What no one has mentioned so far is that Hillary has been doing better with the Hispanic vote, and Richardson might well help Obama in this regard.
The Dem leaders know full well that having the fight go on over the summer will give a lot of free campaign time to McCain. I’m guessing that they are going to wait for PA, and then all come down on one side or the other - behind the scenes, of course. Richardson’s endorsement increases the chances it will be for Obama, but it’s not certain yet.
[QUOTE=Menocchio]
I’d be surprised if Gore endorsed, at least before the convention. He seems to want to be above politics and all about environmentalism, and neither Obama nor Clinton have made that a priority.
[/QUOTE]
Actually they both have, to nearly the same degree. Which is why it is such a nonissue. Both like cap and trade. Both heavily promote the “green collar economy”. Heck even McCain is on almost the same page. Gore though plans on being above the fray and would weigh in during any deal brokering as a putatively neutral party statesman.
Pelosi will weigh in officially when she feels she can say the voters have spoken and it is time to recognize that and move into the general election phase. It is arguably at that point, hence her previous statements effectively declaring Obama the victor, but saying it outright … for that I think she’ll let PA and possibly NC and IN play out first.
The passport thing? That doesn’t have much displacement value.
On the Edwards note…I’m going to be very interested to see who he ends up endorsing. I wonder if he’s going to endorse anyone. If he looks at the trend over the entire campaign, Obama would seem to be the correct candidate to endorse. I don’t think endorsing Hillary is going to do much for Edwards in terms of a long haul decison… Bet your bottom dollar Bill and Hillary are thinking - WTF???About Richardson signing on with Obama.
Its crystal clear he did so because he thinks Obama has the best chance of winning this whole thing.
I became an Obama supporter after the “race” speech (though I would still be just fine with Clinton), but I gave up on the value of insider endorsements in the last election cycle, when Gore endorsed Howard Dean.
I don’t know how this will effect the election or the nation, but IMHO, this is a pretty big deal in New Mexico. Bill Richardson is highly respected, and I think that, at least here, this will help Obama in the general. Granted, Bill’s a Democrat endorsing a Democrat, in a swing state, but there are quite a bit of independent voters here. We’ve only got 5 electoral votes, but hopefully Bill can help them go towards Obama’s total.
[QUOTE=Voyager]
What no one has mentioned so far is that Hillary has been doing better with the Hispanic vote, and Richardson might well help Obama in this regard.
[/QUOTE]
With his Anglo name and accentless speech – do Latino voters really regard Richardson as one of them? Or as an . . . I guess you would call it an eclair (analagous to Oreo and Twinkie)?
[QUOTE=E. Thorp]
I became an Obama supporter after the “race” speech (though I would still be just fine with Clinton), but I gave up on the value of insider endorsements in the last election cycle, when Gore endorsed Howard Dean.
[/QUOTE]
The difference here is that this isn’t an endorsement to sway voters anywhere. This is an endorsement to end the fight.
What this really means, is a signal to all super-delegates who are afraid of standing up to the Clintons that they shouldn’t be afraid. The Clintons have done lots of favors for people, and I would imagine that a lot of undeclared super-delegates have that in mind. But if Bill Richardson sees it as being okay to stand up, then it surely will make others think about it for a bit.
Bill Richardson is probably someone who owes the Clintons more than any other super-delegate. He was given two cabinet posts, which apparently Bill pointed out to him in a heated exchange once before. One thing I always like about Richardson though is that he was always very candid (albeit in a funny way). He mentioned that once before when weighing between Obama and Hillary that he had the Clintons to thank for those many reasons, but apparently Obama helped him out once during a debate which he found really telling.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
With his Anglo name and accentless speech – do Latino voters really regard Richardson as one of them? Or as an . . . I guess you would call it an eclair (analagous to Oreo and Twinkie)?
[/QUOTE]
As Cajun comic Justin Wilson said, there is nothing he can do about his behind name. I think he’s done pretty well in New Mexico with Hispanic voters, right Santo Rugger? I think they are not going to be fooled by the name.
Figures that Richardson shows up to his scheduled announcement a bit late!
Yet again the voters that matter now to finish this thing are the supers. They can finish it before PA, if enough of them conclude that the voters have indeed spoken already. Think maybe that Obama’s small highlight of Richardson’s work on energy security and green technologies was small bid to get Gore to move off the fence?
[QUOTE=Voyager]
As Cajun comic Justin Wilson said, there is nothing he can do about his behind name. I think he’s done pretty well in New Mexico with Hispanic voters, right Santo Rugger? I think they are not going to be fooled by the name.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know the breakdown, but considering he won 68% of the votes in his reelection for Governor, in a state with the highest percentage of those with Hispanic ancestry in the Union, I would have to say yes.
Concerning the Richardson surname, three of his four grandparents were Mexican nationals. That’s pretty common around here, since most Hispanics in this area are a mix of Cortez and his Spaniard conquistadors and the Native Americans who originally populated the region. All of the Spanish surnames are, well, from Spain, so IMHO people here don’t really think of Richardson as not having a “brown enough” surname.
[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
The difference here is that this isn’t an endorsement to sway voters anywhere. This is an endorsement to end the fight.
What this really means, is a signal to all super-delegates who are afraid of standing up to the Clintons that they shouldn’t be afraid. The Clintons have done lots of favors for people, and I would imagine that a lot of undeclared super-delegates have that in mind. But if Bill Richardson sees it as being okay to stand up, then it surely will make others think about it for a bit.
Bill Richardson is probably someone who owes the Clintons more than any other super-delegate. He was given two cabinet posts, which apparently Bill pointed out to him in a heated exchange once before. One thing I always like about Richardson though is that he was always very candid (albeit in a funny way). He mentioned that once before when weighing between Obama and Hillary that he had the Clintons to thank for those many reasons, but apparently Obama helped him out once during a debate which he found really telling.
[/QUOTE]
I saw this news earlier today, and recalled some months ago when Richardson mentioned that he was “okay with being on the fence” in part because he “[didn’t] think endorsements matter” to the voters. At the time, I figured that made a lot of sense, and if he was also on the fence because he was waiting to see which way the wind was blowing, it was no skin off my nose.
So I was intensely curious that he’d come out and endorse someone now, and the nominee who is currently trailing in the polls, if I understand correctly. I’d be surprised if PA voters care about the NM governor’s endorsement in the slightest. Maybe it meant he didn’t care which way the wind was blowing, he really was just waiting to see who he felt was the best candidate?
The above post makes a lot of sense to me, and I don’t know much about politics at all. I lurk here in GD, but never feel educated enough to post.
I’m coming to the conclusion that Richardson originally didn’t endorse for two reasons. First, he really felt both Obama and Clinton would be excellent candidates, and didn’t have a compelling reason to swing one way or another. Especially since, second, he really believes that most voters don’t give a damn who endorses whom.
Now, for whatever reason, he’s got his compelling reason to throw his weight behind Obama - perhaps Obama’s speech really did move him that much, as the posted e-mail says. And he knows he’s got pull he can use with that candidate with people who matter a lot more than originally expected - other superdelegates. If this race had been sewn up back when McCain landed the Republican nomination, his endorsement may really have not mattered since the superdelegates were so much less in play in the beginning.
Anyway, that’s what this thread seems to make me think, particularly with the above post. I’ll probably keep lurking to try to understand more, but that’s what a reasonably politically unsavvy person who doesn’t really give a damn about endorsements as a voter sees at the moment (between the news and lurking here).
In my opinion the Superdelegates who are not committing at this point are doing almost as much harm to the party as anybody.
[QUOTE=BlueKangaroo]
I saw this news earlier today, and recalled some months ago when Richardson mentioned that he was “okay with being on the fence” in part because he “[didn’t] think endorsements matter” to the voters. At the time, I figured that made a lot of sense, and if he was also on the fence because he was waiting to see which way the wind was blowing, it was no skin off my nose.
So I was intensely curious that he’d come out and endorse someone now, and the nominee who is currently trailing in the polls, if I understand correctly. I’d be surprised if PA voters care about the NM governor’s endorsement in the slightest. Maybe it meant he didn’t care which way the wind was blowing, he really was just waiting to see who he felt was the best candidate?
The above post makes a lot of sense to me, and I don’t know much about politics at all. I lurk here in GD, but never feel educated enough to post.
I’m coming to the conclusion that Richardson originally didn’t endorse for two reasons. First, he really felt both Obama and Clinton would be excellent candidates, and didn’t have a compelling reason to swing one way or another. Especially since, second, he really believes that most voters don’t give a damn who endorses whom.
Now, for whatever reason, he’s got his compelling reason to throw his weight behind Obama - perhaps Obama’s speech really did move him that much, as the posted e-mail says. And he knows he’s got pull he can use with that candidate with people who matter a lot more than originally expected - other superdelegates. If this race had been sewn up back when McCain landed the Republican nomination, his endorsement may really have not mattered since the superdelegates were so much less in play in the beginning.
Anyway, that’s what this thread seems to make me think, particularly with the above post. I’ll probably keep lurking to try to understand more, but that’s what a reasonably politically unsavvy person who doesn’t really give a damn about endorsements as a voter sees at the moment (between the news and lurking here).
[/QUOTE]
Just because Obama is trailing in the polls doesn’t mean he’s not still the frontrunner. The interesting thing about this endorsement is essentially what Merkwurdigliebe said, that it shows other superdelegates that it is not only OK to stand up to the Clinton’s but that it is indeed necessary to do so at this point in time and at this point in the campaign. All Obama needs to do is keep it close for the next several primaries, winning a few wouldn’t hurt, but keeping it close would ensure he holds his commanding lead in pop vote and delegates. If he can do that - and I see no reason he can’t - but if he can do that, I do not believe the superdelegates would overturn the will of the voters.
Just because the voting public is essentially divided with a lead given to Obama doesn’t mean CLinton supporters won’t show up in significant enough numbers to send Obama over the top in November.
That’s not Bill Richardson…
IT’S HIS EVIL TWIN!!!
I just wanted to also add here that the voting is essentially over. Most people are pretty sure that Hillary will win PA, Obama will win NC, and IN and KY will probably be less clear, but will almost certainly not change the score.
Really the only thing Clinton has left is the media. They keep pretending that she has a realistic chance, which boosts her poll numbers. They want a horserace so bad that they keep propping her up because she can technically still win. She will, by the way, be able to make this argument all the way to the convention if she chooses. I just hope that once Obama has more than 2024 (including Super-delegates), people will call a spade a spade and stop listening to her.
[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
That’s not Bill Richardson…
IT’S HIS EVIL TWIN!!!
I just wanted to also add here that the voting is essentially over. Most people are pretty sure that Hillary will win PA, Obama will win NC, and IN and KY will probably be less clear, but will almost certainly not change the score.
Really the only thing Clinton has left is the media. They keep pretending that she has a realistic chance, which boosts her poll numbers. They want a horserace so bad that they keep propping her up because she can technically still win. She will, by the way, be able to make this argument all the way to the convention if she chooses. I just hope that once Obama has more than 2024 (including Super-delegates), people will call a spade a spade and stop listening to her.
[/QUOTE]
Do you think if more people [read supers] jump to Barack, that Hillary will continue to ride this until the convention? DO you think she has the capability to conceed?
Who knows…
Hillary has the benefit of being a Clinton (11!!!11!!) meaning that they for some reason can never lose. That’s fair given their past, but I think BO has shown, and with the benefit of hindsight will surely be proven to be the Michael Jordan/Joe Montana/Wayne Gretzky of politics. He is going up against one of the most difficult Democratic candidates ever, against unbelievable odds and has won. He’s doing it by treating voters like adults. Seems to be working too, right? He gets in a jam and just seems to either A) get lucky, B) knock it out of the park or C) both. That’s what has happened this week. Obama gets in trouble, gives one of the best speeches of his career, gets his passport data stolen, and gets Richardson.
But I don’t think Hillary will quit until it becomes impossible, mathematically. The only question left is does that mean when enough Super-delegates endorse or does it mean the convention? I hope they do a superdelegate primary like was suggested. That way it can be finished in June instead of freaking August.
I’ve stopped expecting Hillary to drop out when a reasonable person would a long time ago, because she has passed every opportunity by giving some new contrived way to win. I wouldn’t be surprised if she ran third party at this stage.
First of all, the timing is very interesting.
It was rather brave of Richardson to back Obama now, when his campaign has hit a bit of a slump rather than jump on the bandwagon when everything seemed rosy and to be going his way (the Kennedy’s back then). That shows a bit of courage - especially considering Obama has not been stellar when it comes to getting out the Hispanic vote.
However, I think the whole “pastor flap” and “race speech” has shown that Obama is not afraid to tackle an issue head on, immediately and without waiting for dozens of polls and pundits to tell him what to say, where and when. Obama is proving he knows how to quickly put out fires, face the music and move on.
Richardson was wise to back Obama now - it proves he too has some gumption and is not afraid to stick his neck out during this period of Obama’s campaign. It would have been safer for him to wait until the dust settled.
[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
<snip>I wouldn’t be surprised if she ran third party at this stage.
[/QUOTE]
That’s one way she’d be able to give the campaign to the candidate she unofficially endorsed.
Hmmm…Richardson, help or hinder? Before I decide I need to know more about his Pastor.
[QUOTE=Merkwurdigliebe]
I’ve stopped expecting Hillary to drop out when a reasonable person would a long time ago, because she has passed every opportunity by giving some new contrived way to win. I wouldn’t be surprised if she ran third party at this stage.
[/QUOTE]
I would. This is Hillary Clinton, not Joe Lieberman. While she’s going to stay in the race as long as she has a chance to win it, she’s not going to run as a third party candidate when she knows
and