Oprah for Obama. Ted Kennedy and Caroline for Obama. Maria Shriver for Obama. Arnold for McCain. Garrison Keeler for Obama.
Do endorsements matter? Do celebrity or high profile endorsements sway the minds and votes of everyday voters? I suspect they do at least somewhat. Endorsements may not be key to electoral victory but they matter and in a close election, such as the Super Tuesday contests between Obama and Clinton, they may make a difference if not the difference.
I’m only slightly surprised that no one has sought my endorsement. Well, I jest. I’m not surprised at all. Only one or two friends have even bothered to ask me my preference, although readers of my blog already know how I will vote on February 5.
As a skeptic and former political scientist, I seriously question the reasons high profile personalities advance to explain their endorsements. There are no doubt a few “pure” endorsements but I suspect most are what I might call “impure.” Some are motivated by clear self interest on the part of the endorser. For example, politicians who might be seeking the vice presidential nomination or a cabinet position or something of value from the candidate being endorsed. But I suspect most are motivated by more muted self interest or personal emotional factors.
Take Ted Kennedy for example. Why did he jump on the Obama bandwagon so very late in the campaign? Was it because he felt that the Clintons, Bill in particular, had gone overboard in their campaigning, alluding too directly to race and gender and otherwise seemingly risking a rift in the Democratic Party, as some have suggested? Or was it because his niece Caroline Kennedy shed her political virginity and endorsed Obama, for reasons that aren’t quite clear. Or was Ted acting on the basis of some animosity or feelings of jealousy toward the Clintons for having emerged as a potential political dynasty, pushing aside the Kennedys from that position? After all, Ted himself lost any chance of ever becoming a viable presidential candidate after Chappaquiddick, despite an effort to upend Carter. Is there some jealousy operating underneath the surface? Was Ted waiting until Obama had proven himself a competitor before deciding to take his side? Surely if Ted’s rationale for supporting Obama was based upon his belief that leadership should pass to a younger generation he would have stepped down years ago from the Senate. But, no, he certainly hasn’t done that!
And Oprah? She was questioned apparently just yesterday as to whether her support for Obama was because of his race, particularly given her propensity not to endorse political candidates in the past. No, she said. She was supporting Obama not because he is black but because he is brilliant. Run that by us again, Oprah. Out from the political shadows to support Obama, the first African-American mainstream candidate for president, because he is brilliant? Why is that simply not believable?
And what about Arnold Schwarzenegger’s last minute endorsement of John McCain, after the Governor claimed he would remain neutral in the primary? Well, that’s hardly surprising coming on the heels of Arnold’s last minute support for proposition 93 regarding term limits after he had opposed the proposition in the past. Arnold is notorious for switching directions at any point in time that he or his advisers sense that his political fortunes will be advanced. I don’t doubt that McCain’s policy positions are closer to Arnold’s in many areas but I cannot help thinking that Arnold saw in McCain a winner and wanted to jump on board the McCain express now so that after Arnold’s tenure as governor ends there might be a political appointment in a McCain presidency. Perhaps his family is hedging its bets with his wife’s last minute support for Obama.
Now having “officially” endorsed Hillary in the California Democratic primary, I do feel obliged to deny any impure motives for my decision. Let me quickly distinguish between impure motives and foolish judgment! I have never claimed a monopoly of wisdom and my reasons for supporting Hillary and opposing Barack may be based on mistaken considerations. Nonetheless, despite the drumroll of Obama endorsements on the eve of the vote, I remain unpersuaded.
Despite Obama’s soaring rhetoric and inspiring speeches, I remain unconvinced that he is sufficiently experienced to be the president or that he has shown the kind of consistent good judgment that he so often touts in his stump speeches. Was it Walter Mondale who stole that line from the older woman in the burger commercial “where’s the beef?” to use against Gary Hart? Sometimes I wonder where the beef is when it comes to Obama. I’m as tired of hearing his shibboleths of unity and common purpose as I am Bush’s of liberty and freedom. And yesterday Obama was proclaiming that “we can change the world,” obviously under his leadership. Enough already! Even if Obama has never embraced Reagan’s public policies, I was greatly concerned to hear him adopt a view of the presidency that seems to reflect Reagan and W’s hands off approach to managing government. No, I do not believe that Obama is secretly a Muslim or attended a madrassa or supports Louis Farrakhan, but I do wonder whether his approach to foreign policy might be too similar to Senator George McGovern’s, a candidate I actually supported through the primaries in 1972 but gradually came to distrust, or Jesse Jackson’s, for that matter.
Does my support for Hillary reflect unqualified acceptance of her? Not at all. As I’ve previously written, a year ago or so I said that I would never vote for Hillary. I was turned off by the persona she showed the nation while serving as First Lady and by reports of her personality by some who had been in the Clinton White House, like George Stephanopoulos. She seemed petty, vindictive, cold, calculating and too ideological. Perhaps Bill has a number of those traits but he has had a way of burying them, although his performances of late have been uncomplimentary. Have I now been taken in by a pseudo make-over of Hillary by her handlers? The softer and gentler Hillary Clinton designed to entice skeptical voters such as I? The close to tears episode in New Hampshire, whether planned or not? Other efforts to present a softer candidate? Perhaps. But perhaps she has grown as well, in her campaigns in New York State and now in this presidential rat race. I don’t know. But I have chosen to vote for her on Tuesday. Come join me!⌂
