Reply #18: There are a couple problems with that theory

[jmowreader]

Problem 1 is, why would the King of New York agree to do such a thing?

Problem 2 is the numbers. New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida and California alone will give someone 135 votes--exactly half of what you need to take the election. I also think in a three-way between Obama, Palin and Bloomberg, if West Virginia, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Michigan went away from Obama they'd go for Bloomberg, not Palin. Right now we're looking at 200 electoral votes for Bloomberg. There are only 538 electoral votes out there and, as we all know, you need 270 to win the election. Therefore, if Bloomberg took the ten states I named, and ONLY the ten states I named (I think that, given the choice of Palin or Bloomberg a LOT of the flyover states would go Bloomberg--he is a better Republican than she is) you've got 338 votes remaining. President Obama is going to get more than 68 electoral votes in the next election--you'd have to go all the way back to Jimmy Carter to find an election where the incumbent president got stomped that bad, and Reagan had Walter Cronkite reminding the electorate how many days the hostages had been in Iranian captivity, which Obama does NOT have.

What my point is, if Michael Bloomberg ran a third-party campaign, it would lead to a runoff election rather than a Palin coronation.