Do As I Say, Not As I Do: Bill Richardson Explains Why The Other Superdelegates Should Vote With Their States

CNN's John Roberts spoke to Bill Richardson this morning about his endorsement of Barack Obama, discussing his reasons for endorsing, the Clinton reaction, and his own slightly muddled view on how superdelegates ought to vote. Importantly, Richardson said definitively that Obama did not promise him anything for the endorsement. He also squirmed a bit when asked by Roberts why, if he advocated superdelegates voting with their constituents, he had backed Obama even though Hillary Clinton had won New Mexico? Richardson protested that Roberts was getting "technical" since the state had been so close that the outcome hadn't been clear for two weeks. Still, Roberts said, a win is a win — which launched Richardson into a convoluted explanation of all the reasons why he thought superdelegates should vote like their states except that he was the exception. John Roberts was clearly having none of it. Watch:

Note also that Richardson again described his phone call to Clinton explaining that he'd be endorsing Obama as "heated" though this time he described her as being "gracious" — a word I haven't seen that he had used thus far in so describing the call. To my mind, voting with his conscience does not constitute an act of betrayal, but sharing with reporters details of his phone call with Clinton was sort of uncool, especially when he could have just said, "It was a private conversation between friends where I explained why I had made a professional decision, and considering the circumstances Senator Clinton was very gracious." Saying it was "heated" was the real breach of trust, as I see it. Loyalty is in the little things too.

We're still digging the beard though.

Update: He said she was gracious on "Morning Joe" today, too.

Related:
The Other Bill [ETP]
A Few Unanswered Questions About Bill Richardson's Obama Endorsement [HuffPo]

Comments

[majseventh]

He can't even give straight answers about who to vote for and why he is negative about Hillary.
Obama can have him. Good job cnn

[HaroldBeu]

It is difficult to tease out a solution to this mess that is fair, such that everyone would be happy. It occurred to me that there are those who want Hillary to win because of the historic nature of her campaing being the first serious woman candidate for president. The same holds true for Obama as the first black and did hold true for Richardson as the first HIspanic. Unfortunately, we have only one president and there have been only 43. I can think of literally hundreds of other groups other than Christian white males that are unrepresented in the Presidency. I as an agnostic would never have a chance. Neither would a Muslim at this point.

But as to Hillary, I have problems with her as I did with her husband. They both seemed to be calculating which gives rise to mistrust. I would be very happy with another woman for president, for example Nancy Pelosi. That would please greatly. I just hope that people will rise above a sense of entitlement and irrationality as demonstrated by James Carville in his stupid Judas comment about Richardson. It is clear to me that Obama has run an effective campaign, unlike H. Clinton, which speaks volumes about what kind of commander-in-chief each will be.

[joand]

Good answer although I disagree with you. What politician isn't calculating? I keep using this example, but all those 'present' votes by Obama.....that was calculating as hell. A) It served a purpose for his party....but probably not his constituents and B) It also makes him harder to pigeon-hole in a larger election like, say for the United States Senate. Or even better, for the Presidency of the United States.

He bashes Hillary for her vote for the war, although he doesn't quote what she said at the time. But Hillary took a stance, rightly or wrongly. Wrongly, as it turned out. But what about him? Had he taken a stance on some of the more important 'present' votes, we may be wondering about his decision-making, too.

[Marshall Lucky]

Hey Rachel, you like guys with beards? I like busty brunettes with Canadian accents. Maybe we could get together sometime...

[LollieDotCom]

I think this is the way it went down....Richardson had to choose between his loyalty to the Clintons and his loyalty to our country.So he considered very carefully the decisions George W. Bush has made each time he had to choose between loyalty to who'd scratched his back the most versus loyalty to what was best for our country.

It made it easy for him to see that his greatest loyalty must be to the country, because if nothing else, GW taught us how bad things can be when any political figure places their loyalty to anyone for anything above what is best for the United States of America. Speaking of Jesus Christ, "Jesus Christ, GWB damn near turned us into the United States of Halliburton, that's how loyal he was!"

Loyalty to what's best for all of us FIRST Bill Richardson is not the Judas, James Carville is the JUDAS and he doesn't even realize it yet.

[joand]

It's nice you know what is best for the entire country of the United States of America and every living soul within this country! That's quite an achievement. Tell me, how did you come by your knowledge of what is best for everyone and everything? Is it knowledge we can all possess? Because obviously, MY knowledge of what is best for this country is wrong. I might just have to go back to grade school and start all over again. Maybe I'll join a church. Maybe I'll be part of a political group. I just really, seriously want to know what you know to say what is BEST for America.

You are amazing.

[kingofscotts]

Oh please this is the way it went down.

Richardson: "Well looks like Obama's got this thing sown up. If I want a chance at a cabinet or even VP spot I better get on the bus before it's too late".

If you think for one second that if the scorecard were reversed that Richardson wouldn't have endorsed Clinton you are fooling yourself.

Opportunism folks that's all it is.

[PamFlorida]

I have liked and respected Bill Richardson for a long time. It is obvious that he thought a lot about who to endorse or even whether he should endorse.
Having said that, I was struck by his awkward demeanor when he made his endorsement of Sen. Obama. Even the language he used did not seem characteristic of him. In subsequent media interviews, Gov. Richardson appeared tense and at times, defensive. He is known for his laidback approach and straightforward views. It is obvious that something is making him very uncomfortable.

[thedirtman]

I was thinking about how Bill Richardson's disloyalty compares to Monica Lewinsky's disloyalty - then I remembered. Monica didn't just get a job from Bill C. Bill C. got a job from Monica.

[SHARENEWS]

Oh, pleassssssssse dirtman. Couldn't you have contributed something more constructive to the discussion?

[aurelio23]

....and God sai to Jesus:

[joeyfoto]

I like Bill Richardson; i support Senator Obama's candidacy but I do not like the unprincipled position that "Super-delegates" should vote for the candidate who earned the majority of the people's votes... except in my state ('New Mexico was a 1% victory for HC so that really leave me free to vote based on my judgement'). I think not.

[IconoclasticYouth]

The way he should have argued it is since he picked up 1 1/2 percent of the vote for his campaign despite having long since formally dropped out, and the race was within that margin of his votes, he had the ability to use his 1 1/2 percent to vote the other way.

[SkimaskBob]

well said.

[PuffAndStuff]

Have to say it was a real stunner that Richardson did not endorse Hillary after the Clinton's have seemingly been so good to him and his career in the past.

[TJJJ]

this is nothing but double standards for Richardson

[ME08]

LIAR!

[melann830]

Truth!

[postrealitysyndrome]

The entire logic behind questioning Richardson's endorsement is absurd!! A public ENDORSEMENT is totally irrespective of one's VOTING obligation as a superdelegate. Richardson, as a superdelegate, is obligated to vote for Clinton for no other reason than to avoid hypocrisy, but that in no way requires him to endorse her. I don't understand why that's so hard to comprehend! An endorsement is nothing more than an opinion, a recommendation to the public-you don't vote with an endorsement! Should I go on?!! What's so hard to understand about the differences?

[melann830]

The reason it is questioned is because he made comments which go contrary to his actions. This is the making of hypocrisy at its best. This is the reason Roberts went after Richardson. Nice Job, Roberts. You deserve a big fat raise for being able to see right through it. When Richardson answered that he was not offered anything by Obama, look at his response again. It was so indicative of masking a lie. Richardson, eres un puto y traidor a la mayoria que votaron para Clinton en el estado de Nuevo Mejico.

[Melissa]

It was a very funny interview. Richardson was very uncomfortable. Good for Anderson!

[AdultFilmLegend]

Richardson was the only one in the race with a resume to back up the job application.

[dora rice]

I hate a traitor. Regardless what excuse he uses. but then no one was listening to his dumb campaign speeches.

[strifeknot]

He'd be a traitor to the American people if he were to back Clinton.

[melann830]

Like interviewing Monica Lewinsky for a job which she refused.

[US55588144]

Are you out of your mind, the best candidate from either party was Senator Joe Biden of Delaware. I felt that Richardson embarassed himself in several of the debates. The best remaining candidate is Hillary Clinton. Richardson should represent his constituents. He's a hypocrite.

[Owlygirl]

I don't begrudge Richardson his choice at all (esp since it happens to be mine). But I still view him as an opportunist. He just really irks me. What bothers me most is his stance with Latinos. Never once have I heard him advocating what Latinos ought to do for themselves. My own grandfather came here with next to nothing. He never whined or complained about work or struggle. He never criticized America or resented that he had to work very hard. This grateful man built a house for his family, taught his children English along with Spanish, and sent them out with a deep love and appreciation for America. I don't see that enough these days. I see more people complaining about what they deserve and expect of this country. But what happened to, "Ask not what your country can do for you...?" I firmly believe if someone wants to settle here (or in any new country) and feel that sense of belonging they need to take a page from those immigrants who actually have a love and desire to give something back. Or is that asking too much?

[melann830]

That's all well and good, but when I'm paying the kind of taxes that I am, I don't need to give back anymore than what I have already given. A Kennedy quote in today's era is repugnant, particularly with the financial mess this country is in. Richardson does not care about the latinos in his state or any state. He has a border issue in his state and he's looking to get the hell out of New Mexico and back to D.C. That speaks volumes about his character and the fact that he does not care. I do begrudge Richardson and Obama for that matter and will not vote for them come November should they be the nominee. I can only imagine that many Clinton supporters will follow suit. That is our perrogative. To be quite honest, to hell with the Democratic Party. At this rate, I could care less if it collapses.

[copesthetics]

kinda need to give richardson the benefit of the doubt on this one. winning a state by half a percent in an apportioned delegate system is not a mandate, and governor should have some flexibility when deciding between what is essentially a 50/50 split ... and in determining current public opinion in his state. doesn't seem laughable to me.

[melann830]

It does to most of us. If you analyze this situation carefully and watch Richardson's still uncomfortable body language and facial gestures it makes plenty of sense. He is lying. Obama did promise him a job, one he probably knew would not be offered in a Clinton administration. No one gets that uncomfortable when defending a postition they truly believe in. When you know something to be true, you defend it quite comfortably,calmly and articulately. Richardson just pulled the same stunt Kirk Watson did. I didn't hear any specifics as to the pro for endorsement of Obama. "He understands us." How does Obama understand us? Where are the specifics? Who exactly is us? Where are the specifics? Yep, Kirk Watson all over again.

[rjean]

why give bearded bill the benefit of the doubt...what has he ever done to get a benefit....he was a lowly congressman when clinton picked him up..SOME FRIEND BILL...course i dont give a rats ass who he sides with.....one is a nothing senator with no experience backed by a lying press...the other is a bought and paid for serial liar who thinks the presidency is owed her...either way he loses.....­..........­........

ask the people of nm about billy boy.......­..........­........i have friends there and they HATE HIM...

dont guess he'll be having dinner with the clintons any time soon..just as well...the bearded one would have to pick up the tab...

and so goes the life of dirty dems......­..........­.........a­s rush says..OPERATION CHAOS is working..

lmao

[WASanford]

What a phony!

[genseric]

This guy makes Benedict Arnold look like the soul of loyalty. The Obama people are so caught up their own spin, it becomes laughable sometimes. They have been whining non-stop for months that if someone steals the nomination from them, then well... something bad will happen. This is the old 'no justice, no peace' threat from the radicals in the 1960s. The Obama media (msnbc, fox, etc.) are on offense all the time; they're always painting these theoretical threats from the Clintons and then shooting them down ahead of time.