Why did Richardson lose? Racism or limited appeal?

[jackson_dem]

Why do you believe Bill Richardson's campaign finished a distant 4th? Was it because of racism against Latinos or because he had limited appeal?

[TahitiNut]

1. Here's a hint ...

[onehandle]

11. Hey look, John Edwards is closer to Dennis Kucinch than Obama or Hillary.

Whaddaya know?

[TahitiNut]

15. Yup.

It's UNCANNY (imho) how accurately that reflects my own opinions after hundreds of hours reading, researching, watching, and listening. Kucinich was the only candidate that came close to espousing the kind of sane, "Win-Win" policies that I support. Edwards was a distant second - with the single biggest problem of his vote on the IWR. (For which he unconditionally apologized, without weasel words.) Both Kucinich and Edwards accurately identify the pernicious corruption of corporatism - fascism with up-to-date clothing and better PR.

Obama's policy positions are, imho, only marginally better than Clinton's - and he doesn't suffer the glaring fault of surrendering Congress's Constitutional power to declare war - given to a pathological narcissist to do for no legitimate reason. Obama has run a decent campaign - which is orders of magnitude more than I could say for Clinton, whose campaign is a total clusterfuck.

Richardson was Secretary of Energy (after Hazel) when I worked for a DOE contractor as a Research Scientist. The DOE was an out-sourced joke, and still is, with contractors given virtually unhindered (and fraud-redolent) access to the taxpayers' money. He might seem to be a decent enough fellow, but he's NO manager/administrator and NO watchdog over the People's resources.

[Kaleva]

27. Something odd about the chart.

Most of the Democrats are right of center? I think everyone listed ought to be shifted to the left a few spots.

[TahitiNut]

31. They're portrayed against a more global spectrum than merely U.S.

Furthermore, the majority of today's elected "Democrats" are actually further "Right" and "North" than the average Eisenhower Republican in the 50s. It's stunning to those of us old enough to remember and nutty enough to pay attention how FAR to the RIGHT our entire political discourse has shifted in the last 28 years.

Back "in my day," Canada was regarded as very Conservative (they had "blue laws" fer krissakes!) ... while now it's liberal enough to make me envious. And THEY haven't changed as much as WE have.

Here's a depiction of how DU members map on that array. (I ran this poll last year for the second time. It's not an anomaly.) Take the quiz yourself at http://www.politicalcompass.org/ (It's better than any of the others I've looked at.)

[Kaleva]

32. My results

"Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -1.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 1.59 "

I match with about 1.2% of DU members.

[TahitiNut]

33. Well, you might not feel comfortable here.

:eyes:

[Kaleva]

35. The same could be said for Obama and Hillary

Ralph Nader and to a lesser extent, Dennis K, ought to feel right at home.

[joeybee12]

2. Foot in mouth disease...

...never really articulated his points well.

[Pisces]

3. He was to dry on the campaign trail.

[Toucano]

4. He's not particularly inspiring.

Have you seen his face? Presidents have to be rock stars, you know.

And he made some verbal gaffs that made him difficult to take seriously.

[newmajority]

5. Aside from being largely ignored by the media, he didn't articulate himself very well

Bill Richardson probably had the best resume of anybody running this year. But only a political junkie would know that, because he couldn't get himself across to the public in what little face time the media gave him. That's his own fault as much as theirs, because other candidates such as Edwards and Kucinich were just as shunned by the corporate whores, but got the message distributed through other channels, DU being one example.

Richardson also misspoke at some really bad times, like when he used the word "choice" when answering a question regarding sexual orientation at a debate sponsored by LOGO and the Human Rights Council.

[DesertFlower]

6. he's a very knowledgeable guy,

but he doesn't seem presidential. that being said, i hope to see him in obama's administration.

[gateley]

7. Ditto and ditto --

Although I'm not sure "seeming" presidential actually is an indicator of the type of job they'd do.

I remember him firmly stating he could get our troops out of Iraq in X number of months. He had to come back and revise that statement. That was kind of embarrassing to watch.

I sure like the guy, though -- a LOT!

I don't think it was racism -- but I'm not a racist, so....

[DesertFlower]

14. i'm certainly racist either,

but we have to be realists. there are racists out there.

[newmajority]

18. er.... you might want to edit that.

:evilgrin:

[DesertFlower]

28. OMG. too late to edit.

correction. i'm certainly not a racist.

[gateley]

20. Yeah - add a 'not" --

My point was (which I didn't make, admittedly) is that since I'm not affected by their race, I assume nobody else is either. Everybody thinks like me, right?

Like when I hear of somebody doing something dastardly and I go "no, I'm sure there's a reasonable explanation..." because it's something I wouldn't personally do. I always seem to give people the benefit of the doubt, which I was once told was a very "Seattle thing to do."

Even though I'm still naive in these my twilight years, I DO acknowledge there's racism and bigotry - and it's rampant.

[DesertFlower]

29. too late to edit.

what i wanted to say was "i'm certainly not racist either,"

OMG. it's been a long day.:hide:

[marimour]

8. Limited Appeal. I didnt even know he was hispanic for a while.

[tritsofme]

9. He was never a serious candidate, he was running for the VP slot.

nt

[elfin]

10. Although experienced in many venues, he projects

just a bit too much "right brain" as opposed to organization and clarity for the top spot.

He is creative and practical, but a bit inattentive to details (witness tenure at Energy) because his main interests are in the broad themes of international situations.

He can successfully manage the micro situation when hostages are at stake, for a limited period of time, relying on his personable nature with enough knowledge of the specifics to get the job done.

I like him a lot, but see him more as a Sec. of State with a lot of help to keep the details straight.

[JI7]

12. it seemed like he was running to be VP rather than Presidential candidate

he did a good job defending other Dems and trying to keep peace among the party. he would make a good vp running mate.

he might even make a good Pres candidate but i don't think he ran trying for it.

[jackson_dem]

13. But whites and blacks didn't vote for him. Isn't that prima facie evidence of racism?

I believe his peak was 12% in Iowa and New Hampshire polling. That means 88%, even at his high water mark, in those states would not vote for a Latino. In SC he did even worse with whites and didn't even register with blacks. Is this not prima facia evidence of racism? These voters all had no problem casting votes for non-Latino candidats.

[PresidentObama]

23. Had nothing to do with racism. He just didn't catch on.

If racism was a problem in Iowa, Obama wouldn't of won.

[madaboutharry]

16. I honestly believe his limited appeal was partially

due to the fact that he is overweight and not particularly attractive. I don't think it is right, but I think it is true. It speaks volumes, in my opinion, about how shallow we are as a nation.

[msongs]

19. the "overweight" speaks volumes about how he treats his own body nt

[Bensthename]

17. He did not stand out among the others in my view.

[aquarius dawning]

21. Bill Richardson? Never heard of him.

[PresidentObama]

22. His debate performances sucked, his campaign failed to do anything to catch fire.

Any attention outside of Clinton and Obama seemed to go to Edwards and Biden, not Richardson.

[Orangepeel]

24. Great resume, lousy speaking skills

He might still be VP, though.

[bklyncowgirl]

25. Because I supported the guy, my candidates always lose. Also...

Aside from that, watching him now, he seems to have more fire in the belly as an Obama supporter than he ever did as a candidate. I think that he thought with his resume, he SHOULD run for president but he never had that burning ambition that made him HAVE to become president. He seems to believe in Barack Obama more than himself.

Also, he just didn't look or sound good on TV and that is the kiss of death for any presidential candidate. The best thing the man ever did for himself, aside from spending a great deal of quality time with his horse after he dropped out of the race, was to grow a beard. He actually looks pretty damn good, one might even say hot these days. Hope his wife doesn't confince him to shave it off.

[uponit7771]

26. He was my first choice, then Edwards........sigh

[mmonk]

30. Different than what Obama is encountering.

Limited appeal though I liked him and he was on my short list for pres.

[AnnieBW]

34. He was overshadowed by the first Black and first Woman running

He doesn't have a "Hispanic" last name, so people probably didn't assume that he was Hispanic.

[Seabiscuit]

36. He humiliated himself with his ignorance of gay issues on that panel of gay women.

[Orsino]

37. Richardson who?

Despite all the talk of his experience, most Americans didn't know a thing about him before the campaign started, and since then, he's seemed mostly bland-but-likeable, with nothing distinctive about him.

That's what the TV told us, that is.