How would Richardson perform as a general election candidate?

I am more interested in hearing from people who don't loathe him (I find the "I hate candidate X so everything they say and do sucks and there is nothing good about them" posts not very interesting).

I see good and bad in all the candidates. Richardson is level headed. He has lots of experience. He seems genuinely driven to get things done. He definitely could undo a lot of the damage that Bush has done to our foriegn relations. He doesn't seem power driven. He doesn't seem like a flip flopper. I see him as a Lyndon Johnson get-it-done kind of President. Being a popular Governor of a swing state helps too. Maybe he would get a boost from hispanic voters, I dunno.

What I worry about is his speaking style and personality. That stuff doesn't matter to me, but it matters to a lot of voters. He doesn't seem great at connecting.

I see him getting him winning over voters who are big on experience and fiscal responsibility. I don't see him getting Naderized by the left anymore than the other frontrunners. I don't think it will be easy for the GOP to paint him as some scary America-hating, muslim loving librul. I don't know if he will win over the "I vote for the guy I want to have a beer with crowd." I don't see him pumping up the youth vote the way other candidates could.

What do you think?

Richardson is not a good orator at all. And that's something rather vital on the national stage.

These mindless primary debates are not his specialty. And that doesn't hurt him, because these debates are going to be basically meaningless in the end. Its the general election debates that count, and those are a better format for him to display his skills and likability.

He gives you New Mexico, and an excellent shot at Colorado and Nevada in a general. He'd have a great shot at Ohio as well. He's a governor, and our last two Democratic presidents were governors. Only one Democratic sitting Senator has ever made it to the White House. Clinton and Obama being in the Senate is a huge obstacle for them. Plus, a Richardson nomination throws the Repukes on the defensive. They will never expect it, since he's a dark horse, and they will have no effective plan against him. I cannot see how the Repukes stop him.

I originally supported Richardson, but his campaign skills seem weak. He'd be better in the Cabinet. He still is in the running for VP - particularly since he hasn't doesn't anything to criticize Hillary.

They are not seen as Washington "insiders," and they are supposed have the fiscal experience necessary to do the job...though after DimSon, all bets are off.

His resume is great and he's very personable in a small group. But his debate performances have been weak.

He's a regular guy, and he speaks like a regular guy--a SMART regular guy. I think his speaking style is a strength--he sounds like he is talking TO you, not 'at' you.

I think he connects brilliantly. He's like your neighbor over the fence, the one you go to when you want some reliable direction on how to do something.

I think he is very capable as an ambassador or political negotiator to help countries settle disputes. Richardson is not a charismatic leader type person, but a professional who you would rely on to dispatch to help solve problems in my opinion.

Richardson has talked favorably about a policy that would take the Midwest's water and redistribute it to the overpopulated desert areas in the Southwest. You may think that's just a super idea, but I guarantee you he will have zero chance in any Midwestern states because of it. Zero. The reaction was virulent. He really shot himself in the foot with that one.

Go ahead and Google Richardson Great Lakes for yourself. Here's just one very restrained sample of reaction. He can backpedal as fast as he wants, but he put himself in unelectable shape in the Midwest with this one:

A water query from out West
Hopeful's interest in Great Lakes renews call for compact
By DAN EGAN
Posted: Oct. 5, 2007

The idea of piping Great Lakes water to faraway places seems to many like a pie-in-the-sky plan, but apparently not to Democratic presidential hopeful Bill Richardson.

In a sign of how fragile the Great Lakes could one day become as the nation's population - and political clout - drifts west, the New Mexico governor told the Las Vegas Sun this week that he is interested in looking east to solve his region's water shortages.

"I believe that Western states and Eastern states have not been talking to each other when it comes to proper use of our water resources," Richardson told the Las Vegas Sun for a story published Thursday. "I want a national water policy. We need a dialogue between states to deal with issues like water conservation, water reuse technology, water delivery and water production. States like Wisconsin are awash in water."

The message from Richardson, a long shot for the nomination, might play well in the Southwest, but he likely just lost a boatload of votes in the Midwest, where Lake Superior has hit a record low for this time of year, and Lakes Michigan and Huron are flirting with their own record lows. . .http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=671644

Illinois is as well. Minnesota is not going Repuke next year. Indiana is a lock for any Repuke.

Wisconsin and Iowa are the only midwestern states he'll have to worry about. And he can just say this was a Western governor talking. He won't speak of it again if they don't want it. And it won't cost him.

If he gets the nomination, maybe you're right. But you can't possibly overestimate how strongly Midwesterners feel about the subject. He will not win any primaries in the Midwest, for sure. And he would be hammered on this in a general election.

Maybe he can overcome it. But it WILL cost him.

the farmers in Nebraska and S Dakota and probably even Iowa are getting worried about how they are going to be able to irrigate. It's the plains states, not the SW, who could benefit from drawing on the great lakes.

I think that in a few years we will see a reverse migration as people move out of the real desert states because they are not viable without imported water, and there isn't much left to import. As global climate change stresses water supplies, I think big chunks of the SW will revert to their natural desert state.

He's a governor. Senators don't win. Senators can be ripped to shreds on their voting records. And the exclusive, elitist nature of the Senate doesn't help.
Richardson gives you the West, and a much better chance in conservative-leaning states. If nominated he gives us the best chance to win. Senators always seem to come up short.

Richardson has run the worst campaign of any Democratic candidate.