Showing posts with label Bill Richardson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Richardson. Show all posts

Saturday, August 30, 2008

The Chase for Change 2008: DNC Thoughts

Despite John McCain stealing the thunder the day after I think the Democratic National Convention in Denver this week went as well as can be expected. The case was made better than ever for why Democrats should vote FOR Barack Obama and finally many Democrats went full blown after John McCain – it was more than past time for that. Aside from Obama/Biden I’d argue the best speeches were from Hillary Clinton (Obama could not have expected better), Bill Clinton (I was pleased that he made the parallel back to the dynamics of the 1992 race), John Kerry (finally got his revenge for the “Voting for it before you were against it” smear you got in the last campaign), Bill Richardson (made the points I’ve been making about how on the very few principled stands McCain has taken like on taxes, the environment and torture, he’s reversed on every one) and Al Gore (good to see he noted the uncanny Lincoln parallel in terms of their experience and that at least 1 and up to 3 Supreme Court justices could be selected by the next President which will resonate for decades not 4 years). I wish others got more time like Kathleen Sebelius or Janet Napolitano because with less time you obviously can’t give the show stopper speeches others could. They still did well though.

Joe Biden did quite well, but I wasn’t blown away – still he’ll make an excellent VP and I think he’ll be great for the ticket.

Obama’s speech was definitely as good as it had to be. Not sure I can say it was his absolute best, but definitely blows away what anyone at the Republican convention will offer. All in all I can’t say the Democrats have much to be disappointed about from their convention and early news is they’ve gotten a bump in the polls from it.


Recommend this Post

Saturday, August 23, 2008

The Chase for Change 2008: A Missed Opportunity for Obama's VP

UPDATED
So the worst kept secret is finally out of the bag – it’s Joe Biden. I never got around to outlining what I thought was required for Obama’s VP pick, but had I done so I would have said (you’ll just have to trust me on this) that the VP pick should have executive experience (e.g., be a governor), be able to put some Southern and Midwestern states in play (e.g., be from the South or Midwest), be a woman (because so many female Democrats felt let down by Hillary’s loss and it would give them a milestone to still fight for, not to mention it's well past time), be able to reach out to Hillary Clinton’s supporters (e.g., someone who worked on Hillary’s campaign or Hillary herself) and have solid foreign policy experience. Joe Biden only has the last one so I would count him as a disappointment and a missed opportunity.

What states is Joe Biden going to help Obama with? Will he help win Virginia, Indiana, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado? I’d say no – in fact McCain will be happy to cast the ticket as two liberal Northern Senators who don’t represent the rest of America.

How does Biden help counter the critique that Obama has no executive experience?

If Obama really wanted experience he should have gone with Bill Richardson, he doesn’t meet all my criteria (to be fair no one did), but at least he’s a Midwestern governor with solid domestic AND foreign policy experience, ties to the Clinton administration (even though Carville hates him now) and would have been another first – the first Hispanic (the fastest growing demographic) on the ticket. For those who say Americans couldn’t stomach two "firsts" and Obama needed an old white guy I say that’s offensive and I just don’t think that holds water.

I also thought the argument against Hillary Clinton was that she had been in Washington too long and it would go against his “change” message? So he picks someone who’s been in Washington two decades who has made countless gaffes while he’s been there and who said quite emphatically and he did NOT want to be Vice President? (Yes I know there was the Bill Clinton problem too but that could have been managed) How does Biden help reach out to Hillary supporters? The fact that he slammed Obama so much during the race doesn’t seal the deal I’m afraid and the disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters I fear are going to be fuming.

My top picks would have Kathleen Sebelius (Governor of Kansas) and Janet Napolitano (Governor of Arizona). While they lacked the foreign policy experience Biden has and were Obama supporters they satisfy the other criteria and were strong female governors (which would appeal to many disaffected Hillary supporters who still feel it’s crucial to have a woman in the oval office) who could have helped Obama win in the Midwest and ultimately that’s what Obama needs to win and Biden doesn’t really help much with that from what I can see.

John McCain may now pick a female VP (though I’m certain she’ll be anti-choice and not really onside with the women’s movement) and while I hope not many women get fooled (just imagine someone like Cheryl Gallant leading the country) – I think it would win over some former Hillary Clinton supporters and Obama has left this opportunity wide open for McCain by not just choosing a well-qualified woman himself.

To be clear I’m sure Joe Biden will make a great VP and he is well-qualified and certainly miles better than anything John McCain will put up. To be fair, I’ll refer you to two posts on why Biden will be good for the ticket. Still, from a strategic standpoint I personally just don’t understand this and I happen to feel strongly that there were better, more qualified people who deserved the position more. And as a woman I'm disappointed that this sends a message to wait until 2016 for a woman on the ticket.

The fact remains though that America and Canada and the rest of the world still needs Barack Obama as President. I’m disappointed because I think this pick works against that. No going back of course, but I’ve been frank on the faults made through this Presidential race by any candidate and will continue to do so. Obama is only human and he can learn from his mistakes pointed out by his supporters and recognize the weaknesses that still remain for a Obama-Biden ticket.

In the end I (and I hope many others, particularly in the U.S. so the media takes notice) and many others will continue to point out that John McCain would be MORE CONSERVATIVE on domestic policy and MORE HAWKISH on foreign policy than George W. Bush and would therefore be even worse on both fronts, not to mention he would set back women’s rights 30 years. And I will continue to point out all the great qualities an Obama Presidency would bring. So it won’t be hard to say Obama-Biden is by far the best option for Americans on November 4th. I still look forward to watching the Democratic Convention.

UPDATE: So after reading more posts in favour of Biden and watching his speech in Springfield with Obama, and a couple other videos, I must say I feel a lot better about him as the choice, I think he'll do better in states like Ohio than I gave him credit. When you are getting praise from Republican Senators AND Michael Moore at the same time, along with the high favourability ratings Scott Tribe noted, that is quite a good testament of cross-partisan support. I now feel better that he'll do well for the campaign and he definitely had some good lines in Springfield. That said some of the drawbacks I outlined remain - no executive experience, no regional balance to the ticket, and kind of goes agains the long-standing Obama arguments of "you can't change the culture in Washington by sending the same old faces back and expecting a different result" or that you can't credibly run against John McCain on Iraq when you voted for the war (which Biden did). Also the fact that Biden is on record saying he would be proud to be ON John McCain's ticket and that he encouraged John Kerry to take McCain as his running mate will take some of the sting out of Biden's attacks on McCain. Obama would do well to be well aware of these remaining weaknesses and Biden ought to have an answer ready of why he said he would be willing to be on McCain's ticket or wanted Kerry to have him in 2004.

But I did want to update this to say I feel better about him than I did before so the title of this post has changed a bit. Still a missed opportunity though, I would have liked to seen a strong female governor chosen and I still believe others would have done better and been more qualified for the ticket, for instance, I've yet to hear one argument why Joe Biden was a better pick than Bill Richarson. Biden will be a great VP though regardless. Still looking forward to the big convention speeches :).


Recommend this Post

Saturday, March 22, 2008

The Chase for Change Week in Review: Scandals, Speeches and Endorsements

So I had said the Chase for Change series would go on a hiatus until the next primary, unless there were any major developments, well I’d have to say the events of this week were pretty big. When I last wrote about this race the Clinton campaign was still reeling from Ferraro’s offensive comments and she had just resigned. I said she was probably desperately hoping for something to knock Obama off stride. Well at the least to begin the week she got her wish.

So I don’t think there’s any question that Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s comments are extremely offensive and deserved to be condemned in every way. He should certainly have no place in Obama’s campaign going forward. Certainly now Obama will face questions for some time about what he heard while sitting in Wright’s church for the past 20 years and why he never left. If it turns out to be shown that Obama was not truthful when he said he never heard the words directly out of Wright’s mouth that were the source of this controversy then he may be in deeper trouble (arguably it could sink his candidacy), but until proven otherwise I think harshly condemning and denouncing Wright’s words and ensuring he has no future role in the campaign were about as much as Obama could have done.

Honestly though while these are legitimate questions to ask Obama (though what matters far far more is what Obama has said he would do as President) why does no one ask McCain? I understand McCain has said he is proud to have had (or in the case of those still alive, still have) the support and endorsements from several crazy and bigoted preachers like Jerry Falwell (who said America deserved 9/11 for being too tolerant of “abortionists, feminists and gays”) and Rod Parsley (who has called for a war of Christians against Muslims and called Islam a “false religion”). McCain should be denouncing them as well, not embracing them. The media seems to be dropping the ball on this by focusing only on Obama if they want to make this an issue.

Though of course that was at the start of the week. Then there is the matter of Obama’s speech on race that can now be found be on probably thousands of blogs by now (so I don’t think you need me to post it too). Now as someone who has not endorsed Obama over Hillary or vice-versa, If found it pretty impressive. I think the major points about it have now already been made on so many other blogs: that it was amazing to finally see a major politician not give a safe speech but one that tackled the issue of race relations and racism head on and how it can’t be ignored going forward. Is it up there with the greats? I think I’ll leave that for others to judge, but it certainly was a strong departure from politics as usual and I think we need to see more of that in politics these days. While some people have deplored the speech (and even said they might now back McCain despite him being more Conservative than any Premier or Prime Minister we’ve had in Canada in decades and pretty much a direct continuation of George Bush foreign policy), for me it added to my respect of Obama, as I think it has for most of the U.S. and Canadian media. I think one thing is almost certain, if Obama does lose the nomination he will end up on the ticket, I think it’s clear he’s earned that.

However, I completely agree with Radwanski that it’s extremely unfortunate that in today’s 24/7 news cycle such a monumental speech can get so easily buried and replaced by talk once again of polls and momentum and “was it enough?” Yes Hillary has gained ground in the polls this week, but it’s sad that the media couldn’t just appreciate the speech on it’s own as an important event from the campaign and had to go right back, seemingly within less than 24 hours, to the same horse race lexicon. Well that’s political media coverage for you these days. Maybe some day it will change, but I won’t hold my breath.

So a major scandal, a major speech, you’d think that would be enough for a week, but I guess I picked the wrong week for a hiatus. So just yesterday, New Mexico Governor and former Democratic candidate Bill Richardson endorses Obama. I don’t think people can underestimate the importance of this.

Richardson had arguably the longest CV in this race among the Democratic candidates and has great depth in foreign policy and executive experience so for Richardson to endorse Obama really helps to take the sting out the “he’s not experienced” critique against him. As well, Richardson was Bill Clinton’s energy secretary so if anything the smart money would have been on him endorsing Hillary Clinton, so the fact that he’s gone to Obama must really bother the Hillary campaign.

That said, despite what others are saying, Hillary Clinton is not out of the race because you know the saying “a week is a lifetime in politics” and this week showed that Obama could be knocked off course and in the end whether anyone likes it or not it’s almost assured that super-delegates will decide this race.

I personally think it would be insane for them to go against Obama if he has a clear lead in pledged delegates (BEYOND what Hillary would have won in Michigan and Florida which is a separate messy issue) AND popular vote, but Hillary can still win the popular vote if she pulls out big victories from this point on and I’ve seen at least one poll (likely an outlier but still) showing her with a 25 point plus lead in Pennsylvania, if she actually got close to that result that would be a massive blow to Obama going towards Denver. IF (still a big if) Hillary ends up winning the popular vote I think that would carry tremendous momentum and might actually make her the favourite. As well, if there is something else big happens to bring Obama off side in this campaign then the super-delegates might just argue that he’s unelectable and had the earlier states known more, Hillary would have done better. A dubious argument for them to make perhaps (and one they might live to regret), but not one that is not out of the question.

Personally I still say Obama is the favourite, but never count out the Clintons and Pennsylvania will still matter so the next month of the campaign will be crucial. We’ll see if this time the hiatus in the Chase for Change series holds or if big news strikes again in the coming weeks before the next primary.

In the meantime I am looking forward to seeing 3 new Liberal members in the House of Commons.


Recommend this Post