I think Richardson could spell trouble, even for a candidate like George Allen. He is not one of these shrill dems and he talks a reasonable game. He has lots of experience and he appears to be likeable and a regular human being, the opposite of a John Kerry.
Hitlary will scratch his eyes out.
I agree. He is very likable and comes across as very moderate. Barring any close scrutiny of his tenure during the nuclear secrets fiasco (unlikely given the state of the media) he could prove formidable to anyone the Republicans field.
Don't be taken in by Richardson's tax rebate crap; it was a shell game and he raised taxes in other areas. His style is cronyism, complete political loyalty, party connections and $$$ contributions outweigh experience in government; no deviance from his policies or you're gone. Also, typical lib environmental policy -- bash the oil industry which is the golden goose for him allowing him to do all those rebate redistribution schemes of his. Still most of us have absolutely no use for easterm libs who are completely out of touch with the rest of the country.
Washington Post/WSJ Poll and all the other polls show Allen polling at 5% or below even amoung conservatives. They just don't care about him. I'm not saying they don't like him but he doesn't seem to do anything for them.
What you say is true - however the problem is the dem base is so kooky left these days he would appear as a hostile right-winger to the faction that has taken over the democrats. On that premise I suggest he doesn't have a chance.
But he sounds rational, so the Dems won't chose him.
I know MoveOn is loving the fake-republican democrats that are winning election now, but there's no way they are going to support someone like a Leiberman, a Mark Warner, or a Bill Richardson (who cut taxes) for their Presidential Candidate.
They expect payback for their millions, and they will insist on a liberal presidential candidate. They already seem upset with Hillary for leaving her liberal roots and pretending to be a moderate.