I agree with Sam that if a candidate is mentioned as a V.P. prospect for both parties, it's probably a pretty good bet he won't be picked as vice president. But Mike Bloomberg himself is a bad example of this so-called "Bloomberg law." Sam writes, "someone who has major policy areas attractive to both parties will also hold views each party finds repellent." The curious thing about Bloomberg's governing record, though, is that it contains no policy proposal outside the mainstream of the national Democratic party. Pro-choice? Check. Anti-poverty? Check. Prioritizes education? Check. Pro-gay rights? Check. Distributes cutely branded condoms? Check. Talks about the domestic HIV/AIDS crisis? Check. Granted, the levers Bloomberg uses to enact reforms are often free-market ones, and he has been aggressively pro-development, often in ways New York progressives find distasteful. His West Side and Brooklyn Yards development proposals weren't a hit with the masses, and most agree Bloomie squandered precious time and money on his ill-fated bid to bring the Olympic Games to New York. Still, Bloomberg's neo-liberal politics fit squarely within a Democratic framework, which is why it's so weird he was ever a Republican in the first place, hosting the Republican National Convention in 2004 and supporting George W. Bush and his endless war in Iraq. But what really matters about Bloomberg is that he's a naked opportunist who also just happens to be a sorta wonky, good governance type. Outside of New York City, he never would have gotten away with calling himself a Republican, and without his personal fortune, he wouldn't be able to now bet his political future on "Independence." In any normal world, Bloomie would be a Democrat. It's just that New York isn't normal. --Dana Goldstein
