Come on In, Mike. It Could Be a Wild Ride.

The result? Every bad news story took a heavy toll. Perot made gaffe after gaffe, then blamed his staff for his own blunders. Even though we had some of the best media and political consultants in the country, the candidate didn't listen to them -- and fired them without warning one day before he himself quit the campaign in mid-July. By the time he canned the rest of us and waved the white flag of surrender, he had dropped more than 20 points in the polls and was fast becoming a national laughingstock. People thought he was even crazier when he reentered the race on Oct. 1, blaming his earlier exit on GOP operatives trying to ruin his daughter's wedding. When he was allowed into the presidential debates because of a strategic blunder by the Bush team, he managed to pull 19 percent of the vote -- the best showing for an independent since Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose effort in 1912.

Perot-style nuttiness isn't likely this time. Bloomberg gets it. He hired and listened to some of the best in the business in his two mayoral races. He ran two brilliant campaigns, winning reelection overwhelmingly in 2005 in a city with a 5-to-1 Democratic voter edge. And he may be even better at policy than he is at politics, which is saying something; he has surrounded himself with expert wonks and has tackled some of New York's most difficult problems.

If he runs, Bloomberg will be able to set an agenda that the Democratic and Republican nominees will have to confront. After what will undoubtedly be the most expensive primary season in U.S. history, the major parties' nominees (or is that survivors?) could well be selected by March 1 -- and they'll be beaten, bruised and broke after spending millions to get there.

Bloomberg, who'll be tanned, rested and ready, could begin his campaign in earnest by spending his own millions (and perhaps as much as a staggering $1 billion) in a national campaign starting in March. He wouldn't hear much rebuttal from the major-party candidates, who'll have to wait until after their conventions in late August and early September to get their federal campaign funding of approximately $90 million. When Bloomberg needs cash, he'll go to his local ATM.

Even though he'll have more resources than his Democratic and Republican foes, it'll still be a tough road ahead. Both parties will attack and expose every element of his personal and business life. (Jon Stewart has started already.) He has been an effective mayor, but he hasn't been perfect, and he'll face two big, angry parties keen to puncture his claims of success.

If he loses -- and the likelihood that he will is awfully high -- he'll be blamed by the other loser in the race, who'll insist that he or she would be living on Pennsylvania Avenue if it hadn't been for that pesky spoiler. But Bloomberg wouldn't have to be a spoiler, a la the humorless, rigid and penniless Ralph Nader; he could be an energizer, a force that gives other unaffiliated and justifiably frustrated citizens a candidate to support.

Not everyone will agree with this. And third-party candidates can certainly muck things up. My favorite president -- other than Ronald Reagan, whom I was privileged to serve -- is Teddy Roosevelt. After leaving the White House, the restless former president tried to seize the 1912 GOP nomination from his hand-picked successor, President William Howard Taft. When Taft swatted back his challenge, Roosevelt bolted from his party and ran as an independent.

The "Bull Moose candidate" made it easy for the Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, to defeat Taft, who racked up the worst Republican showing in history -- 23 percent of the vote and eight electoral votes. Many believe that Perot's efforts against the elder Bush similarly led to his 1992 loss to Clinton. That can be argued both ways, but Bush did suffer the second-worst defeat in Republican history, receiving 37 percent of the vote.

So would Bloomberg's race as an independent doom another Republican to defeat? Or would his candidacy raise the level of discourse? The Perot campaign left me permanently chastened about such races, but I still tend to think that having another serious independent running would be good for the country.

"Working together," Bloomberg reminded people in a statement last week, "there's no limit to what we can do." Reagan, my old boss, had a sign on his desk that said something similar: "There is no limit to what a man can accomplish if he doesn't care who gets the credit."

The country's ready for a message like that.

Edrollins1@aol.com

Edward J. Rollins was White House political director in the Reagan administration.