Yesterday’s post on Bill Richardson’s endorsement of Obama produced some interesting comments. Richardson had earlier said this:

If somebody’s appointed as a superdelegate because they’re Hispanic or a governor, they should pay attention to what their voters and their constituencies are saying…It should be voters in states. It should be delegates according to the proportion of the vote or the candidate.

Because New Mexico’s popular vote, delegate vote and Hispanic vote all went for Clinton, commenters both here and at the Huffington Post said that this probably meant Richardson was endorsing Obama but not pledging to vote for him as a superdelegate. I checked with the Obama campaign — not true. Richardson is pledging his vote to Obama as a superdelegate as well.

So the question remains — has Bill Richardson changed his mind? Does he now believe that it’s okay for superdelegates to ignore the choice of the constituents they represent in casting their vote? If he now believes that, he should say so.

And journalists should be asking him.

Jane Hamsher

Jane Hamsher

Jane is the founder of Her work has also appeared on the Huffington Post, Alternet and The American Prospect. She’s the author of the best selling book Killer Instinct and has produced such films Natural Born Killers and Permanent Midnight. She lives in Washington DC.
Subscribe in a reader