It’s fine to be “Ready for Hillary.” “Already Closed to Others” is a different matter, which is why I’m mystified by Equality California’s (EQCA) endorsement of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.
Media outlets announced the endorsement Monday, March 16, an odd date for two reasons. First, the organization’s Web site says “FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 27, 2015,” but their own dateline says “Los Angeles (March 16, 2015).” Second, both dates have come and gone without Clinton announcing her candidacy.
While many have circled a date in April for Clinton’s announcement, headlines about deleted emails, Benghazi and exit statements may yet deter her. More than a simple “EQCA is Ready for Hillary,” this was a formal endorsement that will be a punch line should she should not run. Imagine Vice President Biden talking about EQCA getting out over its skis.
By endorsing so early, EQCA also risks shunning other candidates and their supporters. While EQCA is not dedicated solely to LGBT candidates, a run by Sen. Tammy Baldwin or Rep. Jared Polis could cause some friction. An ally with a better track record could be a problem, as Clinton didn’t announce support for same-sex marriage until 2013. By then, Governors Martin O’Malley, Andrew Cuomo and Christine Gregoire had signed marriage equality into law in their states. Meanwhile, soon-to-be Sen. Elizabeth Warren was calling for President Obama to join her in endorsing it.
Why shut those doors now, even if you are 98 percent sure Clinton will run and deserve your support? I don’t see a huge benefit for Clinton or EQCA.
For candidates, early endorsements can help keep challengers out, raise money, provide organization and show legitimacy on an issue. Which of these does Clinton not have covered? Without announcing, she has frozen the field. “Ready for Hillary” and “Priorities USA” are already raising money and building infrastructure. Despite her relatively brief support of same-sex marriage, she is the darling of many in the LGBT community.
It’s not as if California presents special challenges for Clinton that requires early LGBT support. A February field poll showed Clinton with a 42 point lead over primary challengers in California, similar to recent national numbers from Quinnipiac. She seems even safer in the California general election, which a Republican hasn’t won since 1988.
What does EQCA get? As the release says, they are the “Nation’s First Major LGBT Organization to Endorse Hillary Clinton for President in 2016.” Beyond that, I don’t see much. It’s unlikely Clinton would have wavered on LGBT rights if EQCA waited for her to announce. She will still likely work with national groups like the Human Rights Campaign or the LGBTQ Task Force on messaging, not a state group. As for fundraising, I’m guessing EQCA raised more eyebrows than donations.
No one will take your endorsement seriously if you don’t. Endorsing someone who isn’t running seems more like infatuation than a reasoned opinion. Based on its body of work, I still endorse EQCA. I also hope Clinton runs, but my endorsement will have to wait until I see the candidates, and that she is one of them.
“Rep. Polis recently spoke at an LGBT roundtable of “Ready for Hillary” supporters. It was an off-the-record event, but his “peeps” gave Out Front an exclusive that goes a little somethin’ like this:
“Hillary is determined, she’s experienced, and most importantly, she is a champion for improving the lives of all Americans. I’m proud to join the tens of thousands of people in Colorado’s Second Congressional District and more than two million Americans encouraging her to run.””
Source: http://outfrontonline.com/news/congressman-polis-im-ready-hillary/