The 2016 race: Meaner, louder and more liberal Three former Democratic presidential contenders open up about Trump, Clinton and Tim Kaine.

PHILADELPHIA — It’s meaner, louder and more liberal than they remember. That’s how former Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, and retired General Wesley Clark -- all of whom sought the Democratic nomination at one time or another -- characterized the 2016 Democratic presidential primary.

Over pasta, chicken and wine at Maggiano's Little Italy here on the first day of the Democratic convention, the three former presidential candidates conceded that they never expected Bernie Sanders to get as far as he did, explained why Russia might be behind the Wikileaks release of Democratic National Committee emails, and joked about Hillary Clinton’s running mate Tim Kaine -- he isn't that boring, but they think his Spanish could use some work.


In an only-at-the-convention moment, Sanders himself burst through the doors of the private dining room in the middle of the conversation, catching even these veteran politicians off-guard. The candidates invited him to sit down and join the discussion but after briefly surveying the scene and realizing he was at the wrong place, Sanders hurried away with his entourage to a different part of the restaurant to eat.

Harkin chased after Sanders as he shuffled away. They hugged and had a brief conversation. Meanwhile, back in the room, Richardson chuckled, saying "He went in the wrong room?" Turning to Clark, he said, "He's pissed at me, I was not for him. You weren't either, right?"

"I mean come on, I've known Hillary Clinton for 35 years," Clark said before one of Richardson's handlers cuts him off reminding them the mics were still on.

Below are excerpts of the hour-plus dinner conversation, edited for clarity:

POLITICO: Less than 72 hours before a convention starts the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee is ousted. That's a big development..

WESLEY CLARK: These Wikileaks are courtesy, apparently, of Russian intelligence. That's the read as of now and it's a very sophisticated attempt to influence the election.

POLITICO: And to help Donald Trump?

BILL RICHARDSON: Wikileaks is not a fan of Hillary Clinton or the Democratic Party or the Clintons. I mean they --look I mean you don't release on your own national security secrets and Wikileaks did that.

CLARK: But the timing of this wasn't an accident.

RICHARDSON: And the Russians and the Chinese are the major hackers so they probably were involved.

CLARK: 20,000 emails, they could have released them when they had 18,000 emails. But they held them. Why did they hold them until after the Republican National Convention was held? They could have released them until like 15 July. But they didn't. They held them until that particular day.

RICHARDSON: I know that Debbie Wasserman Schultz, it's now fashionable to strike her down and she had to go. I respect her. She did a good job, I mean this was a distraction she handled this email thing, she probably was tilting toward Hillary. But you know she's a congresswoman, I hope she gets re-elected, I hope this doesn't end her career but this is an impossible job and Tom Harkin will tell you this. The DNC chair, it's the worst job in the world.

CLARK: I think in any organization you will always have some people who say some things that shouldn't be said, and in this case I mean she's taken the hit for it but the point is this is one of the most overt attempts to interfere in the American electoral process. There was an old movie called The Manchurian Candidate. This is like another, more sophisticated way of going at this. We now have a candidate who is, and everything he's said is very pro-Putin in terms of his policies. He says things that scare the NATO allies to death. And so if you were Vladimir Putin you'd be doing everything you could do to get him elected.

TOM HARKIN: I just ran into George Will, an old friend of mine. We were talking about this very subject -- you know he's become an independent now -- and he said there's no doubt in his mind that Putin's behind this, that he sees a Trump victory as already sowing discord among our NATO allies, raising some fears among them that we will be there for them as we said in our charter or not, and if he’s president there will be a lot of chaos and that’s where Putin can make his gains.

POLITICO: So why is Trump doing well? What has he done to get him here?

CLARK: He plays to fear. He gives simplistic black-and-white approaches. Listening to Donald Trump is like having a drink at the bar. When I was a cadet at West Point and I talked to guys at the bar, that's who Donald Trump talks to. 'Loser!' 'Bad!' 'Sorry!' 'Can't do!' 'They should do more!' 'We're not going to let them rip us off anymore.' I mean that's great sentiment but being president is not just about sentiment and there's nothing behind it that any of us have been able to determine. A certain number of people want strong leadership, they want someone who can take charge. They think that's leadership and that's how that got started I think, and it snowballed.

HARKIN: Look, what Wesley said is true. There's a certain authenticity about him that seems to come true. And you know what? I even had to laugh sometimes at some of his statements that he gave. When he said [Ted Cruz] is a Canadian anchor baby and he says 'that guy at the end, that Rand Paul, that little guy. He's at 1 percent.'

RICHARDSON: He said 'turn on your hearing aid.' Remember he said that? To Rand Paul?

HARKIN: I thought when he made that comment about John McCain he'd be done. No, he just kept on rolling. It's his facial expressions, his body language, and it's this strong man image. 'We're going to beat ISIS, it'll be so fast. It'll be so fast.' Well, you want to believe that. Yeah, I'd love to have ISIS to be done away with tomorrow. He says somehow he's going to be able to do that.

RICHARDSON: Well, he says he's going to just pick the right people, for everything, the best people.

HARKIN: Anytime you've got this kind of an economic situation of stagnation for wages and families for such a long period of time and especially when you can stir up a little chaos, strong men come to power in those kinds of times. People look for that strong person, that Mussolini, that other kind of person who takes everything on himself and fixes it all.

RICHARDSON: Now what does Hillary need to do? One, she needs to get Sanders' supporters, she needs to assure them that she's a progressive. Two, she needs to get young voters that don't know her on her side. They are still undecided. Three, she needs to increase the turnout of the Democratic coalition, her base: minorities, environmentalists, gays, African-Americans, Hispanics, union members, although we have a problem with men. She has to deal with the trust issue. I believe she can do it with her experience with her tenure as secretary of state, which was good, with her senatorial experience. And I think with Tim Kaine. I think Tim Kaine brings a little edge of a state that's important, in a state like Virginia. Maybe he can be used to mobilize Hispanic voters because of his Spanish and his connection with Latin America and Honduras, but in the end I think it's going to be a race based on not technology but turnout.

HARKIN: If I were advising her I'd say, 'don't give a speech, quit giving those god damn speeches. Just imagine that you're sitting at my kitchen table which she did one time and just talking to somebody. Go down in front, get rid of the teleprompter and go back home for this one. Give it your best gut heartfelt thing about it and if you shed a tear, don't worry about it.

POLITICO: So let's pivot to Tim Kaine. He's regularly pegged as boring. Is he boring?

RICHARDSON: I knew him as a governor. We were governors at the same time. He is a progressive. I mean here's a guy who spent a year of his life in the Peace Corps. He cares about human rights. He speaks Spanish, not very good Spanish.

HARKIN: It's not that good. But it's good enough.

RICHARDSON: But he cares about Latin America. He was a good governor. He was on Foreign [Relations], Armed Services Committee. He's been a mayor. Civil rights background. I think he's a good choice. Now, I wanted a Hispanic

POLITICO: You wanted Julian Castro?

RICHARDSON: Or [Tom] Perez or anybody. I mean we've been passed over. I was a candidate, I wasn't close. I was a candidate for vice president for the last three. My point is I think the time has come for a Hispanic VP candidate, but it's not there. So Kaine is the next best thing.

POLITICO: None of what you've described is a progressive quality. They're qualities of a qualified legislator.

RICHARDSON: No, no I said on Civil rights issues, on voting issues. I think the only area where many don't think he's a progressive is trade agreements, he's for the TPP.

POLITICO: Well, he just came out against TPP.

RICHARDSON: He's like John Kerry, he was for it before he was against it -- nah, I'm kidding.

CLARK: I did a fundraiser for Tim Kaine when he was running for governor and I just thought in that fundraiser he was warm, he was funny, he had real charisma. I'm not sure why you would say he's boring.

HARKIN: The best speech I've ever heard given in the Democratic caucus over 30 years on race was given by Tim Kaine. The best speech ever given on race, no notes, nothing like that. It was an amazing speech.

POLITICO: So would Sherrod Brown have been better as a vice presidential nominee?

HARKIN: I thought we should have a Hispanic too. I made the argument for it. They said they got the Hispanic vote anyway, because of Trump. Here's the argument I made: I said, ‘Look, there are a lot of Hispanics in this country that are eligible to vote, but they don't vote. They're afraid. Here's why they're afraid: because they're legitimate, they're legal but they've got someone in the house who's not legal or their cousin down the street or another cousin who's not legal. And if they stick their neck out and register to vote, they're afraid they're going to come after you and they're going to find their cousins and stuff like that. I said, ‘You put a Hispanic on that ticket on vice president that overcomes that. But this bump-up that you could get means that we might win some governorships and Senate races and some congressional races and some state legislative races in states like yours [New Mexico] that we might otherwise not win.

POLITICO: Was picking Kaine too classic Hillary Clinton?

CLARK: One of the things you always have to recognize is your judgment is always open to question. Now, I look at it like this: the first thing in terms of picking a vice president is to get the president elected. If you look at where Trump is strongest, it's with white men. Now [Admiral James Stavridis] is a great guy, he would have been a very smart pick in the sense that he could say 'I was with Hillary as a NATO commander when Libya was going on. I know how steady she is. I know how strong she is.' He could have also said, 'I know about emails' and I know who you can trust and who you can't, and I can trust Hillary. But I know [Agriculture Secretary] Tom Vilsack really well. Tom is a terrific guy and people relate to Tom. I knew Tim Kaine, I did the fundraiser for him, I watched with admiration but Hillary has to — we have to make this Democratic Party whole again. This is a party that does great with college educated men and women. It doesn't do as well with high school educated women. It's a party that does well with minorities, it's a party that doesn't do well with high school educated white men. It just doesn't do it. I think Tim Kaine with the Catholic background, with his broad reach, I think he's going to be a tremendous asset.

RICHARDSON: I think our main problem is we do not do well with white non-college males and if they turn out in droves we're in trouble.

HARKIN: If union households go for Trump—

RICHARDSON: If Tom Harkin-union-white-guys go the other way we're in deep trouble. Now I don't think it's going to happen, I think Hillary has the jobs, the growth, the income inequality positions, but I think this is where Kaine can help. The danger is that we can't just be a party of environmentalists, minorities, women, civil rights. That's a great coalition but we've got to start talking about jobs and income inequality and job growth and helping small businesses and economic opportunity. I'm not sounding like a Republican because these are not Republican issues but that white male is deserting us in droves, and I'm worried.

CLARK: I love this party, I love the diversity of this party, we've got to get the white, non-college graduates back in this party.

POLITICO: So this is a good opportunity to ask: where is Sanders going? What's next for him? Will he be a team player for Democrats?

HARKIN: He's already said he would. He said that. He said he's supporting Hillary. I think like in any movement like this, we've seen these in the past, sometimes they just get out of control and I think he even got a little booed when he talked about Hillary.

RICHARDSON: When he was in the House of Representatives, I was in the House, I was a chief deputy whip and I would go around asking members 'are you going to vote for this?' I remember asking Bernie several times, 'Bernie are you going to vote with us?' and he would say, 'well, I'm not a Democrat. I don't know what I'm going to do.' I'd say, 'well, you're going to vote with us.’ He'd say, 'no, I don't know. Don't count on me.' In the end, he'd always vote with us. So I think that because he endorsed Hillary Clinton, because he doesn't want Donald Trump. I think he also thinks about his legacy, he wants to influence the Senate, the Democratic Party, income inequality, student loans, a lot of the progressive causes we're all for, Tom Harkin is for. I think in the end, history will record him very well. I don't know about his supporters, I think his supporters are to his left, if that's possible. There'll be some disruptions, but in the end it won't compare to the Republican division of hatred and bigotry at their convention.

CLARK: I think what he saw is that this is the end of a 40-year period in the American economy in which you could reasonably make a case that if you had low inflation, low interest rates and gave broader opportunities for exports abroad, you could argue that everyone was going to be better off. That was the argument in the 1980s and how the Democratic Party viewed things then. That was the centrist view of the Democratic Party and I think what Bernie put his finger on is it's not working very well for lots of people. Some people have done really well on it, some businesses have done really well but especially after 2008 —

RICHARDSON: The middle class has not.

CLARK: I think what Bernie did is he put his finger on it in a powerful way. Occupy Wall Street was trying to come to grips with it, but they couldn't. All they could do was say something's not working. Bernie's come closer in identifying a problem but Hillary is going to fix it and that's what she's going to do and that's Bernie's legacy.

POLITICO: What are the parallels of this election cycle and past election cycles? What surprised you about this election cycle?

RICHARDSON: I like to tell people I've been wrong about Trump, I've been wrong about Bernie Sanders, I've been wrong about Hillary — I thought she would roll. I've been wrong about Ted Cruz. I've been wrong about everything and that's because I'm not necessarily connected anymore to the electorate, having gone inside the private sector. But when I ran in '08, I knew immediately the American people, the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, they didn't want resumes, they didn't want experience, they wanted inspiration. And that was Obama. And Tom Harkin, I don't know if you were there, at one of the first rallies in '08. Obama gave this speech to all the candidates. It was a cattle call but there were thousands of people. I remember telling my wife, 'this race is over.' Should I endorse Obama?

POLITICO: What are we seeing right now in this convention? Are there similarities between now and past conventions? The conventions for when you each ran in 2008 [Richardson], 2004 [Clark], and 1992 [Harkin]?

RICHARDSON: I think in the Clinton years you see a Democratic Party moving to the center on economic issues and welfare reform. On economic populism issues. On job growth. I remember I was drafting committee of the plank, and Tom, I think you were pretty pissed off at that platform.

HARKIN: '92?

POLITICO: Why was he pissed off?

HARKIN: I wasn't the Bernie Sanders of that year, but I was pretty much to the left of everyone.

RICHARDSON: A lot of this, I think -- the party movement, the party platform -- is a bit cyclical. I mean look where we a,re now. The party's moving to the left, the progressive wing. I think Sanders has had a major impact on the platform, on the income inequality issue, student loans, national security and the party has moved very much towards the progressive wing, which I think Tom has represented for many years. I think Wes and I — I don't know, I don't want to catalogue you -- a little more centrist. But maybe not.

CLARK: So 2004. So John Kerry was the nominee. He was clearly the nominee. It was over.

POLITICO: So there was no insurrection?

CLARK: No, it was about coming to terms with the war. You had a veteran who was going to serve as the Democratic nominee so he could stand toe-to-toe and talk about warfare and there were some tax cut issues and some other things that were running up the debt that you could talk about on the economy, but you couldn't see unfolding what has occurred over the last 12 years.

RICHARDSON: Now there was a Democratic convention where similar things happened of an effort to oust the party chairman. Tom, I think it was in San Francisco where there was an effort by the Mondale people running against Reagan to get rid of Chuck Manatt. Tom, do you remember that?

HARKIN: I don't know, but I was there.

RICHARDSON: I don't know if the ouster of Debbie Wasserman [sic] will extend beyond the convention except if the Sanders people are not satisfied and you don't totally get behind Hillary because of this incident and I don't think so. I think they've got a lot on the platform. Sanders has endorsed Clinton. Sanders will have a major role at the convention and in the party. I don't know. I mean I'm not close to the grassroots as I used to be. But this is very inside stuff.

POLITICO: So what's the worst thing you were called on the campaign trail?

CLARK: I think it was in late January of the run and the Republicans were getting nervous and so Peggy Noonan did an op-ed about me in the Wall Street Journal and she called me a — I can't remember if it was a creepo-jerk or jerko-creep. I don't even remember why she said that.

RICHARDSON: The worst thing that I was called before I even announced was that I was a loser, I couldn't win, that Barack Obama inspired the country, that I couldn't run on my experience, my resume, that the country wanted inspiration, that I was from a small state, that I was Hispanic and the Hispanic vote was not significant, that Iowa and New Hampshire would not vote for a Hispanic, that I was not progressive enough. But it was the word "loser" before I even started. It was a column in the New Mexico paper. But I read it and it bothered me. I remember asking my wife Barbara, "You think this is true?" she said, "No. But they've got a few points that were right.”

HARKIN: I ran before people started calling each other names. I remember one of the monikers they put on me was I was just a mouthpiece for organized labor. Which hell, I thought that was a compliment. I did not take that as a bad thing.

CLARK: And you know what it still is? I mean, we need it more than ever to deal with this.

HARKIN: I know, what they're doing to unions now is just despicable.

POLITICO: So what does that say?

CLARK: I think it says a couple of things. It's a gift to have the opportunity to run and for me it was an incredible gift that I was given and one I never anticipated. But I think the other thing is if you listen to what Sen. Harkin said and the difference in tone over 24 years now is...it's awful. And Donald Trump has taken it to a new low obviously. On every school yard where there's a bully, there's always a few people who follow him around and say, 'Let's see who he's going to pick on now!' It's not necessarily that they're on the bullying side, it's just like entertainment. That's how he got his start in this campaign.”

