Richardson will have to endorse Clinton because his main hispanic base is for her. He will listen to his people.

How is Bill working Governor Richardson?  Three day weekends in Almaty?

Answering Chuck from NY's question on a related post.

Chuck asked:
1) Why do you see your candidate being better suited to be President if elected?
2) What makes you think your candidate has what it takes to successfully lead our country?
3) Why do you think your candidate can beat the GOP nominee in November?


All right, Chuck, you asked, I'll give you my personal answer. I am sure other supporters of Senator Obama could do better. Hopefully, they will respond to you.

After eight years of an administration that has been deceptive and ruined the trust Americans (and friends of America) have in the U.S. government, we need a President with integrity, good judgment, and leadership ability.

INTEGRITY
Senator Obama clearly outshines his opponent here. He has campaigned cleanly and honestly. He does not misrepresent his opponents' records for political gain. Rather, he spends his time convincing voters to suport his candidacy because he realizes that to succeed in office he will need the popular will of the people to accomplish the substantive changes in policy that we need. You can only get such a popular mandate only by appealing to the best in people, gaining their collective and determined commitment.

Obama co-wrote landmark ethics bills that have passed in Illinois and in Washington, DC, to reduce the influence of corporate money in shaping our policies. He recognizes that too many decisions made by government have been influenced by (selfish) corporations.

EXPERIENCE
For all the chatter about "experience" and "inspiration", please note that Clinton has been in elected office for 7 years, while Obama has been in elected office for 11 years. Thus he's been writing and sponsoring legislation and working with both Parties longer than she has.

For that matter, the value of experience may be suspect, given what Clinton has posited. She has claimed on several occasions that she has "35 years of experience". That would mathematically mean, however, that she had 20 years of experience when she embarked on the 1993 plan now termed "HillaryCare", which basically died on arrival, and that she had 29 years of experience in 2002 when she voted to give W the authorization to start the Iraq War.

These two issues are the ones for which she is best known. Despite her stated years of experience, both were terrible mistakes that have hurt our troops, our economic situation, and our reputation.

Meanwhile, Obama has co-sponsored several bills that have passed in the Illinois Senate and in the U.S. Senate, addressing issues from health care, crime, immigration, ethics, etc.-- he's covered a great deal of policy ground. He may be rightly painted as the candidate with lesser experience, but he certainly has sufficient experience, and that is what matters.

JUDGMENT and LEADERSHIP
More importantly, he has exhibited superior judgment, both on the Iraq War, and on what really matters to the American people. That is why he has been so successful in combating the Clinton incumbency. I attribute his skillful campaign to his life experience and political savvy. Hillary Clinton was way, way ahead in December, with leads in the teens and twenties in every state but Illinois. Just one month later, Obama has done rather well. He beat Clinton in IA by 9%, narrowly lost to her in NH by 2%, lost to her in NV by 6%, and trounced her in SC by 28%, receiving more than double her votes in the most recent contested primary. His ability to command the respect of voters in such a short timeframe demonstrates his leadership.

True leaders inspire. Obama is a true leader.

WINNING the GENERAL ELECTION

Which brings us to the notion of electability. It is unquestioned that Clinton and her husband are polarizing figures. For all the good feelings that the Clinton administration engenders among Democrats, we should remember that the shenanigans in Clinton's second term (scandals galore) hobbled Al Gore in 2000. He had to run away from the taint (yes, unfortunately, it's true) of the Clinton administration, and as a consequence voters elected W. Yes, voters voted for W to "clean up" after the Clintons.

Clinton's campaign has tried to diminish the importance of Clinton's electability, but here again is a huge contrast between her and Senator Obama. Republicans will be engaged if she is the nominee and will be able to raise large sums of money from people, threatening the Democrats' chances in the general election.

Meanwhile, it is well-known that independents and (moderate) Republicans have been flocking to Obama's campaign. I know this is true from talking with people, and you can confirm, if you wish, by checking polls. Obama is not simply obtaining support from Democrats, he's getting support from everybody. Witness that 650,000 of us hoi polloi have donated to his campaign. This presages well for his winning in November.

It should have been easy for Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Claire McCaskill, Janet Napolitano, etc. to back Clinton-- she should have been a shoe-in. Instead they decided to support the future of the Party.

So, Chuck, the question is not whether you should pick Obama or Clinton, but only at what time will you decide that Obama is the right choice for you and for the American people.

Sincerely,

Jerry


PS: I have tried my best to give you correct facts. Feel free to respond if you have any questions.

I presume you mean Bill Clinton is working hard to keep him from endorsing Obama.  Also, doesn't Obama have a rally TONIGHT in New Mexico?  Seems to me a 3:30 ET flight should get into New Mexico right around the time the rally is kicking off.  Just something to speculate about.

{ How is Bill working Governor Richardson? }

Every see Pulp Fiction?

Like Obama's peole are not trying to get his endorsment. MSNBC is completely ridiculous!

Oh, First Read must be so pissed off that this isn't happening today - or for that matter, not at all. But alas, they will come up with some other inane piece of trivia to tout Obama.

Of course, according to First Read, if Obama gets Richardson's nod, then it's because he's the best. But if Hillary gets it, then it's because Bill Clinton twisted his arm. For Christ's sake, you don't even TRY to hide you Obama bias anymore.

Just exactly when did you "journalists" sell your soul to the Obama campaign? It's not only transparent, it's pathetic.

HILLARY '08

Richardson is closer to Obama in terms of his position on the war.  Ted Kennedy was a mentor of  Richardson's.  If he endorses Hillary one would have to suspect a deal.  Also, Hillary dissed latinos last night in the debate (a strategy I didn't understand - Rachel Maddow caught that wedge politics last night - blacks against latinos).
Obama '08

the young latino's are for Obama.  Many older lation's are not for Clinton due to the fact that President Clinton gave us NAFTA which hurt latino's in the US and abroad.  Clinton shoul not take the Latino vote for granted!

the young latino's are for Obama.  Many older lation's are not for Clinton due to the fact that President Clinton gave us NAFTA which hurt latino's in the US and abroad.  Clinton shoul not take the Latino vote for granted!
Juan, L.A., Ca. (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 12:24 PM)

Juan, only American citizens can vote (legally).

I am hoping Obama gets Richardson's endorsement tonight! It would help him with the older Latino voters and I think it's possible because Richardson and Obama are closer on Iraq and because Richardson has enough international experience to know how much the world's view of America would improve if a black man named Obama was our president!

You know who the media wants, it is so obvious,Sen Obama as he can do no wrong , this is a man's world and everything you read is so pro obama , I like the guy, but please what makes him so much better then Mrs. Clinton? Oh could it be that Mrs. Clinton is a WOMAN. Well that is exactly what I think.

Maybe Bill hs promised to take Richardson with him on his next trip to Kazakhstan tohave dinner with the President there. What's a little human right's violations among friends.

Paul from NY, your temper in posts remind me of specific candidates  :)

Gov. Richardson could easily endorse either candidate if he chose to do so.  The funny thing is, if he endorses Obama he can say that he was inspired.  If he endorses Clinton, people will assume it is due to political advancement.  I am an Obama supporter, and I do believe that the media is harsh on the Clinton's, but I would say that they brought that on themselves....i.e.  whitewater, impeachment hearings, partisan hatred, etc.  I think Sen. Clinton is an excellent candidate and she brings with her the good and the bad from her husband's administration.

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY

I don't think you should vote for anyone.  In no way, shape or form did she dissed latino's.  You are the type of person the media looks for.  Gullable and confused.  

Obama, last night brought me from being very anti-Obama to liking him, though, not more than Hillary.  I think he would make a great President, in 8 years.  

Jerry, you hit the nail right on the head.  Great job.  One more point.  Obama matches up so much better against McCain.  And beats McCain by a larger margin.  Clinton will not get the Independant vote from McCain.  Clinton will not get the Republican cross over vote that Obama gets.  Clinton will definately not get the youth vote that Obama has stimulated.  If Clinton is the candidate for the Dems, the Dems loose.  I for one will not vote for her and I hate the Republicans.  I can not live through another bi-partisan administration.  They were ushered in and heightened with the Clintons and have continued through the Bush adm.  American can not live through another scandel ridded and crippled Clinton administration.  We need change...why go backwards?

Richardson will not endorse anyone...why would he? He wants to see what happens on Super Tuesday just like everyone else! And Bill Clinton has always been friends with him...he doesn't need to "work him"!
Hillary For President!!!!!!!!!!!!

I wonder if Bill Richardson also noted the subtle race card tossed out there last night...

Clinton: You know, I was in Atlanta last night, and an African-American man said to me, "I used to have a lot of construction jobs, and now it just seems like the only people who get them anymore are people who are here without documentation."

I'm sure the Clinton supporters will come out in force to say it wasn't a race card play.  If it wasn't for all the other comments made so far that are basically just like this one, I'd probably believe that, but there are just too many now to brush off as coincidence.

I just cannot stop laughing..........

After eight years of an administration that has been deceptive and ruined the trust Americans (and friends of America) have in the U.S. government, we need a President with integrity, good judgment, and leadership ability.

LOL.....
So by electing a woman who gets money from chinese dishwashers, people who are now in jail, people who are being investigated, her husband, who worked for a company that sold lists to people that cleaned out the bank accounts of Alzheimers patients, people are going to elect Hillary Clinton??????

And this rubbish about President Bush and how he destroyed the country is just some more liberal left wing drug induced garbage.  This comes from people who are either too lazy or too stupid to get ahead in life and must depend on "Mommy Hillary" to get their lives in order because they were never adult enough to do it themselves in the first place.

And note that Bill Clinton is working him over hard.
He must have some serious photos of Bill Richardson doing something nasty or holding a secret that will destroy him.  That is the Clinton agenda, torture your enemies until they see things your way.

To Jerry Tsai
Nicely said...I am a converted Republican who changed to the Democratic party last summer in order for me to vote for Obama.  

Don't you think sometimes "Oblivous" works? As Obama said in one of the debates was" I told my suragates not to give me any notes 2 minutes before the speech because I'll lose it" or when he was asked why he had no notes, no tracks of time using during of his 3 years as a Senator of Illinois? He can not answer it straight. So, here is my conclusion: He might lost the important misleading reports from the Bush/CIA??? therefore he voted NO for the war??? But, the important point here is: One good judment does not guaranty success...how to solve and tackle the problem is called EXPERIENCES and WISDOM. Hilary based on the misleading reports and the history of Saddam Hussein to vote YES to go to war. She deserves to get credit for protecting our country.

I remember Richardson's campaign denying they were planning to turn Iowa supporters in places where they didn't meet threshold toward Obama, and then later doing just that. I remember also reading that Bill was incensed by this 'betrayal' and placed a couple phone calls, etc.

I suppose something similar could be playing out here.

How is this even a question.   Didn't Bill Clinton give Bill Richardson a number of appointments during the prior Clinton Administration?

For Richardson to have not already endorsed Senator Clinton (even if he does tomorrow) says volumes to me about the Clintons.  Why wouldn't he have come out and endorsed his own bosses immediately after dropping out?

How is this article bias? It seems like Clinton supporters are getting a bit nervous. MSNBC has been one of the only even handed news sources available this election cycle. Clinton still has the advantage going into Super Tuesday, so stop blaming the media for your candidates polarizing persona. If she loses, it will be because of her "35 years" of divisiveness she so proudly touts.

Something to think about:  The Democrats plan to pull the troops out of Iraq and have continuously condemned President Bush for going in to begin with; when Iran develops nuclear weapons, or Syria decides to sell or use the WMD's Sadam moved to their country (everyone knows he had them, where did they go) - then how will either of these candidates, as President, be able to convince the American people that war is necessary.  Anyone who believes that we can just sit down and "talk nice" to these people is dreaming.  A vote for the Democrats is a vote for terrorism.

Very nice work Jerry Tsai!

Obama O8....  true and fundamental change.

People can say what they want,but Obama did make his point anout Hillary's authoriziation of military force.  He said the paperwork was headed as such.  She showed lack of judgement.  That's a little scary when you think about the critical decisions she would have to make as president.

I wonder, if those who think that the media is biased toward Obama (and after watching Wolfie and Clintons last night on stage basically...well) I disagree, but....

Is it POSSIBLE that they've SEEN THIS WOMAN UP CLOSE and KNOW what she's like? That's why I changed my endorsement, I started learning about her here in Iowa, watching her with her staff, etc. It is REMARKABLE how she turns on and off the charm like a light switch. NOTHING genuine about that, just more of the same 'ol.

how did ted kenedy vote for this so called war that clinton voted for

HE S A CLINTON KISS UP, BESIDES HE GETS ELECTED BY ILLEGALS, LIKE CLINTON WILL.  IM IN S TX. AND I GUARANTEE YOU THEY VOTE=GET WELFARE=FOODSTAMPS=HOUSING=AND EVEN MEDICAID

I'm totally split as to who I should cast my vote for on super tuesday.  I like Obama but I don't think he's ready for the whitehouse and with Clinton-she just has too much baggage.  However, I think both would make a great Vice President.  I hate to admit this, but I'm actually considering voting for McCain in November.  I've never switched parties... Can someone help me better decide who I should vote for?  Thanks

is kenedy and mc cain good frieds

Chuck from NY, let's take a look at Obama's integrity.

To see how shrewedly Obama's camp played the race card and baited Bill Clinton into the mud just watch this video - Obama's own words from the Nevada debate where he conceded pushing the race story. Don't believe me, watch for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQY_9ZcsjpQ&NR=1

What I most dislike about this malicious hypocrisy and what I object to is not that Obama's camp tried to secure the african-american vote. Fine. Clinton tried to secure the female vote too. However, Clinton has tried to do that without making Obama out to be a misogynist. What I find reprehensible is that Obama played his cards in a way to not only secure his african-american vote but also to bait Bill Clinton and make him seem racist. Read for a play-by-play on how it was done:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23140008-7583,00.html

Watching this video and reading this article should convince you of this much - Obama is not the hope, unity candidate he makes himself out to be. If you are still not convinced then I have nothing more to say.

Is it possible that none of the former Democratic candidates have endorsed either Clinton or Obama because they would prefer to have their supporters make their own decision on who they think is the best for them ?

Just wondering.

how come nothing is being said about the last debate about obama saying he made a mistake about working for slum lord and last night he said he said he always made the right decision

Hey, how would you want the First Read guys to say about Hillary and Obama? Was there a rumor about Hillary getting the endorsement that should have compelled First Read to post? If so, you guys would be smiling broadly and approvingly at the rumor of Richardson endorsing Hillary had First Read reported it.
But when there is nothing to find a rumor concerning Richardson endorsing Hillary but a rumor about Obama potentially getting such an endorsement, you rush to accuse the guys of bias or ridicule. How funny.
An almost equal number of endorsements for Hillary and Obama are not always reported by First Read. For isntance, it was a comment author who posted the American Nurses' Association endorsement of Hillary, not First Read. Likewise, many Obama endorsemments weren't reported. Is that subtle bias? If i am absolutely sure First Read is leaning heavily toward Obama with its onesided reporting, I'll stop reading, period.

I would have expected Richardson to endorse Billary since he is close to them but I would love a Richardson endorsement of Obama.

I supported Richardson at first but recently switched to the Obama camp after his win in Iowa.  

I totally agree with Paul´s comment on MSNBC´s tilt toward Obama. I´ve been an avid fan of all its political shows (watching clips online) and I can´t stand to see their bias against Hillary anymore. Most recently, the way they dismissed the Florida vote when 1.4 million dems went to the trouble to express themselves. They basically made fun of Hillary for going down to give a "victory speech" when it was absolutely the right thing for her to show appreciation to the people to who took time to vote under the cirmumstances. Abrams is the only one to point out the obvious on that one.

I feel that MSNBC is working for the Obama campaign. Their coverage is anything but fair and balanced.  Most, if not all of their anchors utter the name Clinton with such disdain, it's really troubling.  Unfortunetly many people make their decisions based on what they hear these people say.  They covered the Kennedy endorsement all day long, as if it was the second coming.  Yes, it was a good day for Obama, I will give him that. However, as soon as the national election comes along, the media (probably not MSNBC, unless they jump ship) will be saying, "Oh Kennedy is so liberal, he's going to hurt Obama."  It's frustraing to listen to these people, especially Morning Joe, those two can't get away from their feelings towards the Clintons.   I watch the show to hear what the guests have to say more than anything else.  It's interesting how when people are saying anything good about Clinton, they interuppt them, (mostly Joe, as he does to everyone.)  They spend a lot of time talking about Obama Girl, which is just ridiculous.   People are entitled to their opinions, but there should be a disclaimer on the bottom of the screen that says "fired up and ready to go."    
      Anyway, I believe Richardson would and should endorse Hillary. If you remember in the debates, he came to her defense and backed up her opinions several times.  I also belive Hillary is giving him serious consideration for VP, which would be a good decision.  I expect the endorsement will come within a day or two of super Tuesday.  
       I support Hillary for several reasons.  I believe she is the strongest, smartest, and most capable person to lead this country.  
She's going to be ready on the first day of office to turn the page on the horrible situation this current administration has left us in.  
        On a personal note, I support Hillary because my son, was born with a very rare genetic bone disorder and he's already broken 7 bones in 7 months.  There is no prognosis and no cure.  He was born into this world with a great deal working against him and he has many obstacles he has to overcome.   As a parent, it's heartbreaking to watch, and to not be able to do anything about it.  Knowing that he has so much working against him with his health, and such, I want to make sure there aren't more obstacles added in his way.  Hillary Clinton has been fighting for children, for the past 35 years.   She wants health insurance for all, and tax breaks for people like us in the middle cass.  She will turn this economy around, and provide some comfort for me knowing that someone who cares about my sons future on many levels is in the White House.  There is no distinction for me, with my head and my heart I support Hillary Clinton for president.

Hey Paul - I'm sure you loved the CNN debate last night.  It was a love fest between Billary and Wolf Blitzer.

The MSNBC debates w/ Russert and Williams are so much better and professional.

Barry has given up in Ca. where his own polling indicated Hillary will win BIG. He is off to concentrate on a couple of tiny states that he still has a chance of winning. Who needs Cali anyway, they aren't really a big delegate state...


HA HA!

Barry has given up in Ca. where his own polling indicated Hillary will win BIG. He is off to concentrate on a couple of tiny states that he still has a chance of winning. Who needs Cali anyway, they aren't really a big delegate state...


HA HA!

Barry has given up in Ca. where his own polling indicated Hillary will win BIG. He is off to concentrate on a couple of tiny states that he still has a chance of winning. Who needs Cali anyway, they aren't really a big delegate state...


HA HA!

Jerry, the "landmark" ethics legislation essentially was nothing more than a ban on free lunches.  And you'll recall that Obama and McCain got into a huge argument over it at the time, which, I'm sure will be rehased if Hillary's not the nominee.  At least to me, Ted Kennedy is somewhat of a has-been heretic.  While Caroline Kennedy-Schlossberg's endorsement is nice, she has no clout other than her being the daughter of a great president.  The Kennedy's (JKF's side, that is) endorsement of Obama is significant only in that it shows media bias toward Obama.  Only the media thinks it's such a big deal.  John Kerry?  If I were Hillary, I wouldn't even have wanted his endorsement.  "It's well known that indepedents and moderates are flocking" to Obama's campaign.  Flocking?  You almost sound like Obama: a bunch of empty rhetoric.  Put down the KoolAid.

Please, please, please endorse Obama.  Do it today.  There are rare chances to make a real difference in this world, and this is one of them.  Clinton is great.  She is.  But Obama is better, and has a better chance of winning, and can really take politics and the country into the positive future.  I have a feeling you know this.  Please.  We will support you.  Endorse Obama.

Wouldn't it be a hoot if Gov Richardson endorsed his neighboring Senator, McCain.  Bet that'd get people going What the....

Richardson is going to be Obama's running mate.  Talk about the unbeatable ticket.

One of the greatest accomplishment of Obama is something none of the candidates of any campaign in many years has been able to do - inspire thousands upon thousands of young people to not only take an interest in politics but to work for him in his campaign too.  Realistically, if Obama wins, then the democratic party wins with thousands of new active members, but if there's a "fix" in the mix the democratic party stands to lose these young folks in droves.  These young people are our future.  They hold the future of our nation in their hands.  My "hope" is that they achieve success on their first time out and that Barack Obama is elected our next President of a truly United States of America.

Everyone who wants universal healthcare should endorse Obama, because there is zero chance that Hillary's version will become law.  In the first place, it's probably illegal.  You can't make a law that says that Americans MUST pay money to private insurance companies.  It's one thing to make auto insurance a requirement for people who want to use the nation's roads.  It's quite another to require health insurance for people who want to live in this country.  Hillary's version will be challenged in the courts, it will be challenged in Congress, but most importantly, it will be used against her during the general election.  The Republicans will never allow mandated private health care to become law.  Not after a million years of partisan bickering and court challenges.

Nearly all Americans want access to good, affordable healthcare.  But the mandate is a deal-killer for Republicans.  And like it or not, the Republicans WILL be voting in the next election, and if Hillary gets the nomination they WILL be voting against her and what I suspect the Republican opposition will refer to as her "Forced Socialized Medicine" or some such thing.

Obama has the better bill, and I think he can even sell it to the Republicans.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):