Wednesday, October 03, 2007
AFT Endorses Hillary Clinton
First Read reports that the American Federation of Teachers union has decided to publicly endorse Hillary Clinton for president.
This endorsement of Clinton is not a big surprise. Clearly Obama hurt his chances for union support when he told both AFT and NEA members that he supports merit pay for teachers based upon standardized test scores. While Edwards has worked very hard for labor support, his standing in both national and key primary and caucus polls is pretty low and the union wants to back a winner. So Clinton gets the nod.
The endorsement comes on the heels of a Washington Post/ABC News poll showing Clinton solidifying her lead over Barack Obama (she leads him by 33 percentage points) and news last night that Clinton out-raised Obama $27 million to $20 million in third quarter political donations.
Clinton really looks like a lock for the Democratic nomination.
The only bad news she has gotten lately is a recent Newsweek poll showing Obama with a slim 2 point lead over her with likely caucus voters.
But barring a pre-election scandal (which is always a possibility with the Clintons) or an Obama win in Iowa (which could be a real momentum shift), I just don't see how she loses this nomination.
What do you think?
Does she have the Democratic nomination sewn up? And if so, can she actually win the White House? And if she does win the White House, will she be good for public education and teachers? Finally, if you're an AFT member, are you happy about the endorsement or would you rather have seen the union endorse another candidate or not tender an endorsement at all?
This endorsement of Clinton is not a big surprise. Clearly Obama hurt his chances for union support when he told both AFT and NEA members that he supports merit pay for teachers based upon standardized test scores. While Edwards has worked very hard for labor support, his standing in both national and key primary and caucus polls is pretty low and the union wants to back a winner. So Clinton gets the nod.
The endorsement comes on the heels of a Washington Post/ABC News poll showing Clinton solidifying her lead over Barack Obama (she leads him by 33 percentage points) and news last night that Clinton out-raised Obama $27 million to $20 million in third quarter political donations.
Clinton really looks like a lock for the Democratic nomination.
The only bad news she has gotten lately is a recent Newsweek poll showing Obama with a slim 2 point lead over her with likely caucus voters.
But barring a pre-election scandal (which is always a possibility with the Clintons) or an Obama win in Iowa (which could be a real momentum shift), I just don't see how she loses this nomination.
What do you think?
Does she have the Democratic nomination sewn up? And if so, can she actually win the White House? And if she does win the White House, will she be good for public education and teachers? Finally, if you're an AFT member, are you happy about the endorsement or would you rather have seen the union endorse another candidate or not tender an endorsement at all?
Comments:
<< Home
I think I'd rather not think about a Clinton nomination - and certainly not a Clinton presidency.
I can't say the other annointed dems are any better policy-wise, but I think Clinton beats them all at shrewd, calculating, all-encompassing self-interest.
I can't say the other annointed dems are any better policy-wise, but I think Clinton beats them all at shrewd, calculating, all-encompassing self-interest.
# posted by 
: 6:22 PM
: 6:22 PM
I tend to agree, abi. Unfortunately, I also think she's the strongest candidate to take back the WH. And my eyes are on the Supreme Court. If a repub wins, you will see a 6-3 Court when 86 year old Justice Stevens either retires or passes. And that won't be pretty. As it is, this Court has ruled in favor of the wealthy, the power, and the connected every time last term. Just wait until Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, Little Scalia, and Kennedy get another running partner or two.
I believe that HRC is actually the weakest candidate the Dems could send forth in the general election, with the possible exception of Kucinich. Worse, though, is what could happen if she is elected -- the 25% or so who hve guzzled the neocon Kool-Aid hate her with an irrational and visceral passion. We could expect the Starr/Gingrich years to be a Sunday School picnic in comparison, as those barricading Planned Parenthood clinics turn their wrath on a variety of government buildings and every public gathering as a forum to spew their hatred. Far better for the Dems to run Edwards or Obama or Dodd or Richardson, none of whom incite the same passions in that bunch of madmen, in spite of having far better progressive credentials.
# posted by : 12:04 PM
: 12:04 PM
Ironically, neo-cons ought to like her most of all the Dem candidates because there is no one with closer ties to AIPAC in the Dem race than her.
Post a Comment
<< Home
