I have written before of my skepticism toward the influence celebrity plays in politics. You cannot ignore the large efforts made by Frank Sinatra & his Rat Pack in electing Kennedy or the waves Sinatra made when jumping parties to later support Ronald Reagan. I am not convinced though that having Barbara Streisand or conversely James Woods in your court equates to votes or that the money they raised couldn’t be found from corporate or activist donors.

With that said a story came out this week that actor George Clooney was supporting the Barack Obama ticket but that he was reluctant to take a visible role, fearing Hollywood could play negatively in a campaign as it did in 2004.

In that election Clooney was more than visible supporting the Democrats over the Republicans as were a slew of Hollywood actors, producers, directors and the documentary filmmaker Michael Moore. Massive concerts were staged for the Democratic ticket and what Clooney describes as a “Hollywood vs. the Heartland” mentality set in. The Republican ticket created a sense of the Democratic Party holding “Hollywood” values which seemed to play well, especially with evangelical voters.

In 2006 a much less visible Hollywood contingent existed and Democrats ran campaigns in “red” states with candidates as far removed from Hollywood as possible. The outcome? They resoundingly won. Of course there were many issues at play in ‘06 but as hard as many of the opposing campaigns tried to sound the “Hollywood vs. Heartland” it did not stick and not having visible Hollywood types in the press undoubtedly helped.

So What Do the Blogs Say?
Andrew Sullivan is on the same page asking Clooney to stay away. Meanwhile Yazilikaya sees a distinction between the bloggers desire to have Britney Spears political opinions silences over Clooneys. Meanwhile Steve White calls Sullivan’s comments “pithy”.