Why no talk of Bill Richardson '08?

[wasteofo2]

People are talking about Hillary '08 (fools), they're talking about Bayh '08 (less foolish, but he is a Senator), maybe Vilsak and I've even heard talk of Specter switching to the Democratic side and running. Yet I haven't heard anyone mention Bill Richardson as a possible '08 Democratic candidate, when he seems like such a great one.

1) Richardson is a governor, so:
A: He has experience in the executive branch that people like Bayh don't have
B: He doesn't have that LOOOOOOONG list of voting for or against everything in creation (for tax cuts, for tax increase, for military spending, against military spending etc.)

2) Richardson isn't a stiff boring steryotypical politician (like Kerry), nor is he dangerously passionate (like Dean). He seems like someone who you could sit down and talk with, and who would have a simple answer to helping you out with your problems.

3) He seems like an intelligent, experienced guy in general, definitely someone I'd feel comfortable with being my leader.

And, he’s part of a new breed of Democrats, whom actually stand for fiscal responsibility, and he’s apparently CUT TAXES for New Mexicans.

Anyway, your thoughts?

 

[GENIERE]

I think he's a passable governor.

 

[Gokul43201]

Was a time, when I thought Kerry'd pick him as veep, but I was wrong.

Richardson may not be viable because he might come off as being weak on illegal immigration...just my initial thought. Otherwise, he's probably a safe shot.

 

[wasteofo2]

I posed the same question to my friend tonight, who supports Evan Bayh, and he said that Richardson couldn't run because of some horrible skeleton in his closet that he couldn't recall. Anyone have any idea what this skeleton is?

 

[wasteofo2]

Was a time, when I thought Kerry'd pick him as veep, but I was wrong.

Richardson may not be viable because he might come off as being weak on illegal immigration...just my initial thought. Otherwise, he's probably a safe shot.

Has anyone been strong on illegal immigration? When Bush went on Bill O'Reilly's show, O'Reilly got pretty close to going off on Bush about how LITTLE he's done to stop illegal immigration.

 

[BobG]

I think the main knock against him locally is that he seems to have a very arrogant style. It's the little things, like cussing out state legislators, hiring a gourmet chef, being chauffered down the highway at 100 mph (this last really needs to be put into context, 80 mph would be a pretty reasonable speed on an interstate that runs across New Mexico).

He and a few other Western Democrats would probably be a better option for 2008 than the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. There's a few Dem's that have made it in predominately Republican states: Janet Napolitano of Arizona, Harry Reid of Nevada, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Ken Salazar of Colorado. Any of these would make a good presidential candidate if they could get nominated by mainstream Democrats. (Actually, Richardson, Napolitano, and Nelson probably better than the other two, although, in Salazar's case, it's because he hasn't even served a day in Senate yet).

 

[franznietzsche]

Was a time, when I thought Kerry'd pick him as veep, but I was wrong.

Richardson may not be viable because he might come off as being weak on illegal immigration...just my initial thought. Otherwise, he's probably a safe shot.

Bush is weak on illegal immigration. Everyopne is weak on it. I seriously think the only people in the coun try who still oppose an open border are the california republicans. The national party sure doesn't give a rats ass.