ENDORSING YOUR CAKE AND EATING IT TOO. In one of the weirdest political moves I've seen in a while the International Association of Machinists has decided to endorse Hillary Clinton (surprising, but understandable) and ... Mike Huckabee. The Clinton endorsement seems to be straight-up pragmatism:
Hillary Clinton earned the IAM's endorsement by focusing on jobs, health care, education and trade -- the bread and butter issues of the American middle class.
Because Edwards and Obama totally don't care about jobs, health care, and trade.
The endorsement of Huckabee came, apparently, because he was the only one who bothered to show up to the Machinists' convention. Good for him, but shouldn't getting the support of a union involve a bit more than that? I'm willing to believe that he'd be the least bad Republican on union issues, but shouldn't he at least have to express some positive policy views to merit an endorsement? The explanation given by the machinists is pretty lame:
Mike Huckabee was the only Republican candidate with the guts to meet with our members and the only one willing to figure out where and how we might work together.
Shouldn't he at least give some idea of how he'd be "willing to work" with the union before he is endorsed? I mean, if he wins the nomination this makes it hard for the IAM to give much help to Clinton who is presumably much better on union issues than Huckabee.
--Sam Boyd
