Richardson Surges–Among Those That Actually Listened to Him

Bill Richardson won the respect of the bloggers who listened to him at MoveOn’s Iraq Forum, and this shows in the post-forum survey of members. Note the considerable difference in view of him between those who listened to the forum and those who didn’t per this report from The Hotline’s Blogometer:

MoveOn allowed all of their members to vote on the question: “Which candidate do you believe would be best able to lead the country out of Iraq?” and Obama won with 28% (John Edwards had 25%, Dennis Kucinich 17%, and Bill Richardson 12%). Among those who actually listened to the debate at House Parties, however, Obama came in third with 19% while Edwards held steady with 25% and Richardson surged to second with 21%. As our coverage below shows, among netroots leaders, Richardson was the hands-down winner of the forum while Obama failed to distinguish himself. Will elite netroots opinion filter through the Dem base, or will Obama coast to victory?

Richardson is a distant fourth in the polls nationally, but considering the weakness seen in all three candidates in the upper tier of candidates, he shouldn’t be written off.

Be Sociable, Share!

3 Comments

  1. 1
    battlebob says:

    found this on Kos from the Edwards camp…

    When we say complete withdrawal we mean it. No more war. No combat troops in the country. Period. But we’re also being honest. If John Edwards is president, we’re not going to leave the American Embassy in Iraq as the only undefended embassy in the world, for example. There will be Marine guards there, just like there are at our embassies in London, Riyadh, and Tokyo. And just the same, if American civilians are providing humanitarian relief to the Iraqi people, we’re going to protect them. How in good conscience could we refuse to protect them and then allow humanitarian workers to be at risk for their lives or the work not to happen at all? Finally, it’s also Senator Edwards’ position that we will have troops in the region to prevent the sectarian violence in Iraq from spilling over into other countries, for counter-terrorism, or to prevent a genocide. But in the region means in the region – for example, existing bases like Kuwait, naval presence in the Persian Gulf, and so forth. I hope this helps explain Senator Edwards’ position. Thanks for standing up for what we all believe in.

  2. 2
    kj says:

    “No more war.” And just who defines what “war” means anyway these days? :-\ (Nothing against the Edward’s camp. The cynic in me just had to ask.)

  3. 3
    Librocrat says:

    I really like Richardson. He’s a great candidate who can also win. He’s got the best resume (that has become Cliche, but it is still true) and he isn’t remotely controversial a candidate, neither alienating the far left or middle. He’s a good candidate. I wish he were better known.

Leave a comment