Chris Dodd to Endorse Obama
February 26, 2008 by Joshua Davis
Chris Dodd (D-Connecticut ) isn’t done on the presidential campaign trail just yet, sources close to him say he will endorse Barack Obama this morning:
Obama and rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton had been vying for Dodd’s support since he exited the presidential race after a poor showing in the Iowa caucus last month. Dodd, who won his Senate seat in 1980 and chaired the Democratic National Committee from 1995-1996, has long-standing ties to the Clintons.
Dodd is a “superdelegate,” one of nearly 800 Democratic officeholders and party officials who automatically attend the national convention and can vote for whomever they choose. They have become an important force in the close race between Clinton and Obama, and both candidates are lobbying hard for their support.
Chris Dodd has long foreign policy experience, worked for families on a medical leave law, and has five terms of experience in the senate. Dodd is also expected to campaign for Obama in the New England states of Vermont and Rhode Island which hold primaries on March 4th.
Chris Dodd has previously said he wasn’t going to endorse anyone, but as Obama looks more and more likely to win the Democratic nomination maybe he decided to throw in his endorsement for a possible vice president nomination. Chris Dodd is also a superdelagate.
I remember Dodd calling out Obama on his remarks about invading Pakistan:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291788,00.html
I guess Dodd figured, what the hell, he has hopes!
[Reply]
Dan, I know you can find a better link than Faux News. He clarified his position on Pakistan. Much like Hilary clarified calling NAFTA a boon.
[Reply]
In case you did not notice, I was quoting Chris Dodd’s own words. You want a better source than Fox News. Here are a few more with the same quote.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/08/obama-if-mushar.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2007/08/02/2007-08-02_id_invade_pakistan_for_osama.html
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/invade_pakistan_will_yer_harry_1.php
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2007/08/rivals-react-to.html
http://www.nysun.com/article/59662
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2007/08/pak-ing-heat.html
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/08.aspx
What I’m saying is, we need to take foreign policy more serious. It’s a shame Dodd endorsed a candidate he didn’t think was ready to tackle foreign policy.
[Reply]
Since Bill’s 8 years in the White House count towards her experience, why didn’t they anything about Rwanda when the warning signs started? Their reaction to the genocide in Rwanda seems much like Bush’s no-action policy in Kenya.
As for war Hilary Clinton voted for it, Obama did not and was against the invasion of Iraq before it ever happened. All Obama called for was a strike (think SWAT as opposed to the National Guard) if we had good intelligence that showed a terrorist was planning an attack on American soil.
This is completely different that authorizing a war where the best intelligence for the location of WMDs is shown by waving a hand over the entire country of Iraq.
And thank you for the other sources, I never trust Fox News when it comes to (mis)quotes about Democrats. Lastly, Barack Obama is also a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Clinton is not.
[Reply]