An Observation: Down Ticket Elected Office Holders Prefer Obama To Clinton

Hillary Clinton got a boatload of Congressional endorsements when she announced. Why not? She was seen as inevitable, not only by big media but by her fellow lawmakers in D.C. However, after Super Tuesday, that Congressional S.D. pool started flowing in another direction- toward Barack Obama. This illustrates two important points: The doubt about Hillary was always present: That's why most Congress members didn't endorse her from, er, day 1, and these folks (Congress critters who have endorsed post Super Tuesday in Feb) prefer Obama at the top of the ticket. In other words, they think he'll pull more voters, at least in their districts than Hillary will.

Representatives in the U.S. House are those whose fates are most closely tied with the nominee. They're looking out for their own political careers. These are folks who are ALL running this year. And most of those with more vulnerable seats are endorsing Obama. Don't think this sentiment is meaningful? It is. 81 U.S. Reps have endorsed Obama. Granted, this is just 4 more than Hillary's 77, but consider this: Almost all of Hillary's Congressional endorsements came before Feb 3. Many, if not most, of Obama's came after. In recent weeks, Obama has scooped up many more Congress critters than Hillary. And again: THE MOST VULNERABLE ONES HAVE GONE BY A HUGE MARGIN TO OBAMA. Why? They think he's better for their chances; they think he's more electable, and they think Hillary impedes their chances for re-election.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Barack_Obama_presidential_campaign_endorsements

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hillary_Rodham_Clinton_presidential_campaign_endorsements

This flies smack dab in the face of DU Hillary supporters' favorite claim:

OBAMA IS UNELECTABLE.

I mean, c'mon. Who has more credibility on this issue? Hill supporters or the U.S. Reps trying to get re-elected? No contest.

Adam Nagourney makes this point in a piece in today's NYT- kind of as an after thought, but nevertheless....

<snip>

"Mr. Obama has also picked up superdelegate support from Democratic members of Congress in relatively conservative districts — despite efforts by Republicans to make Mr. Obama a liability for Democrats running in competitive districts, including campaigns for two open seats in the South that are under way.

Representative Baron P. Hill of Indiana and Representative Ben Chandler of Kentucky endorsed Mr. Obama, for example, and both face the likelihood of stiff Republican challenges in the fall."

<snip>

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/02/us/politics/02delegates.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1209723048-LOACNPT0lyrazqcTmCk57w

Think about it. Those most in the know, those with most on the line, believe Barack Obama is more electable than Hillary Clinton. I think that's more meaningful than any poll.

due to all the new young voters as well as bringing a heavy AA turnout.

and many on the list of Obama Congressional endorsers believe that Hillary has anti-coattails. They're afraid she'll hyper-motivate repukes and indies. Most of Hill's House endorsers come from very safe districts. It's interesting to make the comparison.

I think this tells us everything we need to know about political endorsements. It's isn't about who they think is the most electable, but rather about who they think can help them stay in power.

they want to get re-elected. they believe that Obama is better for their chances than Hillary. Of course they want to retain their seates or stay in power or however you want to phrase it, but they obviously believe that Hillary is not a nominee who has coattails.

Yes, they need to ride the coat of the one they think the best tails. Odd, I thought Obama supporters were against coat tail riding. Or at least they seem to be so if it is Hillary riding Bills.

are againts a presidential candidate having political coattails? Oh, I see, you didn't: You're simply conflating Hillary's use of Bill's Presidency with the very different matter of elected office holders backing who they think has the ability to do well in their districts, thus helping them. And for the record, I've never held it against Hillary that she takes advantage of those things in her arsenal that she thinks benefit her.

But whatever. You don't seem able to address the points I made or the facts I brought forth.

"elected office holders backing who they think has the ability to do well in their districts, thus helping them"

Congress critters want to go with who they think has the best chance of winning and who helps them the most. And Hillary fans oft repeat how she's the most unelectable, that Obama is unelectable, a drag on down ticket candidates, etc. I'm pointing out that those down ticket office holders don't agree. You should really stop trying to push round pegs into square holes. It's a futile endeavor.

:rofl:

:kick:

who helped them with several ads...it was`t hillary.

hillary could care less about the local democratic parties across this country