I oppose Bill Richardson on the basis of his actions during the primary.
In politics loyalty is considered extremely important, the way Bill Richardson switch from Clinton to Obama obviously did not go down well in either camp.
He may have hurt his chances by actually endorsing Obama - Why? Because he led everyone to believe he supported Clinton by having pizza with Bill Clinton, only later to endorse Obama. His relations with the entire Clinton camp went from "hero" to "zero". This might go down as opportunistic and not based on conviction.
He also holds no keys in terms of the electorate, the latin support for Obama is already in the 60%+ and is unlikely to increase with a SOS.
He is not competing everywhere, everyday that passes he has had to u-turn on some policies/issues since his ORIGINAL issues were sketchy at best filled with more rhetoric and less thought.
Lets be frank, DKos was dumb enough to fall for Obama's rhetoric. In that process they attacked, and yes ATTACKED Hillary, Clinton's, 90's and their supporters, lest not forget the West Virginian attacks.
I'm an economist, the current economic downtown is mostly due to:
a) Unregulated sub-prime lending rules.
b) Causing housing crisis.
c) Causing securities held by banks to lose value - hence banks losing money
d) This means banks stop lending/borrowing money/securities to each other giving lack of liquidty.
This has barely nothing to do with Bill Clinton - sub-prime lending only really took off recently! The poor regulation is due to Bush also.
Secondly oil-prices are unstable due to Iraq/Iran pressures and general demand incrases from China and India.