Richardson: "I'm Loyal to Clintons"

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by stevento, Mar 23, 2008.

  1. stevento macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #1
    ok so this guy was acting like hillary's lap dog at the debates when she was 20 points ahead now Obama is in the lead and he endorses him.
    What a politician.
    He says -paraphrasing- "the race speech Obama gave clinched the endorsement for me even though there were times when I was almost ready to endorse Clinton"

    ITS JUST A SPEECH. i think he's just trying to jump on the bandwagon and strike while the iron is hot after the speech. i think it's obvious that Richardson - my first choice for president btw- is aligning himself with the winning team.

    I bet when Hillary wins in Pennsylvania Richardson will be like "ya know i thought about endorsing Hillary....":D


    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/23/richardson/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
     
  2. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #2
    He changed his mind, what's so wrong with that? :rolleyes:
     
  3. Flowbee macrumors 68030

    Flowbee

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Alameda, CA
    #3
    He even explained that he started to change his mind when Clinton unleashed the negative tactics prior to the Texas/Ohio primaries. The "speech" clinched it for him.
     
  4. stubeeef macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #4
    I was against it before I voted for it.
    I was for it, before voting against it.
     
  5. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #5
    Are these anything like wanting Bin Laden "dead or alive" before becoming "not too concerned about him"?

    or being really concerned about the rising price of oil in 2000 but be completely unaware that gas is approaching $4 a gallon in 2008?
     
  6. stevento thread starter macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #6
    those attacks were effective, and if i were him i'd be endorsing hillary because she's proven tough to not get wavered by these attacks.
     
  7. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #7
    how exactly were they effective?
     
  8. stubeeef macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #8
    No
     
  9. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #9
    He changed it in the wrong direction. I mean, duh! ;)
     
  10. Cleverboy macrumors 65816

    Cleverboy

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    #10
    The Clintons gave him a career. Her being "ahead" had little to do with anything. The reason Clinton has more super-delegates has more to do with past favors and loyalty and people who don't wish to "change their mind" than anything else.

    The only thing remarkable about Richardson's endorsement is that Obama's campaign and character even changed his mind at all... not that he leaned toward Clinton to begin with. Most of Democratic America without a grudge toward the Clintons "leaned towards" Clinton at the start of this.

    I partially agree with Mark Penn though. Even though both campaigns have been trying to gain his endorsement, the time has passed for it to make the most impact. That said, given Obama's rough patch, the news certainly comes as a welcome distraction... even though some news agencies like, um... Fox, tend NOT to be distracted so easily.

    ~ CB
     
  11. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
  12. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #12
    Shouldn't someone get elected to the highest office in the land based on their own merits, and not how well they attack someone else?

    She hasn't proven a thing as she never really has been attacked. Obama has decided to take the high road this campaign and not attack his opponents like she has.
     
  13. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #13
    Not really what he said. He liked the Clintons, and still does, but didn't want to endorse anyone. Almost endorsed Hillary, but hesitated. Then, as noted, didn't like some of the things coming out of her campaign. But he did like Obama's speech, which did cinch it for him. Saying it was about "race" is being disingenuous. It was about the speech, which was like JFK's about religion, which was the opposite of being "about race" or a "race speech". He even admitted it will do little either way. He just decided to do it. Political maybe, but he is a politician. So is Hillary. So is Obama. What's your point other than to criticize him because he went against your choice?

    Why not?

    IOIYAR?

    He says he won't, trying to be like Gore, but who knows. At this point it really wouldn't make much of a difference. Like Richardson, he would probably admit as much though if he did.
     
  14. stubeeef macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #14
    IOIYADAS!

    Like wright is ok, because racism exists.
     
  15. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #15
    Link

    That's a bit over the top, even for Carville. I wonder if Bill Richardson flinches a little bit now whenever he turns the ignition key?
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #16
    A little? Yikes! I suppose Richardson can forget about that knighthood.
     
  17. Pittsax macrumors 6502

    Pittsax

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #17
    The way the Clinton campaign has reacted to Richardson's endorsement illustrates again my biggest issue I've had with her: she expected to get the nomination "from Day 1" (used without permission) out of some misguided sense of entitlement. The fact that Richardson chose the candidate he (gasp!) thought would make the best president over someone who believes he owes a favor -- rightly or wrongly -- shows more integrity than anything else.

    What's worse: someone who has the guts to stand up in opposition to a long-time friend because he doesn't approve of their behavior and thinks the other guy is a better choice, or someone who falls lock in step behind a candidate out of perceived (or legitimate) debt and cronyism? I don't know about you, but I've had a over 7 years too much of blind cronyism.
     
  18. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #18
    Apparently it isn't, as they can't seem to get away with it the way the GOP has.

    Don't remember ever saying what he said was great. But then again, Obama also said he disagreed with him. The above were quotes from the people themselves. So I ask, why is it not different? Your response was a simple "no". I was curious why you thought they were different when they seem similar to atszyman and I. Shouldn't Bin Laden still be important? Aren't oil prices?

    Maybe you misunderstood. I don't think either of us is defending Kerry. Or Clinton either, who's said similar things. Based on this and other threads, most of us aren't defending her. Especially for her war vote. Just criticizing Bush as well for statements he's made, and maybe pointing out that Carville said this, not her. The way Wright said some things, but Obama did not. Actually, he decried what he said and put out a speech saying the exact opposite. Unlike Clinton, or McCain, who haven't really talked much about it when it's their guys.

    We could start bringing up things people associated with Bush have said too, or McCain, but do you really want to go there?

    Agreed. This was a terrible thing for him to say. Even for him. Not that he's as bad as Rove or anything, but... still pretty bad. Barely heard about it though, I don't think the press really cares about Hillary as much anymore.
     

Share This Page