Richardson Endorses Obama

Will be officially unveiled at a campaign event in Oregon. I'm not really sure what the Bill Richardson constituency is, but given that while it's lasted his campaign showed the most leadership on trying to get a clear-cut commitment to really ending the war, maybe he'll help Obama get some further credibility with anti-war activists. For my part, though I didn't disagree with the many valid criticisms of Richardson's campaign, I have always wanted to give him credit for mentioning transit and land use issues as part of his energy/global warming pitch.

Iowa and New Hampshire obviously aren't the best audiences for transit talk, but given that the leading contenders represent Chicago and New York it's a bit sad that it took the guy from New Mexico to bring this up.

Comments

it was the speech. it was hearing a politician say the brown people are not taking your jobs, white people. he knows hillary would discard latinos in an instant, if she did not need them.

Posted by jay | March 21, 2008 9:30 AM

THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!!!! FOR MASS-TRANSIT AND LAND-USE ADVOCATES!!!!

Posted by Idiotic | March 21, 2008 9:32 AM

Si se puede!

Posted by Bill | March 21, 2008 9:36 AM

While he is a governor and ran for president, I guess the bid deal about this is that he didn't endorse Hillary even when he was Secretary of Energy and UN Ambassador under Clinton. Gotta wonder how betrayed Camp Clinton is feeling about this.

Posted by ET | March 21, 2008 9:40 AM

Ah but Mr. Yglesias neglects to comment on todays' column by his favorite columnist.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/20/AR2008032003017.html?hpid%3Dopinionsbox1&sub=AR

Posted by SLC | March 21, 2008 9:48 AM

This Richardson anecdote from the January debates may not have got Obama his endorsement, but it could not have hurt:

“I had just been asked a question — I don’t remember which one — and Obama was sitting right next to me. Then the moderator went across the room, I think to Chris Dodd, so I thought I was home free for a while. I wasn’t going to listen to the next question. I was about to say something to Obama when the moderator turned to me and said, ‘So, Gov. Richardson, what do you think of that?’ But I wasn’t paying any attention! I was about to say, ‘Could you repeat the question? I wasn’t listening.’ But I wasn’t about to say I wasn’t listening. I looked at Obama. I was just horrified. And Obama whispered, ‘Katrina. Katrina.’ The question was on Katrina! So I said, ‘On Katrina, my policy . . .’ Obama could have just thrown me under the bus. So I said, ‘Obama, that was good of you to do that,’” - Bill Richardson, currently weighing whether to back the Illinois senator.

I like the way he called Obama "Obama" at the end, too.

Posted by sweaty guy | March 21, 2008 9:54 AM

Bill Richardson's constituency?

Why, most of all, it's the superdelegates and, secondarily, the media.

Posted by Suze | March 21, 2008 10:09 AM

The questions that come immediately to mind are:

1. Has a Richardson for VP deal already been worked out with the Obama campaign?

2. If so, was the fact that such a deal was already being discussed and negotiated last week help explain why Nancy Pelosi intervened so aggressively to shoot down the "dream ticket" scenario?

3. Is Richardson going to campaign for Obama in Pennsylvania and Indiana? And would it help?

4. Does Richardson carry a lot of weight with Latino superdelegates, and could this endorsement then produce a surge of superdelegate commitments for Obama?

5. Are there any other endorsements lined up?

I have to think that Democratic party leaders are very concerned about the fact that the head-to-head polls have been moving in McCain's direction since he wrapped up the nomination, while the Democrats are still beating each other up. Obama just had to go through a week of pounding from FOX and the right on the Wright matter, and what should have been a very vigorous Democratic counter-response was weakened by the fact that half of the party was happy to sit back and let the Wright attacks do their work. Can the party really endure another month, or more, of this debilitating cycle as we wait for Pennsylvania, Indiana, North Carolina and Oregon?

Obama's major speeches this week; today's polling indicating that he may have put the Wright matter behind him; the no-go results on Clinton's last chance efforts in Florida and Michigan, and now th e Richardson endorsement - perhaps this race has now just started to move past the tipping point, and get out of the two-week stall it has been in. I can't believe party leaders are just going to let this thing drag on to late April, May or beyond. At some point they have to grasp the urgency of recognizing that they now have a nominee and it is time to unite behind him.

Posted by Dan Kervick | March 21, 2008 10:31 AM

This is going to make his next Super Bowl party with Bill very awkward.

Posted by Chris | March 21, 2008 11:10 AM

My big question again is "Couldn't you have done this before Texas?"

Posted by Monster | March 21, 2008 11:42 AM

Two significant things here:
1. Richardson was one of the last outstanding major supers to endorse.
2. New Mexico went narrowly for Clinton. Obama will need to win about 40% of the unpledged supers. Winning supers in states/districts that he lost will make the math a lot more perilous for Clinton who will have a tough time cracking into undeclared supers in states that she lost 2-1.

Posted by Robert | March 21, 2008 12:05 PM

To Dan's question about PA and IN, I don't see how Richardson can help. I DO hope it sends a message to the superdelegates. Those that care about the party more than Clintons have to see that Hill and Bill aren't helping. In the last few weeks, both have appeared to support John McCain before Obama. NOT good...

For the good of the party, HRC should be forced to step down. The math is against her. It would do the Democrats far more good for her to step aside, freeing up all those supers to keep those white working-class Dems from moving to McCain. At the very least, it might move John Edwards off his tractor and into those same communities. If Edwards possessed half the smarts I thought he had, he'd do the math, quit vacillating, and get off that tractor and back onto the campaign trail. (Is it possible that HRC has tacitly promised him the VP spot?)

Sadly, I fear the Clintons would sooner see John McCain in the White House than HRC lose the nomination. Increasingly, I fear that this is about her run in 2012. HRC continues to reinforce my belief that I've longed for her to disprove: That what's good for the Clintons will always supersede what's good for the country.

Posted by Judy | March 21, 2008 12:41 PM

Oddly enough, jay's comment above ("brown people are not taking your jobs") doesn't comport with statements made in a bill that Obama co-sponsors.

Could it be that Obama says one thing to one group and another thing to another group? Perish the thought.

As for BR being Obama's running mate, please, please, please let it be so. At the very least my videos showing how he's not qualified for any public office will get more views:

youtube.com/watch?v=i0YRHXoygRM
youtube.com/watch?v=MiszkrzoOs0
youtube.com/watch?v=CifLm6z32eA
youtube.com/watch?v=mN2o208PFhg

As the first one describes, he was shilling for a pan-American group at the same time as he was running for president of the U.S..

Posted by TLB | March 21, 2008 3:03 PM

Isn't Richardson getting into this a little late? You'd think that if he wanted to have an impact then he would have done this before the Texas primary. (Neighboring state; large hispanic population; critical win for Clinton)

Posted by dcuser | March 21, 2008 3:23 PM

I suppose it can't hurt, though would've been better without Richardson's kinda cheesy goatee.

To the extent that this creates an aura of inevitability and a sense that even old-timer establishmentarians (Richardson, Kennedy, Dodd) are with BHO when you might expect them to be inclined toward HRC, then good.

But I think the jury's out as to whether the word or the endorsement of Bill Richardson actually moves any Hispanic voters. Perhaps it's only the perception that matters -- sends the message thatt Obama isn't weak with Hispanics, that black-brown tension is overstated...and the whole thing becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy of sorts.

Also, notwithstanding BR's boldness on Iraq during his POTUS campaign, is there any evidence that the anti-war crowd sees him as their guy? I doubt this confers on BHO any sort of anti-war credibility.

Posted by Bart Acocella | March 21, 2008 4:53 PM

Perhaps, Richardson has done this actually impact the upcoming contests in favor of Hillary. This would further polarize any whites that were on the fence about Obama vs. Hillary. Now it will come across as Black + Brown!!! We can't have that! That's how we see white flight from diverse neighborhoods and now have places such as the OC. It's underhanded, but well done!!!

Posted by Arthur in Los Angeles | March 21, 2008 7:55 PM

""The time that he could have been effective has long since passed," he continued, "I don't think it is a significant endorsement in this environment.""

-- Senior Clinton strategist Mark Penn, 2008/03/21

Posted by Observer | March 21, 2008 8:36 PM