The great race for the White House

While Hillary Clinton remains the Democratic frontrunner, Barack Obama’s poll numbers and incredible fund-raising suggest it won’t simply be a Clinton coronation.

The Republican race is wide open. Rudy Giuliani’s position has weakened as conservative voters have learned about his liberal social positions, particularly on abortion. John McCain’s stances on the Iraq War and the recent Immigration Bill have seriously damaged his candidacy. Mitt Romney’s focus on the early states is paying dividends, with Romney well placed to win Iowa and New Hampshire. Fred Thompson - of Law and Order fame - has emerged from nowhere to be a serious contender, already leading in some national polls.

But while the major party nomination contests heat up, the prospect of an independent candidacy from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg continues to generate the most speculation.

Bloomberg, a fiscal conservative and social liberal, remains coy about his intentions, but speculation is rife. It has intensified in the last two months after reports that Bloomberg told friends he would consider a third-party run if he could influence the national debate - previously he maintained he would only run if he thought he could win a plurality in a three-way race.

In truth, Bloomberg would in all likelihood wait until February or March next year, when the major party nominees are clear, to make his decision. If the major parties nominate candidates that are likely to be divisive or polarising, that appeal more to their base than to moderates and independents, then Bloomberg has more room to move. Bloomberg is more likely to get into a race with Hillary Clinton and Romney or Thompson, than with Clinton and Giuliani.

If Bloomberg runs he would face an uphill battle. No third party candidate has won the White House since Abraham Lincoln. But even if Bloomberg’s candidacy fell short, it could profoundly influence the race.

Texas Billionaire Ross Perot garnered 19 per cent of the vote as an independent in 1992, helping Bill Clinton defeat President Bush with only 42 per cent of the vote.

Bloomberg could prove a much more potent force than Perot. Perot’s wealth enabled him to overcome the greatest obstacle to independent candidacies - finances. But Bloomberg’s wealth could actually provide him a substantial financial advantage over the major party nominees. And unlike Perot, who was reluctant to spend too much of his money, Bloomberg has shown he is willing to spend his own money to win office Sources close to Bloomberg say he is prepared to spend $1 billion of his personal fortune. This would mean Bloomberg could outspend his Democrat and Republican rivals.

Bloomberg’s politics appeals to independents and moderates of both parties. As mayor he has shown strong anti-terror credentials and kept New York safe. He has reduced crime levels, no mean feat given Giuliani’s previous accomplishments. He has demonstrated fiscal conservatism, resisting spending and tax pressures and keeping the budget balanced. He is a strong advocate of charter schools and educational standards.

These positions resonate with Republicans, many with moderate Democrats. His social views would find support amongst Democrats: Bloomberg is pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-gay rights, and pro-affirmative action.

A recent Rasmussen Report poll confirms the threat a Bloomberg candidacy would be to the major parties. The poll found 27 per cent of voters would be very or somewhat likely to vote for Bloomberg - before he has entered the race or spent any of that $1 billion.

A larger proportion, 39 per cent, indicated they would consider voting for Bloomberg in the right circumstances. This appears to include the situation where their preferred candidate appears unable to win. If it became clear the Republican candidate couldn’t win, 46 per cent of voters said they would opt for Bloomberg over Hillary Clinton (37 per cent). If the Democratic candidate couldn’t win, voters showed a similar preference for Bloomberg and Giuliani (34 and 35 per cent respectively). If Bloomberg could fight his way into second, or seriously dent one of the major party candidates, the dynamics could turn in his favour.

Of course, it is one thing to consider voting for an independent candidate, it is another to actually do it. Many voters, particularly soft partisans, like the idea of an independent candidate, but don’t like the idea of wasting their vote, and the major parties would work hard to paint a Bloomberg vote as exactly that. Turning notional support into actual votes is very difficult for independent candidates.

However, polls assessing a three way race including Bloomberg have already shown support at between 11 and 17 per cent, and he isn’t even campaigning.

A Bloomberg victory is a long shot, but these early numbers suggest he could shake up the race. Bloomberg would draw more evenly from Democrats and Republicans than Perot, so it’s not clear he would deliver either party victory. However, if he can find the right message he could carry a number of states, something Perot couldn’t do. Many analysts believe Bloomberg could win New York, for example.

In so doing, Bloomberg could deny either major party candidate an Electoral College majority. A deadlock would mean the House of Representatives would choose the President, for the first time since 1824.

The matter is not resolved by a simple House of Representatives majority. Each state gets one vote, with a majority of states required to select the President. A candidate needs 26 state delegations to prevail. Democrats currently control 26, so the loss of a single delegation would cost them the majority needed to select a president. Many delegations are closely divided - in at least a dozen Democrat controlled delegations the loss of a single representative in the congressional elections would cost them control.

How then would the presidency be resolved? Nobody really knows. There would be intense negotiations prior to January 20, when the issue must be resolved. One thing is certain: Bloomberg would have significant leverage. If he finished second in the national vote, there is an outside chance he could use this leverage to wind up President. Though finishing second will be a big ask.

Predicting the impact of a Bloomberg candidacy is difficult. An independent candidacy’s viability is influenced by the identity of the major party nominees, and nobody yet knows who they will be. No one can confidently evaluate the impact of a $1 billion campaign. But if Bloomberg strikes a chord, the resolution of the presidency in 2008 could make the 2000 debacle look orderly.