Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Richardson Relaxes... Finally

It only took four debates (or so) but Gov. Bill Richardson (N.M.) actually seemed like the funny, engaging guy he is during his first question.

Richardson made the de rigeur bow to the AFL-CIO but also poked fun at his rivals. "I am here as a congressman as a governor as an elected official because of you. And I will continue taking your financial support." Nice line. And it created the desired effect: laughter.

By Editors  |  August 7, 2007; 7:21 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Edwards: No Surprise, Still Feisty
Next: The 'President' of Canada


Bill Richardson is certainly not the perfect candidate. Neither are his rivals running in both parties for that matter. Many of his rivals have much more serious flaws then the trivial inconsistencies pointed out by the press and blogsphere that Richardson has made so far. If one wants to major on the minors for now, that is fine, but when you look at the bigger picture, Richardson has the substance compared to the other candidates in both parties. He has improved the lives and economy of his state during his tenure as a Congressman and now as Governor. As Secretary of Energy, he negotiated lower oil prices, improved the efficiency of the department, carried out innovation. He achieved more wins then losses at DOE. Richardson has done more with international affairs and diplomacy than any of the candidates in both parties, when the North Koreans come calling, they know who to go to based on credibility and professionalism. Lastly, Bill Richardson is far from an airbrush candidate, lacks the media presence good looks and savvy talk but sticks it out with being honest and admitting mistakes and keeping it real with all the blemishes of reality. So if you want a political rock star with the money, then you will get what you asked for in 2008, a Bill Clinton or George W. Bush, both have failed at foreign policy, one by not having a legacy vision of foreign policy and the other who's current foreign policy vision is failing by underestimating the life-cycle ramifications and cost.

Posted by: threeriverscrossing | August 8, 2007 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Hey, did Richardson get to answer any other questions? And I'd like to hear more about Kucinich.

Posted by: NMAIF | August 7, 2007 11:32 PM | Report abuse

I thought that the time seemed more equally divided this time, giving Dodd, Richardson and Kucinich more chances to answer questions than they usually get. Kucinich does make the most of his.

Posted by: Patricia Barry | August 7, 2007 9:00 PM | Report abuse

I thought long ago that Richardson would be the dark horse. Then he disappointed me, and some of the stuff the Post printed (erm, put on the web) about him showed a real animosity on the part of at least one set of powerful editors.

So far I've decided on my ideal candidate: I want someone with Clinton's savvy, Richardson's resume, Edwards' heart, Obama's style, and Kucinich's wit.

Posted by: amy_e | August 7, 2007 7:29 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company