Name recognition eludes Tancredo to the very end

that guy who hates amnesty

In non-Tancredo news:
What the hell is Bill Richardson up to?

This is definitely worth checking out: Bill called the NY Times today to blast Hillary on her "stunning flip-flop" on Iraq. Yeah, the same Bill Richardson that seemed to be content to subtly brown-nose his way onto Hillary's VP short list.

Does he really think that getting aggressive now can make him viable? Considering what we saw at his HQ in NH (an abandon house with doors left ajar), I seriously doubt it. So why go negative now? And why so proactively? Does this mean that Hillary can't count on Bill's all-important withdraw endorsement? Curious, eh?

11 Comments:

Blogger Robert said...

That's right, CNN's headline about Tancredo's withdraw from the race does not mention him by name. How funny is that?

Clicking though to the article I expected to read something like:

"You know that guy who hates amnesty? The one at the debates that's usually over to one side? Kinda angry guy. No, not Ron Paul! The other guy... Well, anyhow that guy's not running anymore."

Thursday, 20 December, 2007  
Blogger Robert said...

Well... after I posted this CNN changed their headline and photo at the cnn.com/politics page (although they left the original headline on the story itself).

Coincidence?

Oh and that-guy-who-hates-amnesty endorsed Romney, which makes Romney officially the crazy mans' candidate.

I have said that if Hillary was our nominee that I might cross the aisle and vote for a Huckabee or McCain or Bloomberg or Paul. Or cast a crazy protest vote.

The exception is Romney though. If Hillary and Romney are the only two running, I'll be sporting myself one of those nice embroidered denim Hillary '08 button-downs.

Thursday, 20 December, 2007  
Blogger Robert said...

BTW is it just me or is Bush looking more sinister by the day? Check out this pic from today's CNN ticker.

Thursday, 20 December, 2007  
Anonymous mencken said...

Whatever.

What about Obama's 153 "present" votes as a state senator? That's a real issue. Who's up to spinning that
fact?

Friday, 21 December, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Richardson is focusing ALL efforts on Iowa. Let us remember that Kerry was in 4th place all the way up to Iowa, the front runners are not always guaranteed to win.

Friday, 21 December, 2007  
Blogger Kyle said...

Mencken, the number is just under 130 times according to yesterday's NYT.

From that same article: Speaking from his campaign headquarters in Nashua, N.H., he described the votes a tactical maneuvers. "Often times I would strategically vote present because we were negotiating a bill or because there was some element in the bill that was unconstitutional or had problems that needed to be tweaked."

Mr. Obama's aides and some allies dispute the characterization that a present vote is tantamount to ducking an issue. They said Mr. Obama cast 4,000 votes in the Illinois Senate and used the present vote to protest bills that he believed had been drafted unconstitutionally or as part of a broader legislative strategy.


Those votes were a drop in the bucket of a long voting record.

Friday, 21 December, 2007  
Blogger Kyle said...

It is a good move for Tancredo to drop out. He can say that he was a big part of the reason why illegal immigration is a top issue in the Republican Primary. That is something to hang his hat on and walk away with a win of sorts.

Friday, 21 December, 2007  
Blogger Robert said...

Menk,
I was not dogging Richardson. I like him. But up until now he has done nothing but defend and complement Hillary in the debates. This turn of events is definitely interesting. Obviously if Richardson dropped out and endorsed Obama it would be huge.

Friday, 21 December, 2007  
Blogger Russ said...

They said Mr. Obama cast 4,000 votes in the Illinois Senate and used the present vote to protest bills that he believed had been drafted unconstitutionally or as part of a broader legislative strategy.

Well...if you thought a bill contained something unconstitutional, vote "no" and explain yourself on the floor. If your vote was a strategy involving some "broader" legistative issue, vote "no" and explain your self. To me this is an excuse that try's to sound noble, but in reality is was probably given using the tactic, "I'll try and sound noble and the average idiot won't know the difference."

Sorry...I don't believe for one minute the excuse he gave is legit.

Friday, 21 December, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Richardson were to dropout, which he has no plans to do, he would not endorse obama, edwards, or hillary. Governor Richardson wants all troops out of Iraq the three front runners cannot make that same pledge.

Friday, 21 December, 2007  
Blogger sammeee said...

tan-who-do?

Wednesday, 26 December, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home