Do Endorsements Matter in Today's Presidential Race?

[illinoisprogressive]

From Stu Rothenberg:

snip -


The reason that endorsements don’t matter much is that presidential contests are such high-profile, visible fights that voters can draw their own opinions of the candidates. You either like Clinton or you don’t. You can make your own mind up about it. You don’t need some celebrity or politician telling you what to do.

The endorsements are intended, of course, to create an impression of support, either among key subgroups of the electorate —blacks, evangelicals, Hispanics, party insiders, home-schoolers, environmentalists, conservatives, labor unions, etc. — or in the electorate at large. It’s the classic effort to create a bandwagon, to establish the inevitability of your victory.

But the truth of the matter is that only a few people are persuaded by endorsements in White House contests. And sometimes endorsements can backfire, undercutting a candidate’s core appeal and message, or creating another target for the candidates’ opponents. (Those Thomas Ravenel and Sen. David Vitter endorsements for former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani don’t look quite as good as they once did, huh?)

So let the candidates roll out their list of state legislators, city council officials, dogcatchers and “activists” who support them. Just remember that only those few people who have a campaign treasury under their control or real fundraising clout, a near-unique ability to motivate and mobilize real people, or unusual influence in Iowa are truly important supporters.

http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/

[Forkboy]

1. Very few matter at all to me.

There's some people out there that I'd listen to if they endorsed someone,but these "Joe Blow from Idaho" endorsements are just window dressing and have no real effect on what the candidate does or doesn't stand for,and that's what matters the most to me.

[Totally Committed]

2. Evidently.

Entire threads are dedicated to even the smallest and most obscure ones.

HILLARY ENDORSED BY THE FORMER MAYOR OF EAST PODUNK!!!!11!1

It gets really tired after a while... almost as bad as the day the polls come out. (But, really nothig is as bad as that.)

Follow the money. Corporate money = Corporate candidate. That's all I need to know. All the endorsements are good for is to let me know who else has been bought and paid for.

TC

[question everything]

3. They do, in Minnesota

Perhaps this will be the year that they finally do not.

Minnesota political conventions - both - endorse the candidates and the ones that lose that endorsement often bow out. Thus you have primaries that are mostly rubber stamps.

The candidates do not even bother to campaign to their party voters, only to the delegates.

I have recently received a letter from a recent entrant to the U.S Senate race addressing me as "Dear Delegate."

What if you care about the candidates but not about being a delegate - attending caucus, county convention and that state convention? Tough. As far as some "activists" go - as was expressed by a LTTE last year - you should not even vote.

:puke:

[LibDemAlways]

4. I think Oprah's endorsement matters to Obama, not so

much in terms of the number of people she can sway to vote for him, but certainly in terms of her ability to enrich his campaign coffers through fundraisers, like the $2300 a plate one she has planned for September.

Any endorsement that comes with the promise of $$ is a welcome and valuable one for any candidate.

[msongs]

10. oprah is a media shill. not interested in her $50,000 a plate candidate forum. nt

[laugle]

13. $50,000 to meet Oprah......

That's sickening.....geez....her ego knows no bounds.....

It should be interesting to see who would put up the money though!!

[Mz Pip]

5. I remember 2004

Endorsments for candidates were coming way before the first primary. It was a bit much. Gore endorsed Dean and some people seemed to think that was enough to put Dean in the White House. Didn't quite work out that way.

I just think it's too damn soon for major endorsements.

The only time I pay any attention to endorsements is in the CA inititatives. Mostly, I just vote no on general principal since the initiate process has brought us some pretty bad laws. However, seeing who supports them and who opposes them is often a big help if I am at all considering supporting one of them.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[wyldwolf]

6. state by state, I believe they do.

[jackbourassa]

7. Ask Howard Dean if they matter...

Not much!

[Bitwit1234]

8. Wonder why Obama supporters are constantly posting

that Oprah and the black mayor of DC support him, if they don't matter why bother posting them.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

11. They only matter if Obama is getting an endorsement

:rofl:

[Enrique]

9. some do, some don't

Joe Wilson endorsing Hillary is big, but Barry Manilow supporting Ron Paul is small.

[rufus dog]

12. I would agree with that.

A major name in politics may have more influence, an ex VP or ex Pres that is not married to a candidate. Overall I think they are way overblown.

[cherokeeprogressive]

14. The only important endorsement to me is the one I myself make while in the voting booth.

I'm not in the slightest bit concerned whose name or title a candidate tosses out as having endorsed him/her. I'll do my own research and make my own decision. In addition to that, my days of voting for CAREER POLITICIANS are over. Out with the old. It's what got us here in the first place, and this isn't a good place to be.

That's why Clark's my guy.

[LWolf]

15. Not to me.

I will sometimes look at endorsements in smaller races when the candidates have not gotten enough information out there for me to be comfortable choosing between them.

In a national race, where an abundance of information is available, they mean less than nothing.

The NEA, my professional association, will not influence my vote in the least. We have an adversarial relationship; I'm constantly having to tell them how much I don't like their public positions on things. Like the NCLB "fix it and fund it" bullshit. If they were representing me, they'd be advocating "repeal and replace."

There simply isn't a group whose perspective I trust or value as much as my own, given adequate information.

Frankly, the same holds true for "polls." A poll is not going to change my mind or my vote. I'll vote for what I judge to be the best choice, whether a majority of people agree with me or not.

[depakid]

16. Sometimes, they may be counterproductive.....

;-)