Chuck Hagel is dienfranchised with the Republican party and especially upset with President Bush’s leadership or lack there of.
He recently met with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. These two politicians have something very interesting to talk about. Chuck Hagel has been making strong indications that he is thinking about making an independent run for the White House. Michael Bloomberg has a personal wealth factor in the $20 billion range and most New Yorkers feel that he is done a better job of Mayor Dan Rudy Giuliani did.
Chuck Hagel is from Nebraska and Bloomberg is from New York, a ticket filled with candidates from the Midwest and the Northeast running on an independent platform could spare both these candidates the derisive infighting that happens during primaries. They could run for president and vice president and dedicate their money entirely towards the election in 2008 as opposed to the primaries.
They both have strong credibility and Chuck Hagel’s anti-Iraq war stance would give him very good standing with independent-minded voters against the war that don’t truly aligned with either Democrats nor Republicans.
It is definitely likely that if they ran they would spoil the election for the Republicans. The question would become could they get far enough to the middle and actually win an election with their political capital, antiwar stance, and very large Bloomberg bankroll. Ross Perot used his personal fortune to place very well in 1992. Michael Bloomberg and Chuck Hagel both have better political connections and better political track records and Ross Perot plus they have the fortune to match.
Ross Perot benefited significantly from people that were tired of politics as normal. The United States seems to be headed towards a course that by 2008 will provide an extremely large number of voters that are completely fed up with both Republicans and Democrats. It is very possible that 2008 could be the year of the independent presidential candidate. It has never been done before, but politics haven’t been this broken for about a hundred years when Teddy Roosevelt, a veterran of another war initiated on false premises, ran under his own party.
Could it be that America needs a small revolution every 100 years?
Something to stir things up and set the political parties straight. Something that possibly even shakes up the chessboard and resets the game without destroying the country. The country was founded at the end of the 1700s and went through a civil war in the mid-1800s. We then experienced political upheaval at the turn of the century in the early 1900s. World politics brought us together through World War II and the Cold War, but as those old motivations have waned over the last 20 years lesser problems and started to grow out of control and it might be time to reset once again. It might be time to scratch America’s 100 year itch and vote in an independent candidate.