Pres. Obama Won't Make Dem Primary Endorsement: WH
Source: NBC News
President Barack Obama's chief of staff said the White House will not endorse a Democratic primary candidate in the 2016 contest contrary to reports over the summer suggesting the president might have been interested in weighing in.
"We'll do exactly what has been done in the past, which is when the nominee will be set, then the president will be out there," White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough said in a 'Meet the Press' interview with Chuck Todd Sunday.
Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/pres-obama-won-t-make-dem-primary-endorsement-wh-n493606
It says Sanders has "waffled" on gun control over the course of his career - He still rates -D from the NRA.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)done the same thing, i.e., waited until we have a Democratic Primary winner and only then, endorse.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)and a lot of the other endorsements are all part of the coronation strategy..... UNLESS - they ask their membership.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)memberships all over the country are not being asked.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)but it certainly matches the kind of "representation" we have from our legislators.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)really meant as sarcasm.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)Funny - I was gonna respond with those words.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)ram2008
(1,238 posts)Record low congressional approval, very high anti establishment feelings within the electorate, and the feeling that there is a coronation going on give endorsements very little weight. The expectation is Hillary gets all of them.
The only endorsement I can see mattering is Elizabeth Warren if she decides to endorse Bernie over Hillary before Iowa.
You might want to keep the bus in neutral while you wait.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Ram2008, Obama's endorsement would be extremely influential because many, many people respect him and want to continue what he has started.
I believe your assumptions are flawed. Many millions of voters are unhappy with the "establishment" because they feel it hasn't done enough, not because they're allied with right-wingers in trying to tear down the establishment.
vi5
(13,305 posts)He should stay out of the primary discussion and wait for there to be nominee before he campaigns or weighs in. Many other groups and folks should do or have done the same but they are clearly looking for a leg up and a head start once favors start to be returned, so.....can't say I blame them.
Bleacher Creature
(11,252 posts)Sitting Presidents don't usually wade into primary contests. That said, the fact that a bunch of his cabinet members have endorsed HRC is very telling.
And in all seriousness, does anyone really expect the President to endorse the guy who wanted him primaried in 2012?
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)that he would campaign for Bernie either.
karynnj
(59,498 posts)others started in the Clinton administration. Anthony Foxx and Julian Castro did not - both were really too young. Castro has been the pretty obvious VP candidate proposed if Clinton wins.
A quick look at wikipedia:
Thomas Perez was a deputy assistant AG under Janet Reno.
Vilsak was a top DLC person, who initially ran himself in 2008, then dropped out and endorsed Clinton - long before the Iowa caucus.
SunSeeker
(51,511 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Looks like Obama knows the populists are about to overrun Camp Weathervane.
To put it in Willy Wonka terms, we all see who the Bad Egg is, and Veruca Salt is about to drop through the chute.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)endorsed someone in the primary.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Lyndon Johnson, not only endorsed but essentially IMPOSED Hubert Humphrey, his vice president, as the Democratic nominee in 1968, thus creating the only possible situation in which Richard Nixon could ever make a comeback from political oblivion.
Response to Android3.14 (Reply #8)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)rates an F on what American's needed.
Who gives a shit what rating the NRA gives. People can justify anything for those they support. On the big issues, Sander's voted with the NRA and against the interest of Americans.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)INdemo
(6,994 posts)if that's all you have on Bernie Sanders is a vote NO on a gun bill 10 years ago, then I would say we are in excellent shape.
Now..Would you like for me to go back 10 years ad dig up issues from Hillary's past (and i will give you references) I will if you'd like?
I will find explanations how the Clinton's left the White House Broke and ended up multimillionaires..I could do that too
If Bernie Sanders has ever given any $200,000 speeches I haven't found any reference to that but I will double check.
Note: this post will go unanswered because when one challenges a Hillary fan they never respond.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Go for it. This isn't about Clinton.
His vote was wrong for what America needs today. They are wrong for what I expect in a person who wants my vote for President.
I don't give a flying dingleberry if Sander's or Clinton were paid a nickel for a speech or a million dollars. I am not offended by the money they make.
Those two votes show Sanders' attitudes towards guns and gun control. They are wrong for what we need in America today.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)or understood his motivations for social justice - you would have the common sense to recognize that bernie does see that 10 years ago is not the same america of today and that he favor more reasonable legislation to protect the public - such as endorsing the president's recent executive actions. i you want to understand the differentiation of america 10 yrs ago with today's america, you may begin with who benefited from the depression of '08 - and follow the money.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)He voted wrong when he voted against the Brady Bill and voted to immunize Gun Manufacturing Corporations.
I've been told often by his supporters that it is the consistency of his economic justice message that matters, unchanged since the 70's. Should I laud him for consistency on guns or has he evolved?
Those votes mattered. Both O'Malley and Clinton have better records on a critical issue that grows more important with each mass shooting.
Interestingly, he did not think that other industries should be given immunity, only Gun corporations. I must assume he simply like gun corporations.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-01-10/bernie-sanders-supported-gun-company-immunity-but-opposed-it-for-other-industries
His stand on gun regulation is absolutely wrong. You can like him for other issues, but on this issues he fails.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)That's all you got right?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)in that area.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I don't see how anyone on the left would care about a rating system by a group that places the guns over the right of six years olds to live.
I do see that using Sanders rating by the NRA to justify his shitty position on those votes releases supports from asking real questions about what he stands for on gun control.
Response to LiberalElite (Original post)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
Mike__M
(1,052 posts)either
"President Obama turns back on Clinton"
or
"President refuses to endorse Clinton rivals"
MBS
(9,688 posts)tabasco
(22,974 posts)I don't think the President should endorse within the party.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)that it was inevitable that the president would endorse HRC. So much for, er, inevitability.