Brent Budowsky: here is desperation and delusion in the air from the Republican side because they feel the election has been slipping away, and for once, regarding these Republicans, I must heartily agree with them.
In a recent commentary on Sarah Palin’s endorsement of Tea Party candidates, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich said, “After the victories of many of the insurgent primary candidates she’s sponsored, Sarah Palin is off to Iowa for a high-profile series of political events. Is it possible she’s looking to make a run in 2012? [...]
Sharon Kyle: My father looks to me for endorsements. In a sense, we all need endorsements to help us select who we’ll vote for. Our knowledge of the issues and the candidates runs the gamut. Some of us are plugged in 24/7 others rely on television ads, still others wait for the slates to arrive in the mail and then there’s always the endorsement of the party.
Paul Hogarth: But with no real competition among Democrats to replace Schwarzenegger, progressives have been nervous that Brown will not excite the base. This left much of the weekend’s drama on down-ballot races, where competitive primaries meant candidates for Lieutenant Governor and State Insurance Commissioner sought the Party’s endorsement going into June 8th. And while there’s much controversy around that process, it’s a good thing for Democrats.
Caitlin Frazier: To many attending the California Democratic Party convention in Los Angeles last weekend, the vote to approve or object to the endorsement of Rep. Jane Harman (CA/36), was too close to call – certainly not reflective of a frenzied convention tabulation Party Chair John Burton delivered with the qualifier, “No one was bribed.”
Marcy Winograd: Ultimately, we have to ask what the Democratic Party stands for? Who will it endorse? Someone who rushes us to war, covers up illegal wiretapping, and votes with Wall Street to make it easier for banks to foreclose? Or someone committed to global diplomacy, the Bill of Rights, and an end to run-away greed ?