Why Colin Powell's endorsement matters:

[darius15]

February 10, 2008

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that voters are not likely to be impressed by high profile political endorsements. Out of a list of fifteen different public figures, publications, national associations and politicians, only one endorsement – Colin Powell’s – would have a significant net positive impact on voters.

Twenty-eight percent (28%) say a Powell endorsement would make voters more likely to vote for a candidate, while making 19% less likely to vote for that candidate. Half of voters say his endorsement would have no impact. Thirty-six percent (36%) of GOP voters would be more likely to vote for a Powell-endorsed candidate, while 18% of democrats would be more likely to vote for that candidate.

Two former presidential candidates who recently exited the race, Rudy Giuliani and John Edwards, would hold influence on some voters. Nineteen percent (19%) of voters say that they would be more likely to vote for a candidate Giuliani endorses, while 32% say they would be less likely to vote and 46% say his endorsement would have no impact. Thirty-one percent (31%) of Republicans would be more likely to vote for a Giuliani endorsed candidate. After Giuliani’s exit from the race, he announced his support for fellow Republican candidate John McCain.

An Edwards endorsement would make 25% of voters to be more likely to vote for a candidate he endorses. Thirty percent (30%) would be less likely to vote for such a candidate. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats would be more likely to vote for an Edwards endorsed candidate.

Voters are more even more evenly split when it comes to endorsements by two major national organizations, the National Rifle Association and National Education Association. An endorsement from the NRA would have a negative impact for 29% of voters and a positive impact for 28%. An NEA endorsement would be positive for 28% and negative for 25%.

An endorsement by radio personality Rush Limbaugh would make 16% of voters more likely to support a candidate while 46% would be less likely to vote for a Limbaugh endorsed candidate. Among Republicans, 35% would be more likely to vote for a Limbaugh endorsed candidate.

Former Vice President Al Gore endorsement would be seen as positive by 20% and negative by 41%. Among Democrats, 36% of voters would be more likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by Gore.

The numbers also show that Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy’s would make 13% more likely to vote for a candidate and 46% less likely to do so. Among Democrats, 25% say they are more likely to vote for a Kennedy backed candidate while 27% would be less likely to vote for that candidate. Among men, only 14% would be more likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by Kennedy.

Three of the most read newspapers in the country would have a limited impact on a candidate’s quest for votes. Only 6% of voters would be more likely to vote for a candidate the New York Times endorsed, while 40% would be less likely to vote for that candidate. The Washington Post and Wall Street Journal have comparatively less impact on voters.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/colin_powell_most_valuable_endorsement

Yeah, the numbers were from February, but notice how Colin Powell is the only one who would have a positive net impact on voters. I don't hate him or love him, but I do acknowledge that his endorsement is worth a news cycle or two.

[TNMOM]

1. Don't need him. And he's tied to the Bush admin. Don't want him,either.

[Blarch]

3. His endorsement...

and the attacks that will follow will eat up a new cycle, at a time when controlling the news is the name of the game.

[FrenchieCat]

2. It won't matter if it doesn't happen.....

which is why threads like this are not helpful.