Richardson and Obama in 2008
This is my dream ticket.
Bill Richardson and Barak Obama in '08.
This is the ticket that will get me going door to door and talking to people.
And I don't do that shit.
Bill Richardson is ready to be President NOW! He is the only candidate who has a snowball's chance in Hell of repairing the damage that the cretin currently occupying that office has done to our international relationships.
I want to see Richardson make it a goal of his Presidency and a campaign promise to personally meet with and talk to every single world leader in his first four years. That means EVERYBODY. N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, Syria and yes, even France. We have got to start rebuiding old relationships and establishing new relationships with the world community. This isolationist, bullying, "you're with us or against us" bullshit has gone on far too long. We need a Healer, not a Gun Slinger.
Bill Richardson could do that. He has done that. No one else can.
Barak as V.P. makes good sense. I think he would make a great President in his own right, but he needs seasoning. It's too soon. He hasn't been around long enough. I'd vote for him today, but I doubt that enough other voters would.
Eight years as V.P. would catapult him into his own eight years as POTUS. That's assuming that neither he or Richardson screwed the pooch and fucked things up. We could be looking at a 16 year Democratic reign to mend the fences and set things straight.
I love the Clintons. I miss Bill! But there are a whole shitload of people out there who really, REALLY don't like them. For those folks, the thought of Bill crossing that threshold and re-entering The White House for another 4-8 years...even as just a resident (with no official responsibilities, a lot of free time and easy access to the Lincoln Bedroom)...sends their blood pressure into stroke territory.
I don't think Hillary can win. I wish she could, I think she would do great, but I just don't see it happening. Electing the first woman President AND bringing Bill back is just too much for some folks to stomach. Plus, we would never get any health care reform under her watch because of the whole 1993 fiasco.
The rest of the Democratic candidates don't stand a chance and we all know it. They do to. They just like the sound of their own voices.
But a mildly Hispanic (his name is Bill Richardson...not Jesus Ramirez) and a light skinned, moderate, mixed-race, Tiger-Woodish, African Amrican who doesn't have the slavery baggage to carry around as a chip on his shoulder and whose slight brush with Islam could actually be a plus on the world stage...
In a sexist, racist America that is desparately needing a change of course but afraid to take it, these two...Bill Richardson and Barak Obama...might just be able to perform the miracle we need. They could win the election and chart a genuine change in course.
What do you think?
Posts
15 comments:
If Gore doesn't run, I'm all for it.
Gore-Richardson?
One of the reasons I like Obama is he's not just another rich older white guy. We need serious change in this country and not many of those running seem to have the spine for it.
I like what you say about the Clintons, I don't think Hillary can pull it off, too much baggage. I'm not a big fan of Hilary but I think she can be a good president. And, nobody is currently a better politico than Bill himself. Americans still love him, he's magnetic.
"Gore-Richardson?"
Nope. Sorry. Gore has already shot his wad. It's over for him.
He can be the national Clay Chastain with Global Warming as his Light Rail.
But he will never be President.
Joe - Here is the beauty of this "perfect storm."
The Clintons can't win. Too much, too soon, won't happen.
Richardson...Hispania on the rise, large voter block, easily digestible by "white" America, proven track record on the international stage (especially with countries that no one else seems to be able to talk to...HUGE!!), high tech creds with the New Mexico Space Port thing.
Obama - New, original, African American without all of the angry, knee-jerk, Jackson/Sharpton baggage.
I think they could win.
Hubby & I are with you on this. You are absolutely right. What a team they would be! We miss Bill too, but Hillary would just unite the Repubs against us.
I think people underestimate just how powerful the Clinton machine is. Hillary will win the nomination and choose either Richardson or Obama as her VP. I think there are three reasons Hillary will choose Richardson over Obama. Hillary is a take charge woman and she doesn't want someone who might upstage her (Obama). She wants the hispanic vote (Richardson). She's personal friends with Richardson.
travel - I disagree. I think that Hillary, standing alone, without the history of Bill, Monica, Whitewater, healthcare, etc. could probably win.
She is a solid, stand alone candidate.
But when you tack all of that baggage onto the first woman President? I think she loses. Not because she should. But because she just does.
I think a Richardson/Obama ticket is much stronger than a Hillary/Anything or even an Anything/Hillary ticket.
I think she just pulls so many emotional triggers that she can't win. Not this one.
Obama has said in interviews that he is running for President, not VP...
LOL! Yeah. Whatever.
I'm sure he is, right now.
But when it gets down to where the cheese binds, he'll see his opportunity and take it like a man.
XO - Your argument against Clinton(excess baggage, etc.) is the exact reason cited by OBAMA supporters in this USA Today article.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-07-poll-2008_N.htm?csp=34
In other words, your argument is biased against Clinton because you support Obama (I know your first choice is Richardson .. but he's a second tier candidate at this point).
I admit bias as well. To me, Clinton is the most centrist candidate of the Democrats and that's closest to my conservative politics.
The USA Article does make an interesting point though. The people weighing in now in the polls are more of the political junkie type. The average American didn't watch either of the first Democratic or Republican debates. The field will have to be narrowed quite a bit before the masses get serious about their choices and the whys and why nots.
travel - I haven't read the USA Today article. But I will. I'm not "biased against Clinton". I like Hilary. I loved the Clinton years. But there was just something about the two of them that drove the conservative, right-wing, republicans into a foaming-at-the-mouth frenzy.
I think a Hilary nomination would alienate the swing voters that the Democrats are going to need to win the election.
I think it's a brilliant ticket. Neither Richardson nor Obama says they have any interest in VP ... I believe Richardson, whereas I think Obama would accept the VP slot if he didn't get the nomination ... and after 8 years as VP, would be ready for the top job ...
No one ever admits to being willing to settle for Vice President. They all want The Whole Enchilada or nothing.
And they are all liars.
They should all be assumed to be liars, sure. But for whatever reason, I believe Richardson when he says that he will not run for VP. All Obama says is, "I'm not running for Vice President; I'm running for President" ... nothing in the future tense, nothing that indicates what will happen if he doesn't get this nomination.
All politicians might be liars, but in the world of 24-hour news media, none of them like to be caught in a lie.
XO - I retract calling you biased. That was a poor choice of words and I don't know how to clearly explain what I was thinking.
Specifically to your baggage points: History of Bill, Monica, Whitewater, healthcare and woman:
Bill/Monica: Hillary kept her marriage together despite the public humiliation that would have sent most women running to a divorce lawyer. She proved she was a uniter, not a divider, and has family values.
Whitewater: Hard one to overcome, but I think most people have forgotten about it.
Healthcare: Even die-hard Republicans want some form of healthcare available to everyone. Those of us who have healthcare already spend a ton on insurance and out-of-pocket expenses to the point almost anything is better than what we have now.
Woman: I think women like Hillary more than men do, but I don't think simply being a woman is a serious detriment in tnis day and age.
And then there are the other pluses for Hillary. Unquestionably, the strongest candidate on defense. More experienced than most of the others. More centrist than the other candidates.
Lots could change before the convention, but we might have to have a friendly wager :-)
Post a Comment