Media call to action

Let's get organized - Comments Needed.

Laird Bishop — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:29:35 MST

Ok, this is starting to feel like a battered army on the retreat. We still have some good ideas, and there are obviously a lot of people here who are still very committed to Bill Richardson.

If anyone knows the answers to any of these questions, please comment:

1. Who used to maintain this web site? Is there a way to contact them? I imagine they were paid members of the campaign who have been disbanded, but perhaps someone is still out there with admin rights who is willing to spend a little time shoring up the site. There have been no updates since the new hampshire primaries (except the front page), and some very disturbing posts are going un-moderated.

2. There are some good ideas around for continuing to support Bill, including voting for him anyway if he is on the ballot in your state and starting a campaign for "Richardson for Vice President". Should we check in with Bill Richardson to see where he stands on these ideas? I would hate to do anything in his name if he is not behind it.

3. What else can we do? For example, in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer after his withdrawl, Bill advocated public campaign financing as a way to level the playing field so that candidates with less financing could have a better chance of getting their message out. Could someone more familiar with campaign financing and the laws surrounding it chime in here? Maybe taking up that cause is a way to use our energies to salvage another positive from this situation. We could potentially use this as a strong case for advancing public campaign financing while simultaneously generating more name recognition for Bill to help him in the future.

4. What opportunities does everyone else see to get better organized and use the loyal base of people who frequented this site to do something more for Bill? He gave his heart and soul this past year for us, and we are sorry he did not succeed. Now what can we do for him?

What I have learned from Bill

Laird Bishop — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:43:31 MST

I have never been very involved in politics. Sure, I've voted in the past three presidential elections and some state races in between, but never in the primaries.

A month or so ago, after a long exhausting day at work, I fell asleep in my chair in front of the TV and woke in the middle of the night to an interview with Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico discussing his bid for the Presidency. He was discussing the need to cut our dependence on foreign oil and combat climate change, issues which are important to me, so I began to listen.

Bill's message and demeanor that night were something different then I had ever heard from a politician in the past. He addressed important issues and articulated specific solutions. He discussed filling his cabinet with qualified individuals from all parties and his ability to elicit bipartisan support to end the gridlock in Washington. He discussed a tough but fair path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Issue after issue, everything he said resonated with me.

More than the things he was saying, I was increasingly impressed with his down to Earth, humble manner. Before me was a man who could bridge the gap between the world that I live in and the aloof, inaccessible world of Washington politics. I vowed to find out more about him.

Several days later I found the RichardsonForPresident.com web site and began my study in depth. I read biographical information, position papers, and blog posts. I watched video after video. The more I learned, the clearer it became that this was a man who we desperately needed to take the helm in Washington.

I began quietly at first, printing articles from the web site and getting my family to read them. I talked about Bill with a passion that got the attention of my family, friends and co-workers. I began to wonder what more I could do to get the word out.

Enter the Iowa caucuses. 2% - ouch. Not a good showing, but it earned Bill a top four position and guaranteed him a seat at the New Hampshire debates. I began to notice that his name barely came up in the media coverage.

Next came the New Hampshire debates. Wow - what a strong showing. He nailed it! Yet again, he was ignored by the media even in the after-analysis (except for the obligatory report from the "Spin Room").

I saw my opportunity to start doing something to advance Bill's campaign. I vowed to start hammering every major media outlet with emails encouraging fair coverage, and encouraged others to do the same.

In hind sight, it was too little, too late. The following day, the New Hampshire primaries made it clear to me that sensationalism was far more important in this race than selecting the most qualified candidate.

When Bill withdrew from the race, it felt like a gut-punch. I do not question his decision; I'm sure he would have been willing to push on, but the harsh reality of campaign financing made it impossible. I felt (and still feel) much like I did last year when I lost a friend who was cut down by a heart attack when he was only 40. The finality of it, and the sense of losing all the possibility of what was ahead, is hard to bear.

I was just ramping up to be become as active as I could, and now it is over. I feel bad that I never got to contribute. We are just recovering from some unexpected medical expenses, and I was planning on making my first contribution next week. I feel bad that I only got less than 20 emails out to the media. I feel bad that I started too late to make a difference. I can't shake the feeling that if each of us might have done a little more, it might have been different.

Bill did make a difference in the campaign. As he pointed out in his withdrawal speech, he set forth ideas that shaped agendas for the other candidates and provided a moderating influence which shaped the dynamic of the Democratic campaign. If you want to really see the difference, look at the Republican New Hampshire debates compared to the Democratic. The republicans looked like a day time talk show on dysfunctional families. The Democrats listened thoughtfully to each other, and when they started to get a little wound up, Bill called them on it. In spite of their differences and competition, I sensed a unity of purpose which was completely lacking on the Republican side.

Most importantly, Bill made a difference in my life. I am 41 years old, and I have never had a "hero". There have for sure been people who have impressed me, like Stephen Covey or Robert Kiyosake, enough to affect change in my life. But it has never been to the level of considering them a hero. I am proud to say today that Bill Richardson is my hero. I will look to him for example and inspiration. I will continue to follow his career and accomplishments with intense interest, and I hope to see him back in 2012. If he is, he can count on my full support early in the game.

I leave you with this quote by Edmund Burke: "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing." Because of the life and work of Bill Richardson, much evil in this world has not succeeded.

Vote for Bill anyway.

Laird Bishop — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:35:54 MST

My plan is to write Bill in in my state's primary. That won't risk the presidency, because as Bill himself pointed out, all the other candidates in the Democratic field (at least the ones that have a chance at the nomination) are pretty solid now that they have adopted Bill's ideas. It won't matter to me which gets nominated now that Bill is out.

Whoever wins the Democratic Party nomination will recieve my vote in November.

My hope is that by convincing enough people to write him in in Primaries, we might actually get 1% for him somewhere, which wouldn't be a very good showing if he were still in the race, but getting 1% or better for a candidate who has already left the race would cause a media sensation and at very least get his name out there. I remain convinced that the reason he never gained momentum this time is because of a lack of name recognition because of an absence of media coverage.

I'll write him in!

Laird Bishop — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 19:12:39 MST

If Governor Richardson appears on your ballet, please vote for him. I doubt he'll still be on the ballot in Texas by the time March 17th rolls around, but I'll write him in. Think about it: Does it really matter who wins the Democratic primary now? I agree with Governor Richardson that all the candidates in the field this time are pretty good, but pretty good pales in comparison to Governor Richardson. There is nothing to lose by voting for him if he is on your ballot, or writing him in if he is not. Of course that won't work in caucus states, but in primary states it will and we can send a message.

Please stay

Laird Bishop — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 07:53:02 MST

Governor Richardson,

I join with the others here who have expressed heartfelt pleas that you stay in the race.

I can't imagine how difficult it must be to know in your heart, as we know in ours, that you are the candidate who is best equipped to lead us through these trying times and yet to be virtually ignored by the media and by primary voters in two states. I only hope that you can draw strength from the knowledge that you have a growing base of fiercely loyal supporters who will continue to spread the word.

The circumstances which now challenge you campaign to me seem daunting, and yet I hold in my heart the confidence that if anyone can prevail against all odds it is you, Bill. Your history is rife with examples of times when you pushed forward through situations which seemed hopeless and yet prevailed. All you need is one strong showing and the fickle wave of media excitement which has surrounded your opposition will quickly shift in your favor and the yours will be the name that we hear every time we turn on the radio or TV or pick up a newspaper.

Look at the polls in New Mexico. You are a clear leader there, and to me it is obvious that this is because it is the one place where you have widespread name recognition. Not to be trite, but to know you is to love you. The biggest obstacle you face right now is public ignorance fostered by the biased media.

I think any of your rivals are prepared to lead this country to a mediocrity which would seem an improvement over the current debacle. Only you can lead this country to greatness. It almost feels selfish to ask yet another sacrifice of you in light of all you have already given this country and its people over a lifetime of service, nevertheless I am constrained to ask:

Please don't leave the race. Please continue to endure through the frustration and disappointment in the hopes that this can still be turned around. Please don't put us in a position where we will look back the rest of our days and mourn the opportunity which might have been. If you push forward and yet don't prevail, may we always know in our hearts that you, and we, did everything that could have been done.

Don't reply to thoughtless posts

Laird Bishop — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:22:03 MST

By replying to the "Don't Vote for Richardson" post, it keeps getting bumped back to the top of the list under Newest Posts at the left.

I think we can all see that it was posted by somebody who lacks the capacity to do his research before slandering a fine human being, so let's not dignify it with any responses.

Don't be discouraged.

Laird Bishop — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:16:13 MST

Bill heads out West now, where he has a stronger base of support. Immagine what the media would do if he made a strong showing? The same media which has been working against him might suddenly be working with him.

Please use the resources mentioned in my other posts to contact the media and request fair coverage.

Great resource for emailing multiple newspapers at once

Laird Bishop — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:42:23 MST

In the action center, there is a resource which makes it easy to email many newspapers at once. It is located here: http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/speakout/iraq

I modified my original letter to NPR to make it general enough for any newspaper and used this resource to distribute it widely.

The original letter is here: http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/post/lairdbishop/CLHv

I will not re-post since it is essentially the same, though i did add one significant paragraph. I made areference to the fact that Governor Richardson is leading the polls in New Mexico, and pointed out that this was most likely because his name recognition in NM is on a par with the other candidates. (polls found at http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/new-mexico.html

Please use the Action Center resource to submit a letter of your own. We need to flood the media with requests for fair coverage.

Media email address list

Laird Bishop — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 12:15:38 MST

If anyone is aware of an existing list of contact email addresses for national news outlets, please post a link here. Otherwise, let's begin to develop such a list.

My first email went out to MorningEdition@NPR.org.

Call To Action

Laird Bishop — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 12:10:28 MST

To get things rolling, here is a copy of an email I just sent to National Public Radio, which is one of my favorite news stations. What I intend to do is develop a list of email addresses for the major news outlets and send similar "call to action" emails to them.

Before I get too far down the path, it would be nice if someone who oficially represents the Richardson campaign would take a look at this and approve or make suggestions on the content.

My email follows:

Let me begin by saying that I am a loyal listener to NPR thru our local affiliate, KUT. My hat is off to both organizations for providing coverage which I consider to be a cut above the national media baseline.

I am writing today because I have a real concern with the way coverage of the 2008 presidential campaign is being handled both by NPR and the national media in general. My concern stems from the fact that second tier candidates barely get covered.

Here is the conundrum: Are they not getting mentioned because they are second tier candidates, or are they second tier candidates because they are not getting mentioned? I propose that the later is the case.

I believe that it is the responsibility of the voting public to proactively research all candidates to become aware of their positions and qualifications. The reality is that the average voter is content to be spoon fed by the media, and therefore their choices are limited to 'what is in the spoon'. The fact that well qualified candidates are ignored by the media means that they have no name recognition, and this has a direct impact on their standing in the polls. This becomes a vicious circle in which they continue to get no coverage because of their standing in the polls.

Though examples abound, let me cite one in particular. I felt the Democratic portion of Saturday's New Hampshire debates featured very strong performances by all four candidates who participated. One thing which I felt was particularly notable was each candidate's response to the last question, regarding mistakes they had made in the past that they would take back if they could. Two of the candidates dodged the question entirely. One of them offered up what I felt was an inconsequential response and that only after being led by the moderator. Only one candidate offered what I felt was a substantive response in the spirit of the question, which spoke volumes to me. Personally, the prospect of a president with the moral courage to admit his own mistakes rather then deflecting attention from them excites me.

The same aforementioned candidate has 5 Nobel Prize nominations, a proven track record of positive change throughout decades of leadership positions, has gotten the ball rolling on nuclear disarmament in North Korea this year, has insured every child under 12 in his state, and has reduced taxes in his state while simultaneously balancing the budget 5 years in a row and creating a sizable "rainy day" surplus. Yet it seems that he doesn't even rate a mention because he is polling in the single digits. Of course, this in my opinion is only because he is not mentioned and therefore the public is not aware of him.

Has NPR officially endorsed a candidate yet? Would it be against your policy to do so? I'm not suggesting that you endorse a candidate; I'm only suggesting that because of they way you are eliminating candidates from your coverage, you are in effect anti-endorsing them, which hardly seems fair.

This is my call to action: Please stop influencing the 2008 presidential race by omitting candidates from your coverage. None of us would vote for a candidate whose decisions were informed by national polls. I submit that this should not be an acceptable litmus test for the national media either.