Richardson Endorses Obama, Hillary flip-flops

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2008-03-21 01:15pm

(CNN) -- Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico endorsed Sen. Barack Obama in the Democratic race for president Friday.
art.obamafay.gi.jpg

Sen. Barack Obama will receive the endorsement of New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on Friday.

"Barack Obama will make a great and historic president," Richardson told a rally in Portland, Oregon, with Obama standing at his side.

Richardson said Obama's recent speech on race in America, saying he "understands clearly that only by bringing people together, only by bridging our differences can we all succeed together as Americans."

"He appealed to the best in us ... as a Hispanic American I was particularly touched by his words," Richardson added.

In a letter e-mailed by the Obama campaign, Richardson praised rival candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton as "a distinguished leader with vast experience" but said Obama of Illinois would be "a historic and a great president."

In a statement Clinton shrugged off Richardson's endorsement, saying "both of us have many great endorsers, and the voters, not endorsers, will decide this election.

"There are still millions of voters in upcoming contests who want to have their voices heard," she said.

Richardson is the nation's only Hispanic governor. Hispanics have tended to support Clinton over Obama in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

But Richardson's endorsement will have an impact beyond Latino voters, CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley said.

"This is an endorsement that may help with the Latino voting bloc around the edges, but if that were Richardson's target he would have done this before the New Mexico and Texas contests, both of which Obama narrowly lost, largely due to the Latino vote," Crowley said. "So this is a larger message to superdelegates, those elected officials and party officials who in the end may well decide who the nominee will be."

Richardson's statement said the country is blessed to have two great American leaders and great Democrats running for president.

"My affection and admiration for Hillary Clinton and President Bill Clinton will never waver," Richardson wrote in his e-mail. "It is time, however, for Democrats to stop fighting amongst ourselves and to prepare for the tough fight we will face against [presumptive GOP presidential candidate] John McCain in the fall."

Richardson, who served as United Nations ambassador and energy secretary in the Clinton administration, dropped out of the race for the Democratic nomination on January 10.

He drew 5 percent of the vote in the New Hampshire primary and 2 percent of the vote in the Iowa

In a statement Clinton shrugged off Richardson's endorsement, saying "both of us have many great endorsers, and the voters, not endorsers, will decide this election.

Coming from someone who's banking on super-delegates to win, this is utterly laughable.

FSTargetDrone · Post by **FSTargetDrone** » 2008-03-21 01:30pm

Great speech from Richardson.

Wouldn't he be an intriguing choice as Obama's VP??

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2008-03-21 01:40pm

In a statement Clinton shrugged off Richardson's endorsement, saying "both of us have many great endorsers, and the voters, not endorsers, will decide this election.

Translation: "New Mexico doesn't matter."

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2008-03-21 02:00pm

Obama Richardson '08 was the wonder ticket I was waiting for. Richardson is strong everywhere he is weak: he is Latino, he is a governor, he is highly experienced, he is one of the Clintonians (which might help somewhat with assuaging them after she loses), he is a big policy and diplomacy man, he knows energy and has a real plan. I definitely would not mind an administration with a "strong VP" or the "Prime Minister-esque VP" if its Richardson.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2008-03-21 02:13pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Obama Richardson '08 was the wonder ticket I was waiting for. Richardson is strong everywhere he is weak: he is Latino, he is a governor, he is highly experienced, he is one of the Clintonians (which might help somewhat with assuaging them after she loses), he is a big policy and diplomacy man, he knows energy and has a real plan. I definitely would not mind an administration with a "strong VP" or the "Prime Minister-esque VP" if its Richardson.

I suspect he'd also be a draw to the "Blue Dog" Democrats who might otherwise jump ship (again) and vote McCain in November. His record in New Mexico has been solid, sales taxes were cut back in his administration, and he's a Democrat with an NRA endorsement (an A grade, no less.) If only his performance in the Democratic primaries wasn't so uninspiring (though the mix of voters who vote in Democratic primaries isn't quite the same as the voters who will vote in November's general election, so this probably isn't quite the negative that it first appears to be.)

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2008-03-21 02:15pm

Patrick Degan wrote:
In a statement Clinton shrugged off Richardson's endorsement, saying "both of us have many great endorsers, and the voters, not endorsers, will decide this election.
Translation: "New Mexico doesn't matter."

And it pretty much doesn't. Its primary has come and and gone, and Hillary won it (for a gain of all of two delegates.) In November, whoever is the Democratic presidential candidate will probably carry the state (worth all of five electoral college votes. Though 2008's election is looking like it's going to be a close one.)

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2008-03-21 02:46pm

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote: And it pretty much doesn't. Its primary has come and and gone, and Hillary won it (for a gain of all of two delegates.) In November, whoever is the Democratic presidential candidate will probably carry the state (worth all of five electoral college votes. Though 2008's election is looking like it's going to be a close one.)

As close as this race is, Hillary needs all the delegates and super-delegates she can get. Since a super-delegate in a state Hillary "won" threw his weight behind Obama, it doesn't exactly help her campaign's image to dismiss it as unimportant.

Post by **Coyote** » 2008-03-21 03:49pm

Ha, ha! Hillary has blown off almost all the Obama states-- "caucases don't matter" or "they're a red state; they don't matter"... despite an string of victories with only a few setbacks.

Hillary, at what point do the American people begin to "matter"?
Oh, of course-- only when they're voting for Hillary...

It must be awesome to be President of Hillaryland!

Silver Jedi · Post by **Silver Jedi** » 2008-03-21 04:33pm

Coyote wrote:Hillary, at what point do the American people begin to "matter"?
Oh, of course-- only when they're voting for Hillary...

You pretty much hit the nail on the head w/ that one, considering the fight she's been putting up over FL and MI seems to be contingent on the votes from the sham primaries that did occur being taken "as is".

Post by **Coyote** » 2008-03-21 04:47pm

And the thing that really chafes my shorts about the Florida and Michigan thing is how the media keeps reporting them as "states Hillary won"

Her name was the only one on the fucking ballots! All the other candidates withdrew as promised! She "won" in the way a 3rd world generalissimo fucking "wins"...

Fair primary, yeah... if you want to compare Florida and Michigan to Uganda, you bet!

Cecelia5578 · Post by **Cecelia5578** » 2008-03-21 05:01pm

Umm, wasn't New Mexico a pretty close state in 2000 and 2004? Gore won it in 2000 and Bush in 2004. I'd say having the governor of a purple-ish Western state would be a big plus.

CaptJodan · Post by **CaptJodan** » 2008-03-21 05:19pm

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote: Though 2008's election is looking like it's going to be a close one.)

Yeah, why the fuck is that? McCain has all but come out and said he's a Bushie. This is the year the Dems should be rolling over the Republicans like there is no tomorrow.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2008-03-21 05:27pm

A lot of people are enamored and totally in love with the fact that McCain is a war vet and spent years in a Vietcong camp. The allure of the war hero is a strong one.

Post by **Coyote** » 2008-03-21 07:20pm

Hey, good news, everyone! Hillary's campaign is in the red despite declaring "$31-million" in donations in February!

Turns out most of the donations she got in February are from her previous big-money donors-- and it can only be spent in the general election. She can't touch it for the Primaries.

Hillary Campaign "In The Red"
By Greg Sargent - March 21, 2008, 3:49PM

The latest FEC reports appear to suggest that the Hillary campaign may be in the red:

Despite a strong month of fund-raising in February in which she brought in $35 million, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton finished the month essentially in the red, once her campaign’s outstanding debts are factored in, as well as her personal loan, according to filings submitted late last night to the Federal Election Commission.

After spending about $31 million in her efforts to keep up with Senator Barack Obama, Mrs. Clinton finished February with more than $33 million in cash on hand, but $21.5 million of that is earmarked exclusively for the general election, leaving her with $11.7 million for the primary.

Mrs. Clinton, however, loaned her campaign $5 million earlier this year and she listed $8.7 million in debts to various vendors, making clear why she has not yet paid herself back from her loan.

It should be noted, however, that Hillary isn't obliged to repay the $5 million debt to herself. Nonetheless, even factoring in that, once you subtract the other debts her cash on hand number would be in the neighborhood of $3 million.

By contrast, Obama has over $30 million on hand for the primary.

Here's where this really hurts: With the super-delegates. The Clintons' fundraising prowess has been one of the factors convincing the super-dels that this race isn't over and that they should wait out the contest. Revelations like this one could make it a good deal tougher to make this case.

So, why has the Hildebeest been so quiet the last week?
Because she's down to about $4-million to coast on for the month... and, if she gets assed out at the Democratic Convention... I believe she has to pay the rest of that General Election fund donation it back.

Post by **Coyote** » 2008-03-21 07:26pm

Another interesting bit from Politico (kinda long). It talks about how the media has gone along with making the Clinton campaign appear more viable than it really is, partially out of a sense of drawing out the drama, but also to avoid declaring a winner in case it turns out they were wrong...

One big fact has largely been lost in the recent coverage of the Democratic presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton has virtually no chance of winning.

Her own campaign acknowledges there is no way that she will finish ahead in pledged delegates. That means the only way she wins is if Democratic superdelegates are ready to risk a backlash of historic proportions from the party’s most reliable constituency.

Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote — which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle — and use that achievement to pressure superdelegates, she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.

People who think that scenario is even remotely likely are living on another planet.

As it happens, many people inside Clinton’s campaign live right here on Earth. One important Clinton adviser estimated to Politico privately that she has no more than a 10 percent chance of winning her race against Barack Obama, an appraisal that was echoed by other operatives.

In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe.

The real question is why so many people are playing. The answer has more to do with media psychology than with practical politics.

Journalists have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is. Most coverage breathlessly portrays the race as a down-to-the-wire sprint between two well-matched candidates, one only slightly better situated than the other to win in August at the national convention in Denver.

One reason is fear of embarrassment. In its zeal to avoid predictive reporting of the sort that embarrassed journalists in New Hampshire, the media — including Politico — have tended to avoid zeroing in on the tough math Clinton faces.

Avoiding predictions based on polls even before voters cast their ballots is wise policy. But that's not the same as drawing sober and well-grounded conclusions about the current state of a race after millions of voters have registered their preferences.

...

A Democratic strategist said that given the unlikelihood of prevailing any other way, Clinton now must “scare” superdelegates “who basically just want to win.”

The strategist said Clinton aides are now relying heavily on the controversy over Obama’s retiring minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, to sow new seeds of doubt.

...

What has to irk Clintons’ aides is that they felt she might finally have him on the ropes, bruised badly by the Wright fight and wobbly in polls. But the bell rang long ago in the minds of too many voters.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2008-03-21 07:38pm

slightly off topic, His name is Bill Richardson. His appearance gives him the look of an undermined ethnic origin. If not for his constant reminders of "Yo soy Latino." You'd never know. I'm l1/8th Sweedish on my father's side, but i don't carry on endlessly on the benefits of Volvos and Ikea. WTF Bill?

Drooling Iguana · Post by **Drooling Iguana** » 2008-03-21 09:12pm

Shinova wrote:A lot of people are enamored and totally in love with the fact that McCain is a war vet and spent years in a Vietcong camp. The allure of the war hero is a strong one.

It wasn't in 2004.

CmdrWilkens · Post by **CmdrWilkens** » 2008-03-21 09:23pm

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:I suspect he'd also be a draw to the "Blue Dog" Democrats who might otherwise jump ship (again) and vote McCain in November. His record in New Mexico has been solid, sales taxes were cut back in his administration, and he's a Democrat with an NRA endorsement (an A grade, no less.) If only his performance in the Democratic primaries wasn't so uninspiring (though the mix of voters who vote in Democratic primaries isn't quite the same as the voters who will vote in November's general election, so this probably isn't quite the negative that it first appears to be.)

As an addendum, because I agree that richardson is strong where Obama is "weak" I would add one thought. Richardson was, and is, a very engaging speaker and fountain of ideas. His debate performances were never great but they were certianly well grounded and his policy position was probably the most fully articulated aside from Obama's. The one thing which kept Richardson from getting the "inspired" nod is that he was the fourth or fifth name in what the media wanted to be a two person race. The mainstream media wanted a white vs balck, women vs man, old guard vs new guard matchup. Richardson (and Edwards for that matter) didn't fit the prefferred narrative. Hell Clinton got more mileage out of finishing third in Iowa than Edwards did out of finishing second. Once you take Richardson and garuntee him a spotlight then i think he will shine a lot more than folks who only read primary coverage will expect.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2008-03-21 09:25pm

Drooling Iguana wrote:
Shinova wrote:A lot of people are enamored and totally in love with the fact that McCain is a war vet and spent years in a Vietcong camp. The allure of the war hero is a strong one.
It wasn't in 2004.

We had the allure of a charming, invite to your backyard BBQ, Texan in the form of Bush instead. And not much in way of great Dem candidates.

But people here and there, especially older people, just love to go on about McCain's war record.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2008-03-21 09:58pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:slightly off topic, His name is Bill Richardson. His appearance gives him the look of an undermined ethnic origin. If not for his constant reminders of "Yo soy Latino." You'd never know. I'm l1/8th Sweedish on my father's side, but i don't carry on endlessly on the benefits of Volvos and Ikea. WTF Bill?

So what? You have to have an "ethnic" name to belong to a race now? My name is Vermazen. I get Mexican jokes all the time, but I guess what gives, since I don't hyphen, people don't get the satisfaction and justification for their racism by hearing a "Martinez" in there. Sorry I don't meet you racial qualifications.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2008-03-21 09:59pm

I hate that kind of simplistic thinking; its really quasi-fascist. And a lot of McCain's comments imply he is a warmonger, especially his waxing poetic about how unfair ROE were WRT to bombing in Vietnam and since, and how he always wished he could bomb other shit.

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2008-03-21 11:24pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:I hate that kind of simplistic thinking; its really quasi-fascist. And a lot of McCain's comments imply he is a warmonger, especially his waxing poetic about how unfair ROE were WRT to bombing in Vietnam and since, and how he always wished he could bomb other shit.

Depends. Is he talking about "Don't shoot at soviets even if they're setting up a SAM site" style ROEs or "Don't massacre half the population" ROEs?

Not that the latter mattered much in vietnam

Cecelia5578 · Post by **Cecelia5578** » 2008-03-22 12:26am

Col. Crackpot wrote:slightly off topic, His name is Bill Richardson. His appearance gives him the look of an undermined ethnic origin. If not for his constant reminders of "Yo soy Latino." You'd never know. I'm l1/8th Sweedish on my father's side, but i don't carry on endlessly on the benefits of Volvos and Ikea. WTF Bill?

His mother is Mexican, his dad isn't. Simple explanation for his non-Hispanic last name.

Elaro · Post by **Elaro** » 2008-03-22 12:49am

Coyote wrote:Ha, ha! Hillary has blown off almost all the Obama states-- "caucases don't matter" or "they're a red state; they don't matter"... despite an string of victories with only a few setbacks.

Hillary, at what point do the American people begin to "matter"?
Oh, of course-- only when they're voting for Hillary...

It must be awesome to be President of Hillaryland!

Why is she dismissing them? I know she wants to be president, but... does she really think that by appearing to be winning she can actually win? Or rather, who is she trying to impress? The electoral college? Why would they be impressed by her claims of victory, when (and I assume they're intelligent people) they can clearly see through her BS, as we are?

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2008-03-22 12:55am

Elaro wrote:
Coyote wrote:Ha, ha! Hillary has blown off almost all the Obama states-- "caucases don't matter" or "they're a red state; they don't matter"... despite an string of victories with only a few setbacks.

Hillary, at what point do the American people begin to "matter"?
Oh, of course-- only when they're voting for Hillary...

It must be awesome to be President of Hillaryland!
Why is she dismissing them? I know she wants to be president, but... does she really think that by appearing to be winning she can actually win? Or rather, who is she trying to impress? The electoral college? Why would they be impressed by her claims of victory, when (and I assume they're intelligent people) they can clearly see through her BS, as we are?

She's trying to impress the Democratic superdelegates. The only way for her to win is to convince them to ignore the popular vote and pledged delegate leads that Obama has.

The electoral college only matters in the General Election, which isn't until November.