Advertisement

Obama’s endorsements have a negative ring to them

Share

Endorsements.

One of those evergreen political gimmicks that can consume almost as much time in a political campaign as shredding documents. Campaign staffers collect these things as if they were scalps in a 19th century war. From other politicians. From celebrities. From newspaper boards, as if anyone follows editorial page endorsements anymore.

These endorsements are then trotted out one by one in staged events designed to elicit free media attention on the assumption that some voters might possibly be swayed positively.

But do they really work — TV’s persuasive Billy Mays aside? Has anyone ever run out to acquire a reverse mortgage because of Robert Wagner?

Advertisement

Or, perhaps, have some voters watched Barbra Streisand back one of her favorite types and then enthusiastically voted for or donated to the opponent?

Finally now, some documentation on this not terribly insignificant matter.

And the statistical results suggest that President Obama — and others currently marauding across the American political scene — could considerably reduce his carbon footprint simply by staying home this fall instead of flying his large air machine and driving his large SUV all over to raise arms with someone in a phony, premature victory celebration for the cameras.

The Harris Poll has surveyed more than 2,700 Americans and finds such endorsements are at best questionable and, at worst, quite possibly counterproductive.

Results reveal that 45% of respondents would be less likely to vote for a candidate Obama recommended for election.

That’s 3% more than would be swayed by his advice.

It’s even worse for Sarah Palin — only 30% would take her advice; 56% would think about it, and then probably not vote that way.

What if the “tea party” movement endorses someone? Well, Harris finds, 34% would be likely to vote that way, with 41% going the other way, and 26% not really knowing enough to say at the moment (or perhaps insufficiently trusting the pollster’s promise of anonymity).

Advertisement

On Monday, former President Clinton, whose wife clobbered Obama in the 2008 Pennsylvania Democratic primary, tried to sprinkle some of his magic endorsement dust by campaigning with the Keystone State’s U.S. Senate candidate Joe Sestak, who defied the president by successfully challenging the Obama-endorsed favorite in the spring primary.

However, because other polls show that Republican-inclined voters are far more motivated and inclined to enthusiastically vote come Nov. 2 — and not in support of Obama’s policies or endorsees — Palin’s lower success rate might produce more actual votes among the larger GOP turnout.

Having watched so many of these endorsements pile up and blow away over the years, it’s kind of humorous to picture the president endorsing a fellow Democrat for office, causing 78% of conservatives, 82% of tea party sippers and 85% of Republicans, to say, “That’s good enough for me! I’m voting for the other guy.”

An Obama endorsement would cause even 47% of independents to ricochet. (From 77% to 79% of Democrats or liberals would take his word as good enough.)

Last fall, after the president campaigned for Democratic gubernatorial candidates in New Jersey and Virginia and the Democratic Senate candidate in Massachusetts, voters canned them all.

About two-thirds of Republicans, tea party types and conservatives would take Palin’s candidate advice, Harris reports. Roughly the same proportions of Democrats, liberals and moderates would vote the other way.

Advertisement

Not that anyone asked for it, but Harris offers the following advice: “After looking at these two politicians and another party, candidates in tight races and in swing districts may want to hold off asking for their endorsement.”

andrew.malcolm@latimes.com

Top of the Ticket, The Times’ blog on national politics (https://www.latimes.com/ticket), is a blend of commentary, analysis and news. This is a selection from the last week.

Advertisement