Michael Bloomberg plans to skip early voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire if he launches a presidential bid and instead focus his efforts on the crush of states that vote on Super Tuesday and beyond. It’s a strategy that acknowledges the limitations of entering the race at this late stage and the opportunities afforded by the billionaire’s vast personal wealth.
Bloomberg adviser Howard Wolfson says other candidates already have a big head start in the first four states to vote — Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina — and Bloomberg needs to be realistic about where he can make up ground.
In fairness, this strategy did allow Rudy Giuliani to cruise to the Republican nomination in 2008.
The biggest reason there will be stories saying Bloomberg has a chance when he very obviously doesn’t will be pure projection. But there will also be some Savvy takes about how his money will be a huge advantage, despite the fact that we already have compelling evidence that spending cannot somehow manufacture a constituency within the party when you don’t have one ex ante:
Lots of stakeholders in the system (donors, consultants) have lots of incentive to believe that money matters a ton in presidential campaigns, and that probably leads journalists to overrate its importance if they talk to these folks and don't have a good BS detector.— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 8, 2019
I also think Nate is onto something with the question of why rich Democrats scared of Warren are encouraging Bloomberg to run a hopeless vanity campaign rather than just giving money to help Biden or Klobuchar:
Hard IMO to escape the idea that there's a Dunning–Kruger Effect at work here. These donor types are often successful in other areas, and they're usually (because of their status) insulated from criticism, so they tend to vastly overestimate how much they know about politics. https://t.co/DM27EKaiIT— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 9, 2019
Bloomberg will be the Tom Steyer of Marianne Williamsons.