Bill Richardson

[dorethawsp]

We need to get behind this guy. While his odds are slim (still infinitely better than Ron Paul's) he does support our cause and is a viable VP candidate. Maybe I'm off base, but I think he'd be a good candidate in a general election, although I'm sure than GOP blackshirts would paint him as some crazy Hispanic.

[TomVeil]

I wouldn't count out Ron Paul. I know internet polls aren't scientific and blah blah, but every poll out there has Paul making GIANT leaps and all the other candidates going down.

As for your assertion, while I'm not convinced that I'm going to vote for Richardson, I do agree he'd make a great VP [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[dorethawsp]

Ron Paul is to the GOP as Ralph Nader or Al Sharpton is to the Dems. I hope he gets our message out there, but all he is an ideological candidate.

[Wynton]

I think Richardson would win the general election, but I doubt he'll receive any attention to make it through the primaries.

I agree he's the perfect VP.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't count out Ron Paul. I know internet polls aren't scientific and blah blah, but every poll out there has Paul making GIANT leaps and all the other candidates going down.


[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone who thinks Ron Paul stands a chance has no understanding of American politics. Internet polls aren't just unscientific, they consistantly overestimate libertarian support by orders of magnitude. Bill Richardson's chances, as small as they are, are at least 100x greater than Paul's.

[Moneyline]

Lets keep this thread about Richardson. There are already plenty of threads about Paul, and many supporters of our cause would never vote for a Republican or Libertarian.

Even if Richardson doesn't have much of a shot, if the other candidates find out that he is getting a lot of support from poker players, then they might be convinced to join our side as well.

[MiltonFriedman]

But for Ralph Nader drawing a couple of thousand votes in Nevada, the Dems would have won the last Presidential election.

[MiltonFriedman]

Any evdience either way ?

I actually have donated money to Richardson's campaign already, but have no clue about his stand on online gaming. (He has solid credentials and experience in a number of areas, such as foreign policy, immigration and energy, has been a Governor, Representative and Ambassador.

Also, he would attract a large Hispanic turnout.

I think he is a good VP choice for either of the front-runners, except that the Dems still need a Southerner on the ticket to win. Sorry, I still see a Red White House for four more years.

[Coy_Roy]

[ QUOTE ]
(still infinitely better than Ron Paul's)

[/ QUOTE ]

You are either insane or terribly misinformed if you believe this.

[Skallagrim]

Ideologically, i find myself in agreement with Mr. Paul on most issues. Still, reality asserts itself and I have to agree that he has virtually no chance of winning the republican nomination - the religious right and the neocons are still to big a part of that party and Mr. Paul himself just doesnt seem up to the task of converting them.

Bill Richardson has some real chance though in the democratic race. He is right now near the top of the second tier of candidates (and far better from my point of view than any, except maybe Obama, and I say that only because Obama's actual positions are still largely undefined).

Second tier candidates have pulled it off before, especially in New Hampshire. As an independant NH voter, I have narrowed my choice down to Richardson or Paul, with some hope for Obama...

And letting any candidate you support know that their position on poker makes a big difference to you is an essential act on our part.