Thursday, January 04, 2007

Bill Richardson For President In 2008

I have been trying to hold off on endorsing a candidate for president for the 2008 campaign because I thought it was just too early to be talking about the 2008 campaign. But it's now finally 2007, and everyone else seems eager to jump on board with one candidate or another, so I guess I'll join in the fray.

We have the Hillary Clinton supporters who think America is ready for it's first female president. There are the Barack Obama supporters who think a black man could be elected finally in this country. John Edwards has already tossed his hat in the ring, and his supporters think the Democrats must have a southern candidate to win.

Others admire the ecological stand Al Gore has taken and want him to run again. Conservative Democrats are lining up behind General Wesley Clark.

All of these are admirable Democrats, and they are serving their country well. But at this time, I cannot support any of them. To me, they all carry some negative baggage.

Clark is simply too conservative for my taste. Gore ran a poor campaign last time, and there's no reason to believe he would do any better in a second run. Clinton and Edwards have moved so far to the center that I'm not sure what they believe in anymore. Obama is simply too inexperienced, and after his vote on the bankruptcy bill, I don't think he understands the needs of working class and poor Americans.

So, I have opted for competence. I support Bill Richardson because I believe he is the most competent of the major candidates. He is a successful governor, and was just re-elected by the citizens of New Mexico. He understands the problems that our states face and could be a valuable asset in helping to solve those problems.

He also understands America on the national level, having served for 15 years in the U.S. Congress. He wouldn't need time to figure out Washington as most governors would, and could hit the ground running if elected president.

Even more impressive, he has been effective on the world stage. He has been America's ambassador to the United Nations, and several presidents have used his diplomatic skills to trouble-shoot thorny international problems. He has proven he can talk to anyone and bring them peacefully to reasonable actions.

Richardson is also an excellent campaigner. When you listen to him speak, you come away with the impression of a man with common sense, who truly understands America's problems and has rational solutions to those problems. I believe him to be the most competent of all the candidates.

I'm not asking anyone to blindly accept him. Just listen to him with an open mind. I think you'll be impressed.

And if you feel you must vote to break new ground, how about electing the first Hispanic President of the United States?


  1. Anonymous-
    Your comments weren't bad, but please read the orange box in the upper right-hand corner of this blog.
    Pick a name, or make one up, and I'll be happy to print your comments.

  2. Thanks for the opportunity for a 2nd chance.

  3. Glad you came back. I look forward to posting your future comments.
    By the way, I like the name.

  4. Bravo! Not that I'm biased or anything . . . .:-)

    (Also gonna try to get some blog maintenance done tonight, including blogrolling you.)

  5. Thanks lilith! I appreciate that.

  6. It's early, so I have decided who I'm going to support for the nomination, but right now I'm leaning toward Richardson or John Edwards.

    In Edwards' case, I like his economic populism, but I want to see evidence that it's for real.

    In Richardson's case, he's experienced on many levels (as you pointed out so well in your post) and he's *competent*. Whether as a Congressman, Ambassador, or Governor, he's done a good job.

    "Competent" sounds like a weak endorsement, but it's one of the highest compliments I can pay to an elected official. Ideological purity doesn't mean much if our roads have potholes and our schools need desks and teachers.

    As for the rest? I never bought into Clark's conversion as a Democrat, Clinton is too right-wing and corporate, and Obama has no record to speak of. Gore is trying to sell books and DVDs more than run for President, I think, and I only voted for Kerry two years ago because he was the better candidate, not a "good" candidate.

    Of course, then there's my pet theory - if the Dems want to win the White House in 2008, we need to nominate someone who, at least superficially, is a Washington outsider.

    Since the election of Nixon in 1968, with one exception, every candidate who has won in November did not hold a federal office when first elected to the Presidency.

    Nixon - Former Congressman and VP, but out of office after 1960. Afterward, practiced law and campaigned for Republican candidates prior to winning the Rep nomination in 1968.

    Carter - Governor of GA; never held federal office other than President.

    Reagan - former Governor of CA; also never held other federal office.

    Bush (papa) - the one exception, but it could be argued that many of his voters were voting for a third Reagan term more than they were voting for him.

    Clinton - Governor of Arkansas. Never held other federal office.

    Bush (baby) - Governor of TX; never held other federal office, though it could be argued that with his father's ties, he was more of an insider than many active federal officeholders.

  7. You're right on the money with this endorsement. I was firmly in Evan Bayh's camp because he seemed the most electable, and now that he's long gone, Richardson seems like the clear choice--pro-business/pro-personal-freedom governor with enregy-independence *and* foreign-policy cred? Wow.

    Dems need to win red states this time and Richardson seems like the most well-equipped candidate to do just that. I hope an announcement is coming soon from the governor.

  8. FYI, Obama voted NAY on the bankruptcy bill:

  9. How can you say "Clark is simply too conservative for my taste" and "Edwards have moved so far to the center" but then come down in favor of Richardson who is far to the right of both Clark and Edwards?

    Richardson's Pro-NAFTA/Pro-CAFTA/Anti-Fair Trade;

    Richardson shut down presidential recount despite suspicious circumstances;

    Richardson supports revenue reduction via tax cuts for corporations and the ultra-wealthy;

    Richardson is a favorite of the DLC;

    Richardson supports mandatory jail time, even for non-violent offenders;

    Richardson supports the death penalty PLUS abolition of habeas corpus appeals in death penalty cases;

    Richardson supports prosecuting minors as adults;

    Richardson supports expanding the number of federal crimes punishable by death;

    Richardson supports eliminating automatic citizenship for all children born in the USA;

    Richardson supports limiting access to our court system for people hurt by negligent hospitals; and

    Richardson voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act against gay marriage.


ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED. And neither will racist,homophobic, or misogynistic comments. I do not mind if you disagree, but make your case in a decent manner.