Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Larry Sabato: Bill Richardson unbeatable in general election

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
seasat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 09:40 PM
Original message
Larry Sabato: Bill Richardson unbeatable in general election
VOA news did a profile on Bill Richardson today and political prognosticator Larry Sabato stated that Richardson would easily beat any Repug in the general election.

"He is unbeatable. It is amazing the Democrats haven't recognized that," says political scientist Larry Sabato. He says Richardson would make a formidable nominee in the November 2008 general election. Sabato says not only is he a proven winner in a western state, but his Hispanic roots appeal to an interest group that has growing electoral strength.
...
Sabato directs the University of Virginia's Center for Politics and adds, "Republicans will tell you privately that if the Democrats nominate Bill Richardson the election is over. They know they will lose to Bill Richardson. He is perfectly positioned."

In taking positions on issues, Richardson has not entirely adopted either party's dogma. For example, his support of gun ownership rights appeals to western conservatives who often vote Republican. Yet, on the presence of American troops in Iraq, he has adopted the stance of his own party's left-wing core of support. He explains, "We've got, right now, 160,000 troops. And that includes the 30,000 extra with the surge . I would pull them all out."
...
Stuart Rothenberg tracks national politics as the founder of a prominent national political newsletter. He comments, "His problem is there is no obvious opening right now in the Democratic contest. Eighty-five percent of the Democrats say they're content with the field."


IMHO, the second paragraph is one key as to why Richardson hasn't moved up beyond 4th place. He doesn't really fit a set constituency within the party. He's basically running as himself instead of greatly adjusting his positions to fit a large voting block. It's one of the reasons I support him. I know what I'm buying when I vote for him and have questions about some of the other candidates who've greatly shifted their views.

He had a shot early in the race before the media narrative was set but hurt himself with poor performances in the early debates and an interview. However, he has vastly improved his performance and has won praise from former critics for recent debates, speeches, and interviews. His plan for immediate withdrawal from Iraq has lost some of it's pull because of the current media reporting and White House spin that the situation in Iraq has improved. The point still remains though that the overwhelming majority of Iraqis want us out now.

He needs a really good performance in this next debate and for one of the higher polling candidates to stumble to get a shot. He still remains the Democrat with the lowest "vote against" numbers in several polls and has the second lowest unfavorable rating in Rasmussen polls (Gravel is lowest but it is because of name recognition).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. No matter how good Richardson looks on paper- he has communication trouble
He SUCKS during the debates and IMO, would never master the counterattacks against GOP smears.

I was set to support Richardson some time ago until watching his debate performances.

Some people have a very sharp/quick wit. Richardson just doesn't have that naturally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuaneBidoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-27-07 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
13. And explain to me exactly how those same characteristics stopped Shurb?
Edited on Sat Oct-27-07 07:53 AM by DuaneBidoux
He's much smarter than Shrub and he would lose no state that Kerry lost plus gain Florida and NM, two heavily hispanic states that would have put Kerry over he top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #13
29. Umm, Bill Richardson won't have the Supreme Court to appoint him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigdarryl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #1
20. so we are picking a president based on debates well Kerry won all the debates....
and look what happened
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
24. Au contraire--
Richardson can be very witty indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nickgutierrez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. He would be a fantastic VP choice.
Edited on Fri Oct-26-07 09:48 PM by antiwarwarrior
Unfortunately, I don't think he has the necessary charisma to carry the front end of a ticket. I don't like the fact that things like that matter, but they do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. I've long said he'd be a perfect fit as number 2.
He's the political equivalent of a utility player in baseball. He brings so many different attributes to a ticket that he can fill in everywhere.

And the VP slot doesn't bring with it the ridiculous charisma requirements, as you mentioned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigdarryl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
19. FORGET IT HE DOESN'T WANT IT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
34. I agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peregrine Took Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. If Gore doesn't enter the race pretty soon - we defintely see Bill as our next
choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
4. I could vote for Richardson with little reservation
Edited on Fri Oct-26-07 09:49 PM by Mojambo
But I don't really buy the author's contention that he is any more unbeatable than any other Democrat not named Hillary Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
6. He is not a good campaigner
He has the resume, the right issue positions and the right personal profile, but his campaign skills leave a lot to be desired. he makes a lot of gaffes, is often boring and policy wonky and is a mediocre debater.

Campaigns matter, especially now because the whole process takes so damn long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
7. I think our eventual presidential candidate will win in '08. I am supporting Richardson in primaries
Edited on Fri Oct-26-07 10:11 PM by pinto
Agree he would have broad appeal in a general election, has a good record as a federal player and state executive, yet has done poorly in the sound bite debates. He tends to be an understated policy guy, which isn't selling well these days. He knows the ways things work in DC, knows that negotiation is a viable tool. And is clear on our withdrawal from the Iraq debacle. I back his primary run at this point for those qualities.

If he has a break through moment or two, media wise, we may see a tighter race.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
8. I would certainly vote for Richardson if he was the nominee--I like the guy.
I think he's very well-qualified. He's just one very concrete example of the resume not making the President. You've got to have those intangibles: charisma, Presidential looks, charm, and political cunning. Nonetheless, I'd be happy to see him in any capacity in the next administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #8
25. Three out of four of the intangibles you listed
are REALLY depressing. The first three, in fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
27. He has quite a lot of charm and political cunning, actually
He could still bring on a surprise, I think, because there are an awful lot of voters who find charm and presidential looks less important than a down to earth demeanor. He's got it, if enough people get to see it, and his accomplishments and experience won't hurt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue sky at night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
9. personally I think if Hillary gets the nod........
we are fucked; either the repugs will win or she will and either way we are: see the above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwb970 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #9
18. Hey, this thread is about Richardson.
There are lots of anti-Hillary threads for you to post to instead of changing the subject here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 10:15 PM
Response to Original message
10. Richardson has the potential. His problem is how he projects himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-26-07 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
11. He and his resume are great. But he's been so inarticulate in the debates...
Edited on Fri Oct-26-07 10:45 PM by MookieWilson
I was really disappointed. I think he's the best qualified candidate we've had in a long, long time.

I wish he'd pick it up. I really do. I'd like to vote for him. He was my 2nd choice after Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-27-07 06:23 AM
Response to Original message
12. Do the primaries as run today favor the wrong traits in a candidate?
Debates in which the ability to frame a sound bite is more important than depth of knowledge.

Emphasis on who has the most money as opposed to who has the best ideas.

Not to mention looks uber alles.

All of this summed up and amplified by the Greek chorus of the DC press corps chatting up how well the candidate's expressed views conform to their own conventional wisdom as echoed in the cocktail parties of Washington DC.

As a result the top contenders in the Democratic field for what is really the world's biggest executive job have no experience in running ANYTHING.


Richardson's been a Governor (executive experience) a diplomat and a member of Congress. Sure, being a good debater is important but would anyone in their right mind consider the Shrub a good debater? He won (or IMHO got close enough to steal) the presidency twice. Besides, Richardson might well be quite good in one on one debates. I remember being underwhelmed by Howard Dean in the 2004 Democratic beauty contests but when he debated Ralph Nader he left poor Ralph stammering inanities like "Republicans are people too."
I wonder what Dean would have done in a one on one with George W. Bush?

If I hire a janitor I sort of want to hire someone who's been a successful janitor before or who has closely related experience and training. Why should it be any different when hiring a president? I'm supporting Richardson for that reason unless Al Gore gets in.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seasat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. Your point is made here by what threads people respond most to in GDP.
I posted Richardson's policy speech on Latin America the other day. He had proposed some interesting and controversial ideas such as expanding the UN security council to include new permanent members with one being from Latin America. There was only one response other than my posts. However, when I post a thread such as this that deals with no real policy, there are over 20 responses. The threads with the most responses are usually based on electability arguments, polls, or non sequitur attacks. It's no wonder that reality television has such high ratings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-29-07 06:28 AM
Response to Reply #21
43. Maybe we should view the primaries as one long reality show
Candidates engage in pointless activity followed by deeply personal soul searching (or pissing and moaning) in front of the camera.

Best of all we get to vote someone off the island every week--or since this is too important to leave to mere voters, a panel of mainstream media pundit types would do the voting.

Actually, that sounds very much like what's going on now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-27-07 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
14. Reminds Me Of President Glenn And President Kerrey
You know the first man to orbit the Earth and the second Medal Of Honor winner to serve in the Senate since Reconstruction...

The professor should know better...

Reminds me of how a football team that looks good on paper doesn't perform up to par...The axiom is games are won on grass and not on paper...

Same thing with politics....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiseguy182 Donating Member (57 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 02:42 AM
Response to Original message
15. he's one of the most qualified
I would agree that he is one of the most qualified: house rep, Secretary of Energy under Clinton, now two-term governor.

But also, he has the potential to flip a lot of swing states with heavy Hispanic population, including two big ones: Florida and Texas (Texas may still be a stretch) also Colorado, and obviously New Mexico.

It's a shame he is currently polling so low, should be higher.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smalll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 03:40 AM
Response to Original message
16. 21st Century America may BE fat, but it'll never elect a fat President /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiseguy182 Donating Member (57 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 04:24 AM
Response to Original message
17. swing votes
I do believe Richardson possesses a good chance at picking up a fair share of swing votes, something we could have used more of in 2000 and 2004.

I hope he at least gets a VP nod or Cabinet post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
22. Gov. Richardson would make an excellent president. He certainly is
from an entirely different school of adult problem-solving than the current president.

I'm sticking with John Edwards, but if my guy's out and Bill Richardson's in, I'd be happy to cast a vote for the man.

He brings a lot to the table, IMO. Energy adept, foreign diplomatic prowess and knowledge, obvious likability, bilingual command, and governor of a west-of-the-Mississippi state.

Not bad at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
23. Hi again...
:hi:

He's the best qualified, no doubt!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiseguy182 Donating Member (57 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
26. governor/senator
If the old addage that governors win presidential elections and senators typically don't holds true, then Richardson could be our best choice. Of course, there have been a few exceptions to that rule, but pretty few and far between. I guess it's because people think that governors are kind of like the presidents of their states, and in that sense more qualified than senators.

If there's one republican gaining momentum, it's Huckabee, one of the few governors on the GOP side. I doubt he'll win, but could get a VP nod. If we put up two senators (again) like we did in 00 and 04, and they have, say Romney and Huckabee, it could spell bad news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stop Cornyn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
28. Unbeatable in a general election? Hell yeah! General election for US Senator from New Mexico!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
30. Its hard to explain why he's gotten so little traction.....He is probably the best qualified
of our candidates and the most electible. Unfortunately, he really isn't a great "candidate" or debater and he doesn't have the enormous finacial advantages of Clinton or Obama but-witht he right scenario, he could emerge as the ABC candidate (Anybody But Clinton).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. Obama's And Edwards' Campaigns Would Have To Implode Too And That's Not Remotely Realistic
But yeah, it's (theoretically) possible..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Actually I disagree with you on this.....Neither Obama nor Edwards is performing
up to expectations right now and Democratic voters in Iowa and New Hampshire are infamous for slapping down front runners and elevating nobodies. An upset 2nd by Richardson, Biden or Dodd wouldn't surprise me in the least. And a 2nd in Iowa is a big time ticket to national fame.

Sure, either Clinton, Obama or Edwards is LIKELY to be the nominee but Democrats can surprise you when you least expect it. It wouldn't be the first time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. Richardson just needs to relax a little more in front of cameras.
He has no problem doing this in New Mexico, but in the interviews I've seen of him elsewhere, he looks nervous and serious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. He really tends to look stiff and uncomfortable.... When he's at ease he really
comes across well so I've been disappointed by his debate performances so far. Still, he has the background and substance-he just needs a break.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. I know! He's normally instantly likeable and at ease!
His experience and policy positions are exactly in line with what people on the DU boards seem to want, but they can't get past the image factor--probably because Bill needs to chill a bit!

When's the next debate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Its very soon, sometime in early November I think, but Richardson needs
more than one debate. Somehow he needs to catch on fast, to blow everyone away by finishing 3rd in Iowa. That would give him enough publicity to have a small chance of overcoming the institutional problems facing a real outsider like Richardson. Clinton has such powerful institutional support, and Obama has so much money, Edwards is so well known that its hard to see how Bill can steal the spotlight long enough to win the nomination. He could do it but the odds are truely slim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. I can't support Clinton or Edwards (IWR), and I like Obama
the best personally, but Obama's campaign has screwed up of late and he doesn't have as much experience as Richardson does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. I would happily support ANYONE to get those thugs out of the White House
Edited on Sun Oct-28-07 11:04 PM by Rowdyboy
Its a sickness, but I don't care, just get them out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Larynx Oblation Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. The Anti-Biotic
is not just anyone. Those vile, odious, scum of the Earth criminals are being tossed out come November 2008.
We have to be careful of who we put into the big howzen. Just because he or she is a Dem, does not make them immune from carrying the same disease.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. You're quite right but I offer one caveat......The worst Democrat I ever met stank less than....
the finest Republican. Dems certain carry their own personal cooties, but nothing like the filth infesting government today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Larynx Oblation Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-30-07 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. Caveat In-Turn
I hear what you are saying Rowdyboy. But as long as we have corporate money in the pockets of Dem's we will never see a true representative for the people. There are a few candidates in the pool that do not own their collective souls.
Those are the ones I support, regardless!

Any so called media in this country that supports a candidate and claims it to be a front runner only say's this, he or she is a butt-puppet of corporate Amerika who will tow the line.

The only way for this nation to return to forever is through revolution. A revolution against the Plutocracy that we are living under.
Capitalism without restraints is an enemy of the people. I have been ready to rumble for some time now, but the sofa of lethargy that sits in so many living-rooms has delivered us the un-bearable situation we are in.
It will take a radical endeavor, to say the least. An endeavor few are willing to risk and partake.

"Bow down to the one you serve, your going to get what you deserve!" NIN
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiseguy182 Donating Member (57 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-28-07 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
40. swing states
Richardson's likely ability to flip some swing states is very important and can't be ignored. At this point, I have doubts that Hillary or Edwards could flip swing states. But Richardson has great potential in this area. And we are going to need to some flips. We have to get back New Mexico (which Richards should win easily in) and Iowa for starters, keep New Hampshire, and then flip at least one other for a win. I fear Hillary may be too polarizing and Edwards has already displayed he can't flip states, the only state we flipped last time out was New Hampshire, which has been trending Dem anyways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 31st 2024, 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC