Richardson Explains How Obama and Clinton Woo

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.


richardson_headshot.jpg This whole article is worth reading because it has Bill Richardson’s personal thoughts on the Clinton and Obama campaign’s attempts to court his endorsement. But this passage is particularly interesting:

Their manner of courtship — one wooing, the other arm-twisting — seemed to reflect the candidates’ different personalities and campaign styles, he said.

Obama preferred the soft sell, calling Richardson every three days or so — “dialing the phone himself, no operator” — for long discussions about policy and campaign issues. The two developed a bantering relationship, building on the camaraderie they shared off-camera during debates, when they would roll their eyes at some of their rivals’ statements.

Clinton was more persistent and tactical. There were eight or more phone calls a day, Richardson said: “Bill calling, Hillary calling, friends of mine that were in the Clinton administration, Clinton operatives, Clinton Hispanic operatives, New Mexico Clinton Hispanic operatives.”

Some callers, who suggested Richardson had an obligation to back Clinton, did more harm than good. “I think the Clintons have a feeling of entitlement . . . that the presidency was theirs,” Richardson said, and the persistent lobbying from “Washington establishment types” convinced him of a need for some fresher faces on the scene.

The Clinton campaign must be pulling out its collective hair — a persistent, efficient, and professional full-court press got bested by one dude picking up the phone himself and calling once every few days.

That sense of entitlement that Richardson describes must have been awfully strong. Or maybe it was this.

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate