Largely overlooked in the Obama-Clinton race is how onetime political “outsiders” have sided with the Democratic Party Establishment in backing Clinton. The most egregious example is Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums, who not only endorsed Clinton, but also toured the state to promote her candidacy. Dellums got his start as an insurgent running against the Democratic leadership, and may not have had a political career had East Bay voters in the early 1970’s accepted the arguments about “experience” he is now making on Clinton’s behalf. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa made numerous trips to Iowa for Clinton, and seems to be spending most of his time on the campaign trail. But Villaraigosa owes his position to voters backing his insurgent campaign against the Democratic Establishment in 2001, a grassroots campaign he now disparages by claiming it showed that Obama’s huge rallies are unlikely to translate into votes. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom was never an outsider, and may owe his 2003 mayoral election to Bill Clinton’s late appearance on his behalf. But given Newsom’s conscious identification with the Kennedy’s, it is odd to see him campaigning against the candidate of his own generation who is promoting a New Frontier.

Endorsements from politicians may not sway many votes (at least that’s what John Kerry said yesterday), but they do send a message about our elected officials. And this message – surprise, surprise – is that ambition increasingly often triumphs principle.

Consider the examples of Dellums and Villaraigosa.

Dellums ran for Congress in 1970 as the anti-Vietnam War candidate against a white liberal incumbent who had long supported the war. The Democratic Establishment lined up against Dellums, but his insurgent campaign brought him victory.

Dellums served for 27 years, becoming best known for creating “alternative budgets” that showed how the nation’s social needs could better be met by cutting military spending. Dellums endorsed Barbara Lee as his successor, and she has continued his tradition of standing – often alone – against the tide of militarism and war.

Although the Clinton Administration cut military spending in its early years, it steadily backed the military industrial establishment and raised defense expenditures through 2000. Why then would Dellums be so aggressive in his support for Hillary Clinton?

Two reasons have been offered.

First, it has been widely rumored that Dellums is unhappy in Oakland and seeks a position in the next Administration that would allow his return to his longtime home of Washington, D.C. I find this scenario extremely unlikely.

Second, and the most plausible explanation, is that Dellums saw an opportunity to secure resources for Oakland in a potential new Clinton Administration. When Hillary Clinton looked like a sure thing during 2007, elected officials swarmed to get in on the “ground floor.” Dellums has been frustrated by Oakland’s lack of resources to meet its needs, and appears to have concluded that endorsing Hillary would pay off later.

But Obama was in the race when Dellums endorsed, and his opposition to the Iraq War made him the Oakland mayor’s logical choice (as it was for Barbara Lee.) For Dellums to not only endorse but to leave the city to campaign for Clinton in recent weeks – and while he is being criticized for not being out and about in Oakland – appears inconsistent with his own past record.

Villaraigosa’s motives are clearer. His campaign manager, Ace Smith, is running Clinton’s California campaign, and Villaraigosa also needs a major influx of new federal money to address his city’s needs. Villaraigosa also sees backing Clinton as bringing future campaign donations, and the endorsement of President Hillary Clinton in a statewide California Democratic primary would make the Los Angeles mayor nearly unbeatable.

But as with Dellums, Villaraigosa’s arguments for Clinton are similar to those used against him when he ran for mayor in 2001 and even in 2005. These onetime “outsiders” are now backing the forces they once organized against rather than using their status to promote more progressive candidates.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is a different case. He never claimed to be an outsider, and owes a political debt to the Clintons from his 2003 mayor’s race.

But one cannot help but recall how strongly Newsom once identified with the Kennedy legacy, and its “new frontier” mantle. After running for office as part of the “next” political generation who would represent a “break” from the past, Newsom has bypassed his generation’s candidate for one whose peer group has held the White House since 1992.

(And as for the assertion in today's San Francisco Chronicle that Newsom rebuffed Obama because the latter refused to be photographed with him due to the mayor's support for gay marriage, recall that it was Dianne Feinstein, with whom Newsom remains close, who essentially blamed Newsom's approval of gay marriages for John Kerry's defeat)

Among the other politicians whose endorsements betray their political history is Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez. Nunez came up from the grassroots labor movement, and was the quintessential “outsider.” He is now actively campaigning for Clinton, and chartered a busload of people to go to Nevada to work on Clinton’s campaign.

February 5th could prove a very dark day for Nunez. Not only will his Assembly career end with the defeat of Prop 93 (term limits), but his future job prospects in government depends on Clinton going to the White House, a scenario that could look less likely after today.

Who are the political winners in the endorsement game? An Obama victory would be a huge win for San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, who has expanded her progressive support through her backing of the Illinois Senator.

Los Angeles Assemblymember Karen Bass has been a major player in Obama’s Los Angeles campaign, and could use the campaign to make herself the next Assembly Speaker (Nunez would likely be replaced if Prop 93 loses.)

Newark mayor Cory Booker, the subject of a very favorable profile in the current New Yorker magazine, and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, could also use their strong backing of Obama as a springboard for higher office. In fact, many see Obama’s broad appeal as encouraging both to eventually run for the United States Senate or even the White House.

There will be a lot of political careers on the line tonight, and we’ll let readers know in the days ahead which endorsers delivered for their candidates, and which did not.