I'm not sure this is a good idea, Bill.
See, New York is a curious state. We don't mind carpetbaggers.
When they run for Senate.
Like Hillary Clinton. Or Robert F. Kennedy. Or James Buckley (who was born in New York, but moved to Connecticut).
We figure that at the Federal level, a foreigner can represent our interests as well as a native-born person (although to be honest, we have better luck with Charles Schumer than we've had with James Buckley).
But for governor? We want someone who is on top of the local issues, who's actually BEEN to Onteora for more than a whistlestop on a campaign tour. We want someone who understands that our state is rural AND urban AND suburban. We aren't New Jersey. You can't rule over one demographic and ignore the other two. You'll get killed by the press.
Nelson Rockefeller understood this state better than any governor I've seen since (albeit a Republican, he certainly has to be classified a liberal), and while some of his decisions were god-awful (the Rockefeller Drug laws, as an example: Equating possession of two ounces of cocaine to second degree murder is a pretty odious penalty), he was in tune with the people of the state.
Not bad for a Rockefeller, I thought. I mean, he could have been Bush, completely out of touch with people and insulated and elitist, but he chose not to. I actually have his autograph from a campaign stop he made in 1998 (I think) at Jones Beach. The man was vital and vibrant, which probably explains why he died of a heart attack while having sex with his secretary.
But Bill? I have to be honest: Massachussetts is not New York, and so governing the one does not qualify you to govern the other.
Maybe you can take Hillary's place after she's sworn in in 2009....