His past accomplishments in business and politics are liabilities among today’s Democrats.
Michael Bloomberg launched his presidential bid last week at an event in Virginia, where the billionaire former mayor of New York immediately reminded us why no one has ever accused him of being a natural politician. “I think that there is a greater risk of having Donald Trump re-elected than there was before,” he said. “And in the end, I looked in the mirror and said I just cannot let this happen.” But other than the person staring back at him in the mirror, it’s unclear who exactly is beating the drums for a Bloomberg candidacy.
A Gallup survey released in October found that three-quarters of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents “are generally pleased” with the selection of candidates, which “is among the highest levels of satisfaction” since the polling company first asked the question in 1992. Among the 1 in 5 Democrats who wish someone else were running, there are reasons to doubt someone like Mr. Bloomberg is who they have mind.
It isn’t that Mr. Bloomberg doesn’t have a solid record of accomplishments as a private citizen and elected official. He built one of the world’s most successful financial-media companies and is now worth an estimated $54 billion. According to the Chronicle of Philanthropy, last year he donated $767 million to various charities, second only to Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. And as mayor of New York from 2002 to 2013, he oversaw an expansion of school choice for low-income minorities and sharp reductions in violent crime and incarceration.
Mr. Bloomberg’s problem is that these past accomplishments in business and politics are liabilities among today’s Democrats. To win the support of teachers unions, Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have attacked the charter-school movement that Mayor Bloomberg championed. And the social-justice activists now ascendant in the party are far more interested in racial parity among people arrested than in reducing crime rates and keeping the streets safe. Progressives view the Mike Bloombergs of the world primarily as rhetorical punching bags who should have their wealth confiscated by politicians and then sprinkled among others in society who are considered more deserving.
Of course, Mr. Bloomberg is very much aligned with today’s Democrats on any number of other issues. He can check off all the right boxes on climate change, tax hikes and gun control, for example. But none of those views distinguish him in the current field or justify his decision to join the race. He’s running because he’s worried about Joe Biden’s candidacy petering out. Earlier this year, when Mr. Bloomberg initially announced he would not seek the presidency, he cited Mr. Biden’s decision to run as the reason. Both men view themselves as pragmatists who can get things done and keep the left-wing extremists in check. But Mr. Biden’s inability so far to pull away from the other candidates has some Democratic officials concerned.
Mr. Bloomberg spent almost $72 million during his first campaign for mayor, in 2001, which was five times as much as anyone had ever spent seeking the office and more than Ross Perot had spent running for president in 1992. He donated not only to political allies but also political opponents. To mute criticism, he even gave to activists like Al Sharpton. Last year, according to Politico, Mr. Bloomberg contributed $110 million to 24 Democratic congressional candidates, and 21 of them won. Which is to say that he doesn’t simply throw money at politics but knows how to aim, and his decision to spend as much as $500 million of his own riches on the 2020 presidential race shouldn’t be dismissed as a vanity project.
During an interesting podcast discussion last week, the editors of Commentary magazine speculated that Mr. Bloomberg could have a significant impact on the race even if he doesn’t become the nominee, which may not be his primary objective. Mr. Bloomberg could use his war chest to go after President Trump and drive down his approval rating in battleground states as easily as he could use it to make the case for his own candidacy.
Another possibility is that Mr. Bloomberg could direct negative ads at Ms. Warren, Mr. Sanders or anyone else who gets too close to taking down Mr. Biden in the primary. And because political campaigns pay for television advertising at discount rates, Candidate Bloomberg can spend his lucre more efficiently than he could as a private citizen operating through a political-action committee.
Mr. Trump’s job-approval rating has remained underwater despite decent economic growth, low unemployment and rising wages. That suggests he may be vulnerable to any Democrat who wins the nomination, not just a more moderate candidate. But who could blame someone in Mr. Bloomberg’s shoes for not wanting to take any chances?
This piece originally appeared in The Wall Street Journal (paywall)
______________________
Jason L. Riley is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, and a Fox News commentator. Follow him on Twitter here.
This piece originally appeared in The Wall Street Journal