Centrist Bill Richardson Enters 2008 Democratic Prez Nomination Sweepstakes
Yet another Big Democratic Name has entered the 2008 Democratic Presidential sweepstakes — a name that would have appeared perhaps bigger if people named Obama and (Ms.) Clinton were not getting all the big headlines…and sucking up all of the political oxygen: New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson:
Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico jumped into the 2008 presidential race today, announcing that he had formed a campaign exploratory committee in order to seek the Democratic nomination.“I am taking this step because we have to repair the damage that’s been done to our country over the last six years,� Mr. Richardson said in a statement. “Our reputation in the world is diminished, our economy has languished, and civility and common decency in government has perished.�
He highlighted his experience, from United Nations ambassador to state governor, as making him uniquely positioned to tackle a range of international and domestic tasks, from getting American troops out of Iraq to improving the economy and energy independence.
In fact, Richardson does have an excellent résumé and is respected by politicos in both parties. MORE:
“I can bring this country together,� he said on “This Week� on ABC. “I’m a negotiator. I’ve brought countries together closer on peace treaties. I’ve rescued Americans, hostages and servicemen.�“What we have right now is an opportunity to deal with major issues that really are dividing this country,� he said.
The announcement today from Mr. Richardson follows the latest entries into the expanding Democratic field, including Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, who entered the race on Saturday with an e-mail message to supporters that said: “I’m in. And I’m in to win.�
The Democrats now square off in what is effectively the party’s first primary, the competition for campaign donations.
In another year with less well-connected and well-financed (Clinton) candidates, or with less charisma-fortified (Obama) newcomers, Richardson might be one of the people to truly watch as a key figure, although his status as more of a centrist means he is unlikely to be the darling of the Democratic party’s powerful progressive activists or the vocal (and money-raising) “netroots.”
Even so, he has a good record in winning elections. He has done well in polls taken of his terms in office. He is not exactly made for TV, but he has two qualities that seemingly come across when he’s on any interview show or news program: sincerity and competence. He seems to be a reassuring figure. And his Hispanic background, plus his warm ties with Hispanic groups, could prove a plus.
But he’s running against candidates who are likely to suck up the money and the media oxygen. Even so, if you look at the history of primaries, surprises do happen.
On the other hand, does he have some negatives? This post by Steve Clemons (who has worked with Richardson and his staff) suggests he could face some rocky times ahead. Clemons also feels Richardson has little chance of succeeding and only serves to keep other Hispanics from stepping to the national forefront.
12 Responses to “Centrist Bill Richardson Enters 2008 Democratic Prez Nomination Sweepstakes”
Anyone who is interested in finding out more about this guy needs to read “Frozen Lightening,” a book available over the internet and put together by a very knowledgeable New Mexican. Richardson tries to talk the talk but he belongs to the one-member “Billocrat” party. It’s just about him…always has been, always will be.
Despite his negatives I’m hoping that Richardson becomes the beneficiary of an “anybody but Hillary” movement among Democratic primary voters.
More than anything else the conviction that the candidate that receives their support can, in fact, be elected is presumably foremost in those voters’ minds. Ms. Clinton has nearly 100% name recognition; everybody has already made up their minds about her. Her negatives are about as high as her positives and she consistently polls as losing to either McCain or Giuliani.
It’s very unlikely that, if nominated, she’ll be elected. Democrats should get behind somebody who can.
Dave, I’m a New Mexican and while Richardson would be an excellent Secretary of State or roving ambassador, he would be a terrible president. Read Clemons’ blog; he touches on several issues that are whispered but rarely addressed in NM. Richardson has blown through an enormous surplus left by his predecessor with little discernible gain for most New Mexicans. Our socio-economic indicators (education, health, poverty, etc.) remain among the lowest in America. He has “forced” the legislature into allocating hundreds of millions of dollars for flashy, “big ticket” projects like a space port and commuter rail system that most New Mexicans would never have voted for. He has politicized state agencies and increased executive power in ways that only George Bush could appreciate and he has demonstrated a mean and vindictive streak towards anyone who does not go along with him. I am no fan of Hillary but Richardson is not the answer.
That’s what I was thinking as well Jason.
Jason – Clemons also mentions a negative attitude towards women. He is from the Clinton/Monica school, would be a good SoS.
If he’s been such a terrible administrator in New Mexico, why was he reelected with 69% of the vote?
I think he’s shown a proven ability as a problem-solver, and is more results-oriented than bound by ideology. I’m only interested in someone for ’08 who is pragmatic and will work with Congress as it was intended.
Kim, one reason for his high election (and reelection) numbers for governor is the incredible weakness of the campaigns and candidates offered by the Republicans in 2002 and 2006. NM has a much higher number of registered Democrats and my surmise is that a lot of disheartened Republicans simply stayed home and didn’t vote.
The reason that many consider him a good match for SOS (or a similar position) is because his idea of “working with someone” is telling them what to do and then getting pissed if they don’t do it. Even the usually-compliant Democratic legislature in NM has grown tired of being rolled over on every issue. He works well alone – bullying, cajoling, pushing, individual dictators, etc. in order to get a “reasonable result.” He is not so good when he has to deal with an equally-powerful branch such as Congress, especially the Senate, because they are less amenable to bullying.
As for problem-solving, I’ll be interested to see how much information comes out regarding his less-then-successful tenure as head of the Dept. of Energy under Clinton. The full story of his involvement in the Wen Ho Lee case has never been told and there were suggestions, never proven, that he was the “leaker” who identified Lee as this enormous security risk (and we all know how that one turned out).
You are absolutely correct that Richardson is not bound by ideology. He’ll take campaign contributions from anyone and he will never EVER put any ideology over his own interests.
Kim – Deetroit and NOLA re-elected bad mayors. We don’t always vote for the best candidate. The recent national election was a pleasant surprise. Richardson speaks well and has a good TV presence. Halley Brabour in Mississippi is an example on the other side. They rank below NM in many catagories in education and infant mortality.
Did anybody notice this banal, matter-of-fact statement in the story?
“The Democrats now square off in what is effectively the party’s first primary, the competition for campaign donations.”
This is true of the GOP primary as well, and campaign donations come overwhelming from a range of Americans who could be described as the extremely well off to the obscenely wealthy. Before 98% of Americans ever get to vote on a candidate, that candidate has to pass through the gates kept by the wealthy.
The problem with “centrism” in the US is that it is defined by the wealthy, and that ain’t democracy.
Oh, one more thing about King Bill. Despite an overwhelming number of registered Democrats, Richardson DID NOT (would not? could not?) deliver NM to Kerry in 2004. The cynics among us would say he did not try very hard because he knew he wanted to run himself in 2008 and did not want an incumbent Democrat in the White House. The alternative was to wait until 2112 but his governorship runs out in 2010 (he is limited to 2 terms) which would leave him two “empty years” out of the public eye and with no public trough to dip into. Make no mistake, Richardson is every bit as calculating as Hillary and as manipulative as Karl Rove.
I don’t think anyone who isn’t calculating actually makes it into the presidency. Also, John Edwards also failed to deliver his state to Kerry- is that because he also was thinking ahead to his own candidacy in ’08? Kerry’s problems resulted from a lack of broad-based appeal within the Democratic party (beyond the eastern seaboard), overreliance on consultants who obviously lacked Rove’s competence (I don’t like him but he knows how to take a lackluster candidate like GW who didn’t even become a responsible adult until after 40 and turn him into a winner) and an inability to respond aggressively to attacks from the Republican smear machine. He lost because he was, overall, a weak candidate, not because Bush had been a great leader.
Maybe you have your reasons for intensely disliking him, but it is too early for me to rule him out, so I’m choosing to keep an open mind. I’m sure whatever there is in his past will come out in the campaign, and then we can all judge for ourselves.
BTW, I agree that HC is cool and calculating- but that in itself doesn’t rule her out as a viable candidate. Mostly, I’m interested in a competent centrist candidate, who will lead the country out of six years of disasterous Republican rule.
I took the trouble to read Clemons post- and I must say that I’m not impressed by his conclusions. I don’t think its appropriate to try to destroy a man’s reputation based on rumors. In one sentence he tells us that he’s not trying to demean Richardson, in the next he’s demeaning Richardson with rumor and innuendo. Does it bother the social conservatives that watch O’Reilly daily that he’s a womanizer? (and that’s not just rumored – charges were actually filed) Yet he has the highest-rated cable news show on TV.