The Service Employees International Union has postponed a decision on an endorsement until next month, a setback for Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.
The SEIU's executive board has decided to wait until October before deciding which one of the three leading Democratic candidates — Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama or Edwards — to endorse, a spokeswoman said Tuesday.
"The executive board has decided to go back to the local members and ask their opinions before making a decision," spokeswoman Stephanie Mueller said.
This weekend marks the end of the third quarter fundraising period and will provide strong signals on the viability of the candidates. Edwards, a favorite of labor who has picked up several key endorsements, lags his top two rivals in fundraising and trails them in national polls.
http://news.yahoo.com/...
(analysis on the flip)
SEIU notes that they did not provide an endorsement until November 2003, and notes that October would be their earliest ever endorsement in a Presidential cycle. That said, everything has been compressed this cycle, and the dynamics of the race are quite different from 2004.
In 2004, there was no clear front-runner, no 800-pound gorilla. SEIU endorsed Dean in November 2003 to a great deal of fanfare, in the hopes of propelling Dean to the nomination via momentum and a sense of inevitability.
This year, the 800-pound gorilla is clearly Hillary. She has the establishment, the momentum, the polls, and the cash on hand. By delaying its announcement, SEIU is effectively supporting Hillary by default. Every week the announcement is not made, is a week where Hillary continues to build.
The big loser for this decision, as the article indicates, appears to be Edwards. In a race where he is lagging behind Hillary and Obama, anything that would give him a shot in the arm would be a major boon. SEIU is often said to be one of the savviest unions, and it is certainly among the largest, both in terms of membership and political budget. It's a widely coveted endorsement, and for good reason.
I would have to think that SEIU is weighing their desire to see someone more labor-friendly like Obama or Edwards (as opposed to Hillary, with her NAFTA, corporate and lobbyist associations) break out of the pack, versus their desire NOT to back the wrong horse if Clinton continues her dominating march toward the nomination.
Added to this, I have to think there is still some lingering hangover from 2004, when their (at the time) much-touted endorsement of Dean ultimately came to naught. During an era where Labor is continually getting screwed, and membership rolls are declining as a result of continuing, unabating hostility from big business and their Republican cronies, I wonder if SEIU is being a bit gunshy here?
From my perspective, the longer they wait and "keep their powder dry," the less influence they will be able to wield. In a way, I think it would be better for them to gamble and make an endorsement now, rather than delay even one month in making their decision.
But that's just my $0.02 from the peanut gallery. What do you think?
UPDATE: From brooklynbadboy in the comments:
Whats happening is easy. (3+ / 0-)
SEIU isnt your typical beer bellied labor union. THEY ORGANIZE WITH VIGOR! And they are a big city union where the New York and Chicago locals are the foundation of the group. My sister is in 1199 here in New York...let me tell you..NOBDOY FUCKS WITH 1199! NOBODY!
I think the national offices want Edwards, but the biggest and most powerful big city locals have other ideas.
I think that's incredibly perceptive and probably true.
DTH