Woodson endorses Obama, Starr sides with Romney

President Obama (D) holds a Charles Woodson jersey along with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R)
President Obama (D) holds a Charles Woodson jersey along with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R)
President Obama (D) holds a Charles Woodson jersey along with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R)

It’s early November in an election year, and the Packers have a winning record through eight games. So with fan interest peaking and political ads flooding the media, it’s newsworthy when Charles Woodson and Bart Starr publicly endorse a certain presidential candidate.

On Thursday, Woodson endorsed Barack Obama at a rally in Green Bay. Many professional athletes try to avoid voicing their political leanings, but Woodson openly voiced his opinion on the election, citing the distribution of wealth as a key issue.

“You have a lot of people making a boatload of money who are complaining about money. They don’t have money problems,” Woodson said. “There’s a lot of people who do have money problems, and those are the people who should be complaining. Look at the East Coast right now. Those people need help.”

Woodson donated $100,000 to the American Red Cross to help in the relief effort following Hurricane Sandy. Be sure to check out Jason Wilde’s post on Woodson’s endorsement of Obama over at ESPNMilwaukee.com.

Starr, the 1966 NFL MVP and two-time Super Bowl Champion, sided with Romney during a rally Friday at State Fair Park.

“I just think when you look at how successful (Romney) has been everywhere he has been and what he has done, I’m very confident when elected president he will confirm and make those remarkable levels of success every-day achievements for us.”

Starr also attributed two of Vince Lombardi’s key traits–“integrity and excellence”–to Romney.

But the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel cited a statement from Graeme Zielinski, a spokesman for the state Democratic Party: “The Green Bay Packers have never won a Super Bowl with a Republican in the White House. Also, Vince Lombardi was a Democrat.”

So there you go–a major Packers figure stands on each side of the fence. Woodson, a current Packer and future Hall of Famer, stands with President Obama, while Starr, a Packer legend and Hall of Fame quarterback, sides with Romney.

Wisconsin, typically viewed as a “battleground state” around election time, seems to be leaning towards Obama according to recent polls.

Several polls have Obama currently leading; the latest poll from Marquette Law School suggests that Obama leads Romney 51 percent to 43 percent, while a poll by N-B-C News, the Wall Street Journal, and Marist College had Obama leading by three points. St. Norbert’s College in De Pere has Obama leading Romney 51 percent to 42 percent.

The most recent poll from Rasmussen Reports had Obama and Republican Mitt Romney tied at 49-percent.


Follow @MJEversoll

Marques is a Journalism student, serving as the Sports Editor of UW-Green Bay\'s campus newspaper The Fourth Estate and a Packers writer at Jersey Al\'s AllGBP.com. Follow Marques on Twitter @MJEversoll.


39 thoughts on “Woodson endorses Obama, Starr sides with Romney

  1. Thanks for posting about this, Marques.

    I’ve never understood the mindset of people who get mad when athletes/celebs voice their opinions.

    If you don’t like whatever stance Woodson/Starr is taking, that’s cool. There’s nothing wrong with disagreeing with a person’s politics and letting it be known that you disagree.

    What I don’t get is the personal hatred. Just because someone, whether it’s a famous athlete or the guy down the street, doesn’t share your political views doesn’t mean they are evil and shouldn’t be allowed to take a stance on political issues.

    Partisanship and disagreement is a great thing…at least it used to be. People seem to be taking politics a little too personally these days.

    Anyway, I’ll climb down from my soapbox now.

    1. Why do you cite one poll, the Marquette poll which is clearly aberational? Hmmm? If you are going to put politics on this site, try to be fair yourself when YOU cite a poll.

      1. The last paragraph isn’t even tangential to the article, it’s a throw-away. Why do you hyper-focus on it, hmmmmm….?

        1. The last paragraph isn’t tangential to the article? A throw-away?

          The entire post centered on both parties being endorsed. Ending the article with a paragraph citing the most recent polls in Wisconsin seems, to me, justifiable.

          1. Cyhawk is focused on the distribution of percentages, not the poll. The distribution of percentages is relative to athletes and former athletes speaking their minds?

          2. You are correct in that it is not a throw away.

            However, this is not the most recent poll. Moreover, it is not in line with any respectable polling institution.

            Trying to tell everyone that Wisconsin is leaning towards Obams is wrong and not even necessary to the article unless you are bringing your own ideology to the article.

            ie. BIAS

      2. Two dislikes? C’mon. What’s the problem? I didn’t bring politics to the site. If I want a biased view, I’ll simply go to lame stream media. It makes me nauseous to see bias come to this site. Rasmussen has Obama and Romney TIED. Given that most of these polls use a sample based on 2008, it is more accurate to say that Wisconsin is PROBABLY leaning toward Romney.

        Sorry Adam. I enjoy your football perspective.

        1. Guys, I tried making this post as unbiased as I possibly could. I included the most recent poll I could find. Period.

          That poll suggested Obama is currently in Wisconsin by eight points. It is what it is.

          I apologize if I offended you with this political post.

            1. When searching for the most recent WI polls, Marquette Law’s was the first I came across.

              I added a few other polls, in hopes of satisfying both parties.

          1. Don’t apologize for talking about the presidential election. EVER.

            Everybody on the entire planet is effected based on who is elected. It’s not like it has nothing to do with football.

            Just because are uncomfortable talking about it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be talked about.

            This stuff is important. Even for sports.

        2. Don’t blame me! Marques wrote the post. He’s the biased liberal responsible for all of this!

          1. haha…

            THIS is why politics online doesn’t work. For quite a while I tried to talk common sense and respect with buddies on FB. It always devolved into character assassination. Especially from friends of friends.

            People are passive agressive chickens. They’ll rage over the internet or scream at people in person. But not rationally discuss issues and honestly evaluate the positions of others who disagree with them.

            Finding the line between firmness and rage is very hard in person. It’s even harder online.

            Political rant over.

      3. Cyhawk, I don’t get what the heck you’re talking about. Marques cited six poll takers, not one. I’m probably on your side of the fence, but to say Marques is showing bias is ridiculous.

        1. Jersey Al,

          Please note that Marques, in his first post, ONLY cited the Marquette poll. It was only in response to my objections that he added the other polls.

          I hope this helps.

    2. Adam,

      I was thinking the EXACT same thing today, before Marques even posted this.

      Great minds?

    3. I agree, but as the stakes get higher and higher, the perceived danger of the other man gets more dire. In other words, the more power you bestow (or allow) upon those with Power, the greater the stakes. In the case of the Federal level, if the Federal government were kept much closer to its Constitutionally allotted powers, people would not be so scared of those with differing opinions having control – the purview is limited. When you have a government that has penetrated itself into everyday aspects of your life – controls interest, inflation, trillions in debt and trillions in transfers to special interests, directs your personal behavior, bans goods and services, you have a much greater fear of what it will do. The increase in the lack of political civility is in proportion to the expansion of State powers. And it’s not only we great unwashed, the lack of incivility extends to those in power as well.

    1. There are things far more important than football, and besides, politics and football will always be a part of each other whether you like it or not.

      Sports can be effected greatly on how we vote.

  2. So… am I like allowed to say something politically on this article..? Or are we just discussing who’s endorsing who?

    1. I am voting for my cat Zelda. She always lets you know exactly what she believes. No lying. No spin.

      You’re either a great guy… or satan incarnate.

      (This is how all politicians should be)

      1. But your cat Zelda was compared to a kitten that looked just like her and denied it was hers! She says she stands for family values, but how can we honestly trust her?

        I’m voting for my dog maverick. The lesser of two evils.

  3. We are screwed no matter who is elected. This country (and most of the world) is a mess and there’s no quick fix. All the hot air and millions upon millions of dollars that went into this election is a joke. Our country is ran by major corporations and thier lobbyists. Special interest groups influence politics, De-regulation killed us.

    Also, The president of the USA, no matter what party, has a hard time getting anything done because the other party will vote it down just out of spite. The country is confused on were to turn to. This will be a very close election.

    1. It’s true. Nobody has the cojones to say “give me liberty or give me death” any more. Those heroes have all died off.

  4. Just wanted to remind everybody that I did not have sexual relations with that woman….Ms. Lewinski.

  5. No matter what happens, even if the Packers lose on Sunday, it is all the fault of an anti Muslim film from last July that nobody saw and protesters who happened to have rocket fired grenades in their pockets out of pure coincidence.

  6. That giant sucking sound is all the jobs flowing south of the border. Take your country back. I’m all ears.

  7. The curent president is a Bear fan and Packer hater. When the Packers went to the White House he told the Packers that his Bears would beat us on Christmas day and he was wrong , just another of a long line of what this president has been wrong about.

  8. There used to be an add by General Motors when they were still producing Oldsmobile…The catch phrase commercial was “This is not your Father’s Oldsmobile” I think quoting cotton candy news from the Journal was a misleading. True Lombardi was a democrat. A JFK (catholic) democrat. To suggest Bart Starr is wrong when citing his political backing,is based a little on the ignorant side. JFK was for cutting taxes on businesses and having less people believe that U.S. should expect the government to do everything for us. I knew JFK and Obama is no JFK. Starr is simply applying a principle that Lombardi lived by. I doubt if Lombardi were alive today he would back Obama. Lombardi inherited Coach Scooter McLean loosing team but never blamed him for the lack of success that Lombardi had faced. In fact he won championships with the very players from those loosing years because of his conservative leadership.
    “This is not your father’s Democrat”

  9. IF you you want another recession, this one will be far worse than the last one–then you vote for OWEbama. But be aware, in Jan YOU will get a 5% INCOME TAX INCREASE and $585 BILLION OTHER NEW TAXES. That will cause a HUGE drop in stock market, unemployment will SKYROCKET along with GAS, GROCERIES AND TAXES(local and state). Reagan faced a recession in ’81, cut taxes across the board and had 8.2% ECONOMIC GROWTH within two years. OWEbama did the opposite–he’s RAISED taxes by $650+BILLION already–next year’s increases could possibly collapse America and international economy into a GLOBAL DEPRESSION–NOT my words-that’s from NUMEROUS economists, IMF, World Bank.

Comments are closed.