Keep the Faith
|
|
| Also listed in: Bloggers for Bill | Grassroots Organizers HQ | USC Trojans for Richardson | Washington State For Richardson |
Promoted by Joaquin
Tonight's results in Iowa are no cause for despair. As of tonight, Governor Richardson is in the Final Four. He's on his way to NH, and come tomorrow morning, it's a whole new ballgame.Without any strange party rules like 15% viability requirements, Governor Richardson is now free to go to work an do what he does best: reach out to voters, one by one, and secure their vote.
We Richardson supporters, should not hang our heads tonight, but redouble our efforts and go forward knowing that we have the best candidate (one who is in the Final 4) and to give as much of ourselves, our time, money and talents as we can to his campaign.
In 2004, Howard Dean reminded us all that we have the power. Each one of us can make a difference in this race. All of us combined are stronger than each of us as individuals. Our collective efforts will put Governor Richardson over the top.
I leave you with a quote from Senator Ted Kennedy, "For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."
Now let's get out there and elect Bill Richardson the next President of the United States.
I really believe a Edwards/Richardson or Richardson/Edwards ticket would be best for our country.
www.pafundi.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Number of Operations Iraq Freedom and Enduring Freedom casualties as confirmed by U.S. Central Command: 4359
We worked our hearts out for the campaign, we believe in the Governor and his message. I am disappointed that my vote didn't count - one person, one vote - does not apply to caucuses - your vote gets discarded if you don't have 15% of the people at the caucus site voting with you. At our post party we had so many instances of being 1 person short, and you can have no idea how chaotic the thing was from beginning to end. Don't take Iowa as a bellwether. I am committed to seeing this through. WE need Governor Richardon to keep going. WE need to stand by our candidate.
People are turning out to vote because the issues are so important. We had new citizens turning out. We had Independants and Republicans changing party affiliation. We had people registering right there at the check in table. Historically my precinct had 30+ people caucus, the Richardson campaign was telling me to expect at least 70, we ended up with 132 people from my little precinct.
I know there is going to be high voter turn out for New Hampshire. Also you can go into your voter booth and do your thing - you don't have the pressure of openly declaring your vote, of having to be signed in by 7:00 p.m. You probably have all day to go over to the polling location to do it, not be there at 7:00 p.m. or your vote doesn't count. You may even have absentee balloting for those who are elderly, handicapped, or otherwise not able to physically show up at the polling site. YOUR VOTE MAY ACTUALLY COUNT!!
Now of course, it would have been nice if party officials had been there oversee things, have trained people to run the check in. A Clinton volunteer and I ended up signing people in, the lone volunteer from the county was off doing something else. No identification, no verification of any kind, was conducted so that was interesting. I had 14 computer printouts with peoples names on them. A person would come up tell me who they were, I'd find their name (or not) and have them sign. If there name wasn't on the sheet, they signed in on a blank sheet. No instructions regarding verification were given to us and there was no time for verifying identification anyway because everyone had to be checked in by 7:00 p.m. (Why - who knows). I helped out because I got there early and the other volunteer pressed into service was overwhelmed sitting there alone and couldn't find my name. She had me sign the other page and then I saw my name where it should be. It was really a two (or three) person job - two to find names - and one to check identification. I guess they will run down the names and signatures later - and it is true, I knew people, other people knew people - so I'm just saying is was chaotic and unorganized. This lady's husband was helping people find the right precint - several precints were caucussing at the local high school. It was a mess - an absolute nightmare.
I chatted with Roadrunners from New Mexico afterward - they know the Governor and his wife personally - they were very shocked at what they saw with regard to the lack of verifying identification. A word about these wonderful people - they were such lovely people - they hit the ground running and kept us motivated. They gave us great inspiration and encouragement. Because they know him, have worked with him, they are committed to his campaign - we can't thank them enough for all they did for us!!
Given all the great things I've found out about New Mexico, the wonderful people who came up to help up on the campaign, and the lovely weather in New Mexico - I think it would be a nice place to live. At least when I go to exercise my right to vote, it gets counted for what I want and not what my neighbors think it should be!! Kathy Mahoney
You're too far behind and can't catch up. Only a handful of comments on the front page of your website, after the Iowa caucus?
We Democrats need to recognize something here. We've got a great slate. Whatever candidate we support, we can be happy, unlike the Republicans, whose new front-runners seem to be Romney (ugh) and Huckabee (ugh-ugh). I support Edwards, but I would be happy with Obama, and I would certainly vote for Clinton and consider her a huge improvement over the past eight years.
Bill, why not donate your remaining momentum by endorsing Edwards, who is a candidate very close to you in his platform, who could use a boost, and who still has a good chance at winning this thing?
Sometimes part of life is knowing when to call it quits.
As an Edwards supporter I'd like to welcome you to the Richardson for President website and encourage you to spend a lot of time here reading Governor Richardson's positions on the issues and participating on the blog. Encourage all of your fellow Edwards supporters to follow your example.
The more time you all spend on our site with our supporters, the more time we have to change your mind, and the less time you all spend working for Edwards.
Thanks for your concern for Governor Richardson's campaign, but we're not going anywhere. See you in NH.
What I see is that in a few ways Richardson may be more progressive than Edwards, but in as many ways Edwards seems more progressive than Richardson. As you point out there are far more similarities than differences.
From what I have read, the few delegates Richardson did manage to snare were brokered in deals with Biden supporters. Remember Edwards himself has had trouble getting visibility with the media enraptured in the Clinton/Obama "faceoff." I like Richardson, I really do, but he doesn't have the charisma or the national politics cred that Edwards does at this point, much less the momentum--unfortunately he is practically unknown in the myopic national stage; colorful fringe players like Kucinichs and Ron Pauls actually grab more attention. Forgive me if I'm being too tactical and candid about pragmatism, but there is really little hope for Richardson in this slate. A lot of people here seem to have a similar affinity towards Edwards and talk about a Richardson/Edwards or Edwards/Richardson team. Do any of you honestly think that Obama or Clinton would choose Richardson as a running mate? Edwards is the candidate who has the most to lose from Richardson and some of the other 3rd-tier candidates, and Clinton the most to gain. If by the time my late-calendar state rolls around it looks like only Obama has a chance to beat Clinton, I'll vote for him in a heartbeat because my main criticisms of him are his vagueness and to a lesser extent his inexperience; but to the extent he has clarified the issues his health-care plan and other platform planks are all pretty similar. I trust Edwards because of his conviction and his career experience as a trial lawyer, and the clarity of his plans. I am concerned that Richardson's persistence may backfire by giving Clinton the clinch, or eliminating Edwards from the running.
But when it comes down to it, I'll support whoever the party's nominee is, even if it is Clinton. She's not a progressive, but she is a real Democrat and that is what this country needs.
Anyway, sorry for invading your blog; just wanted to comment on the latest developments. These are exciting times.
As a first-time caucus attendee, I wanted to share some thoughts and observations about the process. First -- sadly -- every vote does not count, at least in the Democratic caucus system. Theoretically, Richardson could have had 14% support in a particular ward but, because of the 15% viability requirement, no delagates would be awarded. Instead, Richardson supporters would have to leave or "reallign" with another candidate. The painful irony is this: the Democratic party proclaims itself as the protector of the "common man," i.e., "the little guy." However, just the opposite occurs. The Democratic caucus system parallels the role of the media: promote the "big candidates" and minimize -- if not ignore (or disband) -- the others. Let's face it: The most qualified candidates in this race are Richardson and Biden, neither of whom reached the 15% viability requirement in my ward (and in nearly all others). Give the Republican caucus system some credit; at least the system more accurately reflects the desires of the caucus attendees. I say it's time to change the Democratic caucus system so that it is more democratic.
Second, I was disappointed by the lack of organization and preparation. Our chair had trouble explaining the mathematics behind the process; performing simple multiplication and division proved too difficult. Further, two individuals supporting a "big" candidate left, but at the end of the evening their votes were counted anyway. There were other mathematical discrepancies as well. Although the descrepancies would not have made a difference in light of the 15% viability rule, they nevertheless create some concerns about the integrity of the process.
Third, I was astounded by the arrogance and smugness of some supporters of the other camps. Richardson and Biden supporters seemed the most humble. Indeed, we have much to be proud of.
Let's continue on. We've already made a significant difference in this campaign, and we can do so much more.
You raise a good point about the nomination process in general. What if the primaries and caucuses were held the same day?
Iowans are not a bunch of backward farmers as the rest of the nation seems to think. We are open to new ideas and ready for change! The war must end, we must take care of our veterans, we must do a better job of taking care of our environment and our children. These are the things Iowans care about. Now the people of NH must continue this momentum and vote for the most qualified candidate, Bill Richardson!
As for those feeling down by the caucus process I can relate but lets put this in context.
While the governor was hovering at 13-14% in this caucus turnout that would have been 26-28% based on the previous record turnout and he would have been viable in most if not all precincts in previous elections. The Richardson ground game worked well but the completely unexpected happened the youth vote showed up. That youth vote also put Richardson third in the 17-24 category above clinton.
Richardson is now the only foreign policy expert in the race and he is also the only tax cutter on the democratic side. The tax cutter message can play particularly well in NH. It needs to be played and played hard over the next days.
Iowa also confirmed this election is about change which is good for the governor.
It finally became clear with the clintonista's putting out the message that Richardson sent his second's en masse to obama that Richardson is not her VP choice a subcontext message her surrogates have been using since July to sabotage our candidates campaign and promise people they would get him with her. That's now off the table and it's clear she won't make any offers to richardson.
Focus on your tax cutting and you can get second/third in NH.
In all likelyhood we had about as many supporters in Iowa this year as the last caucus second place finisher had. Richardson deserves to stay in this race and on saturday night he needs to hammer home his tax cutting record to NH independents and democrats.
*So far this debate has been about experience and change, as if they were mutually exclusive. They're not. You need a lot of experience to understand what can bring change. The problem is, WHO HAS EXPERIENCE? Obama, and Edwards don't. Hillary was First Lady, and honestly, as Chris Dodd pointed out, that's witnessing experience. Would Laura Bush be a good presidential candidate? Emphasize the fact that Richardson is the only candidate that is a governor, and we historically elect governors.
*Richardson dealt with everyday problems. No Child Left Behind got through the Senate, the institution that all the competitors are from. Richardson is the only one who knows the complexities of everyday government.
*Richardson is the only one with experience creating jobs. Bill Clinton had experience creating jobs. No one other than Richardson today has that experience.
*Iraq- Seriously, Richardson needs to de-emphasize this point. The only thing Richardson talks about is Iraq. Agreed, it's an important issue to US, but not to most voters. If you talk about the economy, most will listen.
*So far this debate has been about experience and change, as if they were mutually exclusive. They're not. You need a lot of experience to understand what can bring change. The problem is, WHO HAS EXPERIENCE? Obama, and Edwards don't. Hillary was First Lady, and honestly, as Chris Dodd pointed out, that's witnessing experience. Would Laura Bush be a good presidential candidate? Emphasize the fact that Richardson is the only candidate that is a governor, and we historically elect governors.
*Richardson dealt with everyday problems. No Child Left Behind got through the Senate, the institution that all the competitors are from. Richardson is the only one who knows the complexities of everyday government.
*Richardson is the only one with experience creating jobs. Bill Clinton had experience creating jobs. No one other than Richardson today has that experience.
*Iraq- Seriously, Richardson needs to de-emphasize this point. The only thing Richardson talks about is Iraq. Agreed, it's an important issue to US, but not to most voters. If you talk about the economy, most will listen.
Please do the following. Most of us will agree that this is what Richardson SHOULD do:
1) ADDRESS THE EXPERIENCE VS CHANGE DEBATE-
This has been constantly debated. But the funny thing is, NO ONE has experience with Biden and Dodd gone. Say that you "need good experience to know what is right and what is wrong. But the funny thing is, I have the most experience here. I was UN Ambassador, I was US Sec. of Energy, I was a Congressman, and I am now a governor."
2) ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS OF THE CAMPAIGN- Seriously, be frank Mr. Richardson. The campaign isn't going the way you want it to be. Say you're not the ideal candidate. Maybe use the quote I created:
"I might not be as charismatic as Barack. I might not be as good looking as John. And I might not be married to Bill. But I get things done. When hostages need to be taken out, I'm there. When 80,000 jobs need to be created, I'm there. When we want to revive economies, I'm there."
3) ADDRESS THE CAMPAIGN'S POTENTIAL- The one thing that I loved that Biden did was say "Be warned Iowa. If you elect me 1,2,or 3, I WILL be your next president." Say something similar.
Show the voters of New Hampshire that their voter won't be wasted. Be frank.
4) CONTROL THE DEBATE- The media sucks. Ok. Let's get over that. If they don't give everyone equal time, Richardson should just barge in and answer questions. This time, no mercy. If the fate of the campaign hinges on it, no time to screw around. The media will try to give you questions that are unimportant, DO NOT LISTEN.
5) POINTS to hammer:
-TAXES/ECONOMY- You're the only tax cutting democrat! USE THIS!
-IRAQ- Call Hillary and John "flip-floppers"!
6) Jokes! Put some in!
MAKE COMPARISONS BETWEEN YOU AND AL GORE.
Say stuff like:
"I might not be the most exciting, but in the end, I'm more Al Gore than Al Gore."
Also, this is probably the most important,:
Address the campaign's potential! People want to beleive you can win the presidency. People want to be motivated to do something great.
You have to create a superb (and short) argument in this debate on why people should listen to you.
"If you want to end this war the quickest, vote for me. If you want to get taxes cut and more jobs, vote for me. If you want experience and change, vote for me. Be warned, if I do well, I WILL catch on."
In terms of experience I'ld focus on the experience as governor. The experience as a non-sanctioned private citizen negotiator and of course in the live free state tax cutting and pro second amendment.
Rather than cast Obama and edwards as inexperienced I'ld cast them as experienced pulling a shakespeare julius ceasar moment on obama's oratory skills and legal skills on the harvard review, on edwards long experience championing the rights of people through the court system and hillary's nearly two decades of service in the halls of washington as first lady and senator. Could probably work all that in in a 30-60 second bit ending with an each candidate has the experience and skills to be president but reminding people of the unique experience as a governor that has turned around a state economy, created jobs, cut taxes etc...
Throw in a bit about how leaving washington to serve as governor had provided invaluable insight into the everyday challenges american's face as you built consensus in a republican state to address pressing economic issues.
Create distance from washington by juxtaposing it with New Mexico. He needs to become as an outsider agent of change returning to storm the bastille IMHO. Talk about how broken washington policies like no child left behind infringe on states rights and harm education which is why your going to kill it and provide more money for teachers and math and science. Washington can help education by providing money not increased beuracracy and oversight of state and local control etc...
VQTE - Community for political talk and debate / 2008 election
- http://www.vqte.com
Link
Our goal:
To give users a place to discuss the issues at hand, voice their opinions, defend their chosen candidate(s), debate controversial topics, etc.
AUTHOR BILL G