Paul Army!!

So at that press conference yesterday, Ron Paul urged his supporters to back third-party candidates. Most of them joined him onstage, except for Bob Barr, who then turned around and asked Paul to be his running mate.

Libertarian presidential nominee Bob Barr, the former Georgia congressman, rejected comparisons to Cynthia McKinney on Wednesday and made a bid for Ron Paul’s undivided support.

Paul, who this year sought the GOP presidential nomination, told reporters at a Washington press conference that the two-party system is broken. He urged Americans to vote for one of the third-party candidates running, including McKinney, who is also a former member of Congress from Georgia [...]

McKinney, the Green Party nominee for president, appeared with Paul at the National Press Club, as did independent candidate Ralph Nader and Constitution Party nominee Chuck Baldwin.

Barr, who served in the U.S. House as a Republican from Cobb County, was scheduled to be there, too, but changed his mind.

“Bob had a press conference right after that one,” said campaign spokesman Andrew Davis. “He didn’t want to dilute his message by being on the same stage as people like Cynthia McKinney, who is completely opposite of what a Libertarian is." [...]

Barr sent Paul a letter Tuesday asking him to be his vice presidential nominee. Barr already has a running mate, Wayne Root of Las Vegas. Root said in the letter he would step aside for Paul.

How much of a sad sack is Wayne Root?

I don't think that Paul will realistically join Bob Barr's ticket. But he unquestionably has a strong contingent of supporters, most of them from the paleoconservative Republican side of the aisle, who are receptive to his messages, and who I believe will end up voting third party. And as we know, he's on the ballot for President in Montana, where he could grab as much as 5-7% IMO.

Most amusing about this is that the McCain campaign called begging for his support, and Paul stiff-armed them. I didn't hear him say that Obama was looking for an endorsement. This news definitely hurts McCain on the margins, but that might be all that is needed to sink him.

Mike, You're Stupid And Ugly And Nobody Likes You

Turns out that people who endlessly prattle on about how everyone should stop with the democracy and just allow a billionaire plutocrat to rule us aren't very well-liked by anyone.

Yes, someone who does not need voters, donors, or political parties and who will instead act entirely in the interest of media elites is the only person who can truly pull this country together. It is a good thing he doesn’t need voters, since they don’t like him very much [...]

Michael Bloomberg is less popular than the top three Democrats and the top three Republicans running for President right now. He even has lower overall favorables than Ron Paul. Fortunately, since he doesn’t think appealing to the voters is a worthy activity for elected officials, it actually seems like this low favorable rating was one of his goals.

Meanwhile, in his actual job, Bloomberg is preparing for massive budget cuts across city agencies, including $180 million out of the education budget, while keeping property tax cuts for the rich intact. He doesn't have any new ideas. Just the same tax-cut, spending-cut, callous conservatism, and no ask for sacrifice on the part of the taxpayers, no discussion that America is worth paying for.

He's just another stooge, and an unaccountable one at that.

Michael Bloomberg, Sit Down And Shut Up

No amount of your billion dollars is going to make anyone want to vote for you.

Over on his blog, Greg Mitchell flags a new Gallup Poll that probes these questions in some detail. The poll, which surveyed roughly 2,000 adults, finds:

* A startling 84% of respondents think there's a candidate running who would make a "good president."

* Nearly three in four -- 72% -- say that the candidates are talking about issues they "really care about."

* A solid majority -- 58% -- feel that one or more candidates has come up with "good ideas for solving the country's problems," a finding that runs directly counter to Bloomberg's frequent and self-serving criticism of the other candidates.

Gallup's conclusion? "The American public does not appear to believe it is important or necessary for an independent candidate outside of the traditional two major parties to step into the race in order to save the nation." That couldn't be clearer. Are you there, Dean Broder?

To the extent that there's even minor daylight for a third-party run, it comes from the opposite pole of the Broders of the world. It would be fiscally populist and socially conservative (think Huckabee or Lou Dobbs), not fiscally conservative and socially liberal. That position is already filled. A Bloomberg third party would probably not even be so much as a spoiler.

It's not David Broder's country. Sorry.

The Third-Party Question

Everybody's trying to read tea leaves, wondering if there would be an evangelical third-party run if the nominally pro-choice Rudy Giuliani were to take the Republican nomination. The latest signals are conflicting. Sam Brownback, whose support is so wide and deep that he just dropped out of the race in the middle of October, proclaimed himself much more confortable with Giuliani's views on abortion and particularly the appointing of "strict constructionist judges," which is code. The backlash from various sources suggests that Brownback's view is kind of unpopular, which is obvious, considering he's no longer in the race.

"There's obviously something more going on here than fidelity to the pro-life cause," said (Jim) Bopp, a legendary pro-life activist and lawyer who is an important voice for Romney because he vouches for his conservatism. "Brownback is angling for some personal political benefit by cozying up to Giuliani."

[...]

"I'll believe he supports Giuliani when I see it," FRC veep (Charmaine) Yoest says. "For the pro-life movement as a whole, life is a deal-breaker. There would be no better way to demoralize the GOP base than to nominate Giuliani. It would be a disaster for the Republicans party."

Whether this is all talk, or presumptive of action, is the $64,000 question. I think at this point, it's clear that there would be a third-party effort against Giuliani. The real question is whether or not it will be sanctioned by the larger groups of social conservatives, or whether it will be just from the fringe. The latter is manageable; the Constitution Party runs a wacko candidate every year who gets a handful of meaningless votes. The former would really close Republican hopes in 2008. I don't think anyone can be confident about which way things will go.

I'd Really Like To Believe The Hype.

When it was floated over the weekend that some Christian conservatives were thinking about a third-party effort should the socially moderate (but a warmonger to the extreme) Rudy Giuliani be nominated by the Republicans, I thought "GO THIRD-PARTY PEOPLE!" And Rasmussen has polled it, adding to my shouts of "GO THIRD-PARTY PEOPLE!"

If Rudy Giuliani wins the Republican nomination and a third party campaign is backed by Christian conservative leaders, 27% of Republican voters say they’d vote for the third party option rather than Giuliani. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that a three-way race with Hillary Clinton would end up with the former First Lady getting 46% of the vote, Giuliani with 30% and the third-party option picking up 14%. In head-to-head match-ups with Clinton, Giuliani is much more competitive.

People do seem to be forgetting that there's enough money behind this Unity 08 nonsense that there is likely to already be a third-party candidate on the ballot that reflects a center-right perspective, that would almost certainly draw votes away from the Republicans. This would just make that more so. Judge Roy Moore would absolutely get 10-15% of the vote against two New Yawkahs, and could win Alabama. It would be a disaster for the GOP.

Which is why I think it's a lot of hype. Dobson and Robertson and those guys are political operatives first, and I could hardly see them willingly giving away the power they've accumulated over the Bush years.

UPDATE: I'm happy to be wrong about this, and according to SpongeDob, I am:

After two hours of deliberation, we voted on a resolution that can be summarized as follows: If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate. Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous.

There's a little wiggle room here, but not much. You almost want to see Rudy get the nomination, now.