Of course I originally wanted my hero Gore to sweep in and win it all and heal all our sorrows. But that was then; this is now. With no Al on the horizon---and after reading this week's cover story in Time, I reluctantly hope for his sake he'll stay out of the fray---I find I'm drawn to Richardson. He made a big impression on me the first time I saw him (on Real Time with Bill Maher) and though I am not ready to commit, he's the only candidate so far to whom I feel any sort of a pull. .
In his announcement, Richardson---a man of truly formidable intelligence---is friendly, reassuring, and unstoppably low key. He sounds quietly competent and sure of himself; he sounds like a chief executive with a sound grasp of what can---and cannot---be accomplished. That could work in his favor or to his detriment---or more likely in this polarized nation, both in his favor and to his detriment.
I wish he'd mix it up a bit. So far, I've been consistently impressed by Richardson's demeanor and presentation when he's being interviewed seriously on serious questions (and, of course, by his hilarious ads). He might need to work a bit on the campaign rhetoric and the sound bites.
Richardson does best, or so it seems to me, when an interviewer gives him room and scope for a reasoned reply. This segment from Hardball (February 26, 2007) is a good example.
In October 2006 on Real Time with Bill Maher, he discussed the uses of diplomacy (and the Bush Administration's failures in that line).. I thought he came across exceedingly well. It's one of the interviews that really solidified my interest in him.
I see Richardson as the candidate of choice for moderate Dems. And Richardson has this advantage over Gore and, of couse, Hillary and Edwards: he is not (welll, not yet, I should say) a deeply divisive, polarizing candidate. The soft-spoken, thoughtful Richardson has been very successful in building bipartisan support in New Mexico---though this will not work in his favor with a certain type of take-no-prisoners Dem who doesn't believe in negotiation and compromise. So it's both an advantage and a disadvantage!
But does Richardson have a prayer of rising to "the top tier"? As to the whole current "rock star" nonsense---Richardson would do well if it weren't for the charismatic rock star power of Hillary (huh?), Edwards, and Obama, but since he's up against the rock stars yada yada yada---I'll be glad when the starstruck press tires of this strained metaphor (because it surely is strained) and starts talking about which candidates are most like a rock, or a beacon in the darkness, or almost anything else.. I've said it before and I'll say it again: the next president is going to have a hard and---I fear---thankless job and long uphill slog. While there would be glory in successfully overseeing the repair of the damage that the Bush Administration has inflicted on the country, what are the odds of success?
Please, people,: get a grip. Long hard slog; thankless job; problematic rewards; instead, whoever comes next is likely to be blamed for whatever he or she can't clean up or fix. This is a job for someone who can hit the ground running and especially for someone who is able to get people from both parties to work together. You know...to do that thing we remember from way back: "I'm a Uniter, not a Divider."
If I weren't scared for different reasons and in different degrees by all of the "top tier" Republicans, a part of me would be vengefully hoping that one of them wins it all, so long as the Dems remain in control of Congress. They made the mess; let them clean it up if they're so sure they know how to do it...except: no. I remember the pre-911 Giuliani and the former incarnation of John McCain. No way do I want to see either of them succeed George Bush.
I pulled together a few comments from the blogosphere that ought to be of interest to Dems and others with an interest in Richardson. There wasn't as much immediate reaction as I'd expected from the blogs I regularly read.
NOTES FROM THE BLOGOSPHERE: THE WASHINGTON POST
The Pro-Familia Candidate [Joel Achenbach, The Washington Post]
Aschenbach discusses Richardson's Latino background in some depth. As to Richardson the candidate, he writes:
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have stirred discussion about gender and race in presidential politics, but Richardson's ethnicity hasn't gotten much attention. Partly this is because Richardson's echo-chamber message has been experience, experience, experience. His pitch is that he's a doer, an executive, not just one of those senatorial windbags. He knows that Americans tend to go for governors in presidential elections.
He was elected to Congress in 1982, and later served as ambassador to the United Nations and secretary of energy in the Clinton administration. Along the way he became known as an international troubleshooter, and found himself in sensitive negotiations with the likes of Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein and the Taliban. It's an impressive résumé, though collectively it may make him seem all over the place. A man with a fuzzy profile.
He hopes to find a way to rise to the top tier of Democratic presidential candidates. In the first Democratic debate he never looked comfortable and got kind of lost in the shuffle. He's reputed to be a first-class retail politician ("You know, I hold the world's handshaking record"), but confesses that he's still getting the hang of being a candidate: "I admit I don't have my shtick down yet."
[quote ends]
Which is sort of what I was saying. When he told his Saddam Hussein anecdote on Leno, all that really came through for me was that (1) he violated a cultural rule of etiquette and gave Saddam an opportunity to be or to seem pissed off; and (2) Saddam backed down much easier than I would have expected. In other words, the real message---Richardson's negotiating skills, his fearlessness, and his dead-on instincts---sort of sank out of sight, perhaps because it wasn't exactly a light-hearted anecdote. I hope he'll work on adapting his style to the content and the content to the context.
On the other hand, "fuzzy profile"? The hell?
THE POLITICO (in PLAYS FOR THE PRESIDENCY]
Preemptive Strike: Richardson should play the (environmental) Green Card [The Politico, Plays for The Presidency]
Today, Bill Richardson formally announced his candidacy in Los Angeles. He gets a break with a new poll that puts him, finally, into double-digits among Iowa Democrats. His job interview spots â funny Screens on the dry sitcom comedy The Office â are a high-touch showcase of his formidable presidential skill set. Still, heâs way behind the leaders in money, media mentions and identifiable supporters....
Today, we have just the play for the former Energy Secretary....Our recommended call? The Preempt, an attacking move, far to the right on The Playmakerâs Table, which flips competitive advantage by beating a favorite to an expected position.
By casting himself as the environmental candidate (D or R), Richardson can run, in effect, a double Preempt.
- First, heâll de-position Gore as a steward indeed of the environment (not a potential candidate) and thus as a critically important and presumed supporter (not a potential rival).
- Second, heâll preclude any other candidate (D or R) from seizing this huge, predictably looming, issue. We have to figure theyâll all get there somehow by virtue of its impending and rising importance.
- If Richardson takes the mantle as this raceâs Big Green Candidate, Dems will support him as a soldier against global warming. And because heâs a business-first kind of guy, cross-over conservatives may vote for him too, knowing now what even Rupert Murdoch has intoned, that green is âsimply good business.â...
[quote ends]
Seems pretty sound to me, since---and I hope the Democrats who are pining for Gore will take this in--- .I don't think Al is going to run, guys. Which means it's time to move on.
THE GUN TOTING LIBERAL
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson To Make Official Announcement For Oval Office Run; Will Highlight His Mexican Heritage⦠[The GTL, Gun Toting Liberal]
The GTL took exception, as I did, to Aschebach's reference to Richardson's "fuzzy" profile:
âFuzzy profileâ? Iâm still trying to figure out how The WaPoâs Mr. Achenbach can present the fact that somebody with an impressive list of accomplishments can somehow appear âfuzzyâ. Itâs not THAT long of a list of accomplishments; just FAR longer than any other horse in the race, thatâs all. Frankly, the only thing âfuzzyâ I see about Governor Richardson is his stance on our illegal alien problem, in which he does seem to be all over the map according to his official campaign websiteâ¦
The GTL does have some questions about Richardson's position on immigration.
Does he favor blanket amnesty for 12.5 million-plus illegal aliens? Okay, letâs say he doesnât call it âamnestyâ, but a special, discriminatory âreformâ which gives preference to Mexican individuals who are willing to do blue collar jobs on âthe cheapâ over skilled, educated, high-tech immigrants from other nations?.
Does the Governor see the problem presented in giving blanket amnesty to people who simply sneak into the country illegally versus making the OCCASIONAL exception for those who were brought here as young children by illegal aliens; children who know no other way of life than the American way of life? Also, how does the Governor feel about the loophole allowing Mexican parents to sneak over the border to give birth to âAmerican Citizensâ in the same manner that he, himself was brought to become an American Citizen? This is a loophole that MUST be closed ASAP as far as I am concerned, and if the Governor doesnât agree, I might have a VERY hard time supporting him for the Oval Office.
In my way of thinking, if there are 12.5 million illegal aliens, there might be a good reason to give special consideration to those FEW who came to America under special circumstances beyond their control. Whatever that number is, it sure as heck isnât TWELVE-PLUS MILLION and there isnât anything âfuzzyâ about that.
[quote ends]
Fair enough. Richardson's "realistic immigration policy" is here. It seems clear to me from the following that he and the GTL wouldn't see eye to eye:
Establish a Reasonable Path to Legalization for Many of Those Who are Already Here
This is not amnesty, but is a tough but fair opportunity for legalization and the possibility of citizenship. Most of the illegal workers in the country are hard-working, law abiding people simply pursuing the American Dream. Those who pass a background check, learn English, pay back taxes and fines for being here illegally get the opportunity for legal status. Those that don't must leave.
This makes sense to me. It seems obvious to me that the undocumented worker problem exists because they fill the "servant class" niche that was wiped out when we started expecting Americans who hired people to perform menial jobs to do tiresome things such as paying them some sort of subsistence and be otherwise accountable for them.
In other words, the problem arises from the wish of certain Americans for an underpaid/easily exploited underclass. to provide cheap labor. So why, I ask myself, all the animosity towards the workers (I mean the hard-working ones providing lawn care services and such) rather than to the people who give them work? Would they be coming here to work if people didn't employ them? Let's round up all the employers of illegal immigrants(including those who employ firms which employ them) and jeer at them for a bit, is what I say.
The fly in the ointment for any plan that legitimizes illegal workers is that once they have the rights of citizens or guest workers or whatever, the advantages to employers of cheap undocumented labor will presumably disappear....
UPDATE: The GTL has posted further commentary on concerns about Richardson's immigration policy here.
BLUE MASS GROUP
Richardson makes it official: he's in. So what are you waiting for? [David, Blue Mass Group]
[quote begins]
...Barack is making mistakes. Edwards has a distressing tendency to get suckered by warmongers, and frankly has a pretty thin resume. Hillary is, well, Hillary.
It's pretty hard to dispute that, on paper, Richardson is the "most qualified" candidate. But that of course won't get him the nomination or the presidency (though it's a good start). Charisma? Don't count him out until you watch his DNC winter meeting speech -- he's much better than you think. His vote for DOMA when in Congress? Unfortunate -- but here's Ryan on how seriously Richardson is taking gay rights these days (note, also, that Richardson was the only major candidate to even mention gay rights at the DNC winter meeting). Iraq? Richardson wants out, period, though he also understands the need to stay engaged diplomatically. Health care? He has a plan that is something like the MA plan -- enforced employer participation coupled with an individual mandate. Maybe Medicare-for-all would be better, but at least he's talking seriously. There's more on various issues here.
So don't tell me that he hasn't raised enough money to win -- that just turns the election over to the pundits and the big-money donors. Don't tell me that his poll numbers stink -- it's far too early for that, plus they're getting better....
[quote ends; links in original]
Yes, exactly.
WONKETTE [Because hello, at least they gave him some space if not their love]
STILL JENNY FROM THE BLOCK DEPARTMENT--Bill Richardson: Did You Know that He is Mexican? [Wonkette]
It's a typical Wonkette write-up, and therefore characteristically mean, but hey---it's a write-up. Any publicity etc.
Comments