Just how much is a political endorsement worth if the person who gives it doesn't stand behind his or her word and wobbles instead?
In the case of superdelegate and former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joe Andrew of Indiana, not much, particularly since he was against superdelegates selecting the party's presidential nominee before he was, apparently, for it.
On November 18, 2007, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) announced the endorsement by Andrew, who served 1999-2001, during the Clinton administration, as the youngest DNC chair in party history:
"Hillary Clinton has the strength and experience to compete and win across this country," Andrew said. "I have seen up close her intellect, character, and fortitude, and I am convinced she is the best prepared to handle these challenging times. Her 35-year record fighting for America's families is as impressive as she is, and demonstrates why she will be a great President of the United States."
However, on May 1, 2008, the Associated Press reported that Andrew had officially wobbled and "switched his allegiance" to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
On background, by February 13, 2008, Andrew was sounding wobbly—"less wedded to his commitment"—telling the Fort Wayne, Indiana, Journal Gazette
"I want to vote for Hillary Clinton, don't get me wrong,... My commitment to her is profound, but I would be troubled if either she or Barack Obama actually became the nominee because superdelegates decided, opposed to actual voters going to the polls and pulling the lever."~~snip~~
For Andrew, who headed the Indiana Democratic Party in the 1990s before being appointed national party chairman in 1999, the superdelegate system is a potential tragedy.
"I think we could lose the presidency over this," he said, if the superdelegates end up being the deciding factor in the party's nominee.
"Anything that looks like a backroom deal," Andrew said, would give the GOP nominee ammunition to accuse the Democratic Party of being non-democratic. "The worst thing that could happen is the superdelegates' votes actually count."
Andrew thinks the superdelegates ought to promise to vote for the candidate who has accumulated the most votes - not delegates - in the primaries.
According to the May 1, 2008, Associated Press report, in which Andrew officially announced his wobbliness:
... he is switching his support because "a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote to continue this process, and a vote to continue this process is a vote that assists (Republican) John McCain.""While I was hopeful that a long, contested primary season would invigorate our party, the polls show that the tone and temperature of the race is now hurting us," Andrew wrote. "John McCain, without doing much of anything, is now competitive against both of our remaining candidates. We are doing his work for him and distracting Americans from the issues that really affect all of our lives."
As the Associated Press reported, "Andrew's decision puts Obama closer to closing Clinton's superdelegate lead."
But let's fast track backwards to what Andrew said in February 2007 when he first showed signs of wobbling, saying he would be "troubled" if either Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama "actually became the nominee because superdelegates decided, opposed to actual voters going to the polls and pulling the lever."
Have we missed something? Has Indiana already held its primary? Have Indiana voters already decided the state's, nevermind the nation's, popular vote?
I thought not. But then, perhaps Joe Andrew's word on the role of the superdelegates is as reliable as that of Democratic political consultant, superdelegate-at large and DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee member Donna Brazile, who said on the February 6, 2008, edition of CNN's Situation Room:
"If 795 of my colleagues decide this election, I will quit the Democratic Party. I feel very strongly about this. ... There's no reason why we should decide this election. I feel very strongly."
How strongly, Ms. Brazile? Not much wobble in that statement. And how reliable is your word now, Mr. Andrew? Particularly since you've identified yourself as what some might call a fairweather wobbler.
And was Joe Andrew ever really a loyal Clintonite, as some reports had said? It's questionable. It is not for nothing that the Center for Media and Democracy and the Sunlight Foundation's Congresspedia designated Joe Andrew as a superdelegate wobbler.
And what difference, really, does all this wobbling really make if the superdelegates should not decide the Democratic nominee, as both Andrew and Brazile have stated?
|
|
|
Permalink :: 37 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
