Suitably Flip

(Probably) Not If I Can Help It

The Observer weighs in on Bloomberg's prospects to get on the Republican line as he campaigns for the first of his potentially endless mayoral terms beyond the two that everyone believed to be the limit.

Manhattan Republican chair Jennifer Saul is not expected to make a decision in the next few days about whether to allow Michael Bloomberg to run in their primary. "We will do our screening process before the assembled district leaders and members of the executive committee," said the organization's executive director, Jason Weingartner. "A vote will take place afterwards." Those screening meetings historically have taken place in the first week of May, which means that the potentially tie-breaking decision of Saul and the committee—she would be the third of the five city chairs to approve Bloomberg's participation in the G.O.P. primary for mayor—may not be made for weeks.

As one of those district leaders, I'll certainly be delighted to hear what hizzoner has to say (assuming he comes in person to make his case), but I can't say I'll be going in favorably disposed.

A Democrat until he first ran for mayor eight years ago, Bloomberg conspicuously disavowed his nascent Republican status in 2007 (amid rampant rumors he was exploring a self-financed, half-billion dollar bid for the Presidency), saying:

“I have filed papers with the New York City Board of Elections to change my status as a voter and register as unaffiliated with any political party,” he said in a statement issued while he was in California delivering political speeches. “Although my plans for the future haven t changed, I believe this brings my affiliation into alignment with how I have led and will continue to lead our city.”

In the current political environment, I'm loath to advocate against anyone who wants to participate in Republican politics.  But in light of Bloomberg's history of calculated party shifting, his jaw-dropping track record of nanny statism, and his correct acknowledgment that his policies have not been in keeping with any brand of Republican (nor, frankly, even mainstream Democratic) ideology, rolling over for sake of notching up an electoral win (an admittedly rare event, as no Manhattan resident has any Republican representation at any level of government) seems nearly as cynical as the mayor's penchant for expedient party affiliation.

As noted, I'm not making up my mind before hearing his argument (and my opinion may well carry minimal weight during the screening process anyway), but shame on Bloomberg for fooling us once in 2001.  In the words of our erstwhile President, "Fool me... we can't get fooled again."

Comments

(Probably) Not If I Can Help It

The Observer weighs in on Bloomberg's prospects to get on the Republican line as he campaigns for the first of his potentially endless mayoral terms beyond the two that everyone believed to be the limit.

Manhattan Republican chair Jennifer Saul is not expected to make a decision in the next few days about whether to allow Michael Bloomberg to run in their primary. "We will do our screening process before the assembled district leaders and members of the executive committee," said the organization's executive director, Jason Weingartner. "A vote will take place afterwards." Those screening meetings historically have taken place in the first week of May, which means that the potentially tie-breaking decision of Saul and the committee—she would be the third of the five city chairs to approve Bloomberg's participation in the G.O.P. primary for mayor—may not be made for weeks.

As one of those district leaders, I'll certainly be delighted to hear what hizzoner has to say (assuming he comes in person to make his case), but I can't say I'll be going in favorably disposed.

A Democrat until he first ran for mayor eight years ago, Bloomberg conspicuously disavowed his nascent Republican status in 2007 (amid rampant rumors he was exploring a self-financed, half-billion dollar bid for the Presidency), saying:

“I have filed papers with the New York City Board of Elections to change my status as a voter and register as unaffiliated with any political party,” he said in a statement issued while he was in California delivering political speeches. “Although my plans for the future haven t changed, I believe this brings my affiliation into alignment with how I have led and will continue to lead our city.”

In the current political environment, I'm loath to advocate against anyone who wants to participate in Republican politics.  But in light of Bloomberg's history of calculated party shifting, his jaw-dropping track record of nanny statism, and his correct acknowledgment that his policies have not been in keeping with any brand of Republican (nor, frankly, even mainstream Democratic) ideology, rolling over for sake of notching up an electoral win (an admittedly rare event, as no Manhattan resident has any Republican representation at any level of government) seems nearly as cynical as the mayor's penchant for expedient party affiliation.

As noted, I'm not making up my mind before hearing his argument (and my opinion may well carry minimal weight during the screening process anyway), but shame on Bloomberg for fooling us once in 2001.  In the words of our erstwhile President, "Fool me... we can't get fooled again."