, that’s all that matters in our system. The website http://www.draftmichaelbloo… which is now non-operational, got something like 3000 signatures when it was up – and it had received tons of national publicity.

        1. fredwilson

          He’s done a great job for nyc. I think hed do a great job for our countryHe’s made the transition from entrepreneur to politician very wellIts too bad the country doesn’t realize what an amazing leader he isFred

          1. Jeff Judge

            I’m sure they’d realize it if he ran. Obama faced this issue too. If he ran, he’d have my vote.

  20. greenskeptic

    Bloomberg in ’08. Bring on the entrepreneurial presidency. We’ve had enough of autocrats and bureaucrats.

  21. Todd Savage

    100% in agreement with you, Fred. I would get behind Bloomberg in a second.

  22. Dominic

    Agreed! Bloomberg would get my vote hands down…

    1. Jason Krebs

      I would actually get involved in this ridiculous political system of ours, to help get Bloomberg elected.

      1. fredwilson

        The people who don’t read blogs on sundays are all for bloomberg. What does that tell us?Fred

  23. Gerald Buckely

    Fred, if you can lead a horse to water but can’t make him drink how do you get a Bloomberg to enthusiastically run for President of the US?All for it. But “how?” seems to be the question du jour. He has to want it. And the three running definitely want it.

  24. Myles Fuchs

    Fred,re Bloomberg for PresidentYes!!! My thoughts exactly.But as you said, it ain’t gonna happen.Best regards,Myles Fuchs

  25. Myles Fuchs

    Fred & Company,Though I was alone in my thinking.Maybe Fred should start a Petition to Elect Mayor Bloomberg?We can dream ‘-)Myles

  26. Guest

    Here’s one problem with Bloomberg:…We may be ready for a Black President or a Female President, Jewish President will be OK, too… I am not sure we are ready for a Short President… Height is probably only matched by Hair in importance…

  27. S.t

    Sean Hannity is to Barack Obama what Meredith Whitney was to Bear Stearns.

  28. Frozen Tundra

    Not a tremendous Bloomie fan myself; I think he is an elitist w/ a tin ear as mayor. Still, better than any hack the democrats in NY could produce.Bloomie would have ZERO play for President.Still, b/c of his no nonsense style and generally sound business acumen, I think he would make a good VP candidate for McCain, who seems to be a complete dunce on the economy (not that Hillary or Obama would be any better; they would be far worse).

  29. Frozen Tundra

    Jon Barbour … take your racist, demented crap elsewhere.

  30. Frozen Tundra

    Funny how the Israel / Jew haters are completely silent about the genocidal terrorists of Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. And the Juden Rein Arab countries.And the enlightened tolerant country of Saudi Arabia where not only is it Jew-free; but also oppresses every other religion and women too, while promoting all sorts of medeival practices.Where do you nut jobs get your hatred of Jews from anyway ?

  31. Frozen Tundra

    McCain isn’t exactly tall either.And neither is Hillary.

  32. Antman

    Although philosphically it sounds good, I’m not sure a “non” politician could get anything done. Is the President really the person pulling the strings, or is it the Washington insiders that have been there for years. Look at the Bush White House, some of those cats go back to Nixon. Intriguing, but not convinced he could execute.