Michael Bloomberg is creating a certain buzz as the presidential campaign starts to gear up.
The former New York mayor is pondering whether to run for president as an independent.
Not surprisingly, Democrats are trying to talk him out of it. Why? They consider him a potential spoiler in the party’s bid to retain control of the White House.
My own hunch is that Bloomberg won’t run if the Democrats appear set to nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton for president.
If it’s Sen. Bernie Sanders? And if the Republicans nominate Donald Trump? Well, then it becomes dicier for everyone involved in the election . . . in both parties.
This brings back memories of Ross Perot. Perot, the Dallas billionaire, ran twice for the presidency, in 1992 and 1996. Republicans keep saying that Perot’s strength decimated GOP President George H.W. Bush’s chances for re-election, handing the election to Arkansas Democratic Gov. Bill Clinton.
The jury, though, really is still out on that. I’ve seen plenty of evidence that suggests that Clinton would have defeated Bush that year without Perot on the ballot, that Perot attracted nominally more Republicans than Democrats, but that his candidacy wasn’t necessarily decisive.
Bloomberg’s entry into this race as an independent is hard to gauge.
He’s a friend of Hillary Clinton. He once was a friend of Trump . . . before the two men got tangled up in some business deal.
Given the utter madness that has enveloped the 2016 campaign to date, I am not willing to assume a single thing about what Bloomberg might do and what effect it will have.
Let’s just chalk this up to one more nod to the craziness that’s brought us to this point.