AP Survey: Superdelegates Jump to Obama

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - AP Survey: Superdelegates Jump to Obama stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

STEPHEN OHLEMACHER | February 22, 2008 05:27 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., greets supporters during a rally on the campus of University of Texas-Pan American Friday, Feb. 22, 2008, in Edinburg, Texas. (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer)

WASHINGTON — The Democratic superdelegates are starting to follow the voters _ straight to Barack Obama.

In just the past two weeks, more than two dozen of them have climbed aboard his presidential campaign, according to a survey by The Associated Press. At the same time, Hillary Rodham Clinton's are beginning to jump ship, abandoning her for Obama or deciding they now are undecided.

The result: He's narrowing her once-commanding lead among these "superdelegates," the Democratic office holders and party officials who automatically attend the national convention and can vote for whomever they choose.

As Obama has reeled off 11 straight primary victories, some of the superdelegates are having second _ or third _ thoughts about their public commitments.

Take John Perez, a Californian who first endorsed John Edwards and then backed Clinton. Now, he says, he is undecided.

"Given where the race is at right now, I think it's very important for us to play a role around bringing the party together around the candidate that people have chosen, as opposed to advocating for our own choice," he said in an interview.

Clinton still leads among superdelegates _ 241 to 181, according to the AP survey. But her total is down two in the past two weeks, while Obama's is up 25. Since the primaries started, at least three Clinton superdelegates have switched to Obama, including Rep. David Scott of Georgia, who changed his endorsement after Obama won 80 percent of the primary vote in Scott's district. At least two other Clinton backers have switched to undecided.

None of Obama's have publicly strayed, according to the AP tally.

Story continues below
advertisement

There are nearly 800 Democratic superdelegates, making them an important force in a nomination race as close as this one. Both campaigns are furiously lobbying them.

"Holy buckets!" exclaimed Audra Ostergard of Nebraska. "Michelle Obama and I are playing phone tag."

Billi Gosh, a Vermont superdelegate who backs Clinton, got a phone call from the candidate herself this week.

"As superdelegates, we have the opportunity to change our mind, so she's just connecting with me," Gosh said. "I couldn't believe she was able to fit in calls like that to her incredibly busy schedule."

In Utah, two Clinton superdelegates said they continue to support the New York senator _ for now.

"We'll see what happens," said Karen Hale. Likewise, fellow superdelegate Helen Langan said, "We'll see."

Other supporters are more steadfast.

"She's still in the race, isn't she? So I'm still supporting her," said Belinda Biafore, a superdelegate from West Virginia.

Obama has piled up the most victories in primaries and caucuses, giving him the overall lead in delegates, 1,362 to 1,266.5. Clinton's half delegate came from the global primary sponsored by the Democrats Abroad.

It will take 2,025 delegates to secure the nomination at this summer's national convention in Denver. If Clinton and Obama continue to split delegates in elections, neither will reach the mark without support from the superdelegates.

That has the campaigns fighting over the proper role for superdelegates, who can support any candidate they want. Obama argues it would be unfair for them to go against the outcome of the primaries and caucuses.

"I think it is important, given how hard Senator Clinton and I have been working, that these primaries and caucuses count for something," Obama said during Thursday night's debate in Austin, Texas.

Clinton argues that superdelegates should exercise independent judgment.

"These are the rules that are followed, and you know, I think that it will sort itself out," she said during the debate. "We will have a nominee, and we will have a unified Democratic Party, and we will go on to victory in November."

Behind the scenes, things can get sticky.

David Cicilline, the mayor of Providence, R.I., indicated this week that his support for Clinton might be wavering after _ he contended _ members of her campaign urged him to cave to the demands of a local firefighters union ahead of her weekend appearance there. The firefighters, in a long-running contract dispute with Cicilline, have said they would disrupt any Clinton event the mayor attends. A Clinton spokeswoman said the campaign would never interfere in the mayor's city decisions.

Obama has been helped by recent endorsements from several labor unions, including the Teamsters on Wednesday.

"He's our guy," said Sonny Nardi, an Ohio superdelegate and the president of Teamsters Local 416 in Cleveland.

The Democratic Party has named about 720 of its 795 superdelegates. The remainder will be chosen at state party conventions in the spring. AP reporters have interviewed 95 percent of the named delegates, with the most recent round of interviews taking place this week.

The superdelegates make up about a fifth of the overall delegates. As Democratic senators, both Clinton and Obama are superdelegates.

So is Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory, which is one reason his phone rings often.

He is a black mayor, and Obama has been winning about 90 percent of black votes. His state has a March 4 primary with 141 delegates at stake. The Democratic governor, Ted Strickland, is stumping hard for Clinton _ and perhaps a spot on the national ticket.

A phone call from former President Clinton interrupted Mallory's dinner on a recent Saturday.

"I continue to get calls from mayors, congresspeople, governors, urging me one way or another," said Mallory, who is still mulling his decision. "The celebrities will be next. I guess Oprah will call me."

___

Associated Press Writers Ace Stryker in Salt Lake City, Laura Kurtzman in Sacramento, Tom Breen in Charleston, W.Va., John Curran in Montpelier, Vt., Joe Milicia in Cleveland, Dan Sewell in Cincinnati and Anna Jo Bratton in Omaha contributed to this report.

(This version UPDATES delegate count; Democrats Abroad issued corrected allocation)

WASHINGTON — The Democratic superdelegates are starting to follow the voters _ straight to Barack Obama. In just the past two weeks, more than two dozen of them have climbed aboard his presiden...
WASHINGTON — The Democratic superdelegates are starting to follow the voters _ straight to Barack Obama. In just the past two weeks, more than two dozen of them have climbed aboard his presiden...
Filed by Will Thomas  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
442
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 (6 pages total)

Last week, when rival and fellow pledge-taker John McCain reminded him of that promise, Mr. Obama refused to go "locking" himself into an agreement.


This "No, We Can't" moment is supposedly a function of the Obama campaign's belief that it can massively out-raise Mr. McCain, and wants no public financing limits. The more cynical (and likelier) case is that Mr. Obama is using this in hopes of handicapping Mr. McCain in the upcoming months -- well before the general election begins.

Whatever the motive, this is a telling first example of the actual cash value of Mr. Obama's soaring words. From the start, Mr. Obama's promises to reform government, to make campaign finance more transparent, to weed out "moneyed special interests" have been integral to Obamamania.

This is no mere side issue, but the stuff on which the senator lifts crowds. "Now I know some will say we can't make this change," he thundered in one "transparency" talk on lobbyists. "That the culture of corrosive influence in politics is too sprawling to spotlight . . . That's not how I see it . . . Making government accountable to the people isn't just a cause of this campaign -- it's been a cause of my life for two decades."

Consider, too, that this is one of the few instances in which Mr. Obama did more than talk. His campaign won rave reviews when it last year forwarded a proposal to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to allow candidates to defensively raise money for a general election, but give it back if both sides agreed to public money. Mr. Obama then committed to taking public funds if his competitor did. This was a key moment in the Obama rise, a supposed example of his "fresh thinking."

Where is that "fresh thinking" now? Mr. Obama made his pledge when his campaign and fund-raising prospects were unknown. Today, the charismatic candidate is inching closer to the nomination. He is said to be collecting money at a clip of a million dollars a day. Liberal bloggers are pressuring him to keep this advantage. And Mr. Obama, with nary a whiff of remorse for the "cause of his life," has changed gears.

"This should be a warning for anyone caught up in Obama rhetoric," says Todd Harris, a Republican strategist. "When that rhetoric meets political expediency, it's not the rhetoric that wins." What makes this even wilier gamesmanship is that it is far from clear that it's in Mr. Obama's interest to forgo public financing. He instead appears to be using the threat that he is a money powerhouse to contain Mr. McCain now.

Bradley Smith, former head of the FEC and current chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics, notes that one reason nominees take public financing in the general election (President Bush and John Kerry did) is that it is a fab financial deal. Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama would each receive about $85 million to spend in the two months between conventions and Nov. 4. That's a whopping $1.4 million a day, and about as much as Mr. Obama spent last year.

Mr. Smith points out that even a red-hot Obama would struggle to best Mr. McCain's $85 million. It takes money to raise money, so he'd need closer to $100 million to realize $85 million. Even under public financing, Mr. McCain can raise about $20 million in private funds, which Mr. Obama would also have to match. And the Democrat would need to do all this while simultaneously staying competitive in a primary fight that could conceivably last through the summer. Do the math and he'd probably need to gin up $200 million over eight months, a near-impossible feat. "What he's probably doing is using this as leverage," says Mr. Smith.
[John McCain]

How so? The answer may be found in the op-ed Mr. Obama penned this week in USA Today in response to criticism. In it, Mr. Obama said he still wants to "aggressively pursue such an agreement," but dramatically raises the stakes. Any "solidly constructed" agreement, in his mind, would now have to go beyond public dollars, and also "limit fundraising help" from "outside groups" and "address the amounts that Senator McCain . . . will spend for the general election while the Democratic primary contest continues." Hmmm.

Mr. Obama knows Republican 527 groups are scooping up cash and will soon unleash it to Mr. McCain's advantage. He knows Mr. McCain's greatest asset is the next few months, when he'll be able to define himself and his opponents while Democrats slap away at each other. So Mr. Obama is proposing a new ethical challenge to Mr. McCain, one that conveniently hobbles his rival. You can call this savvy, and it might reassure voters who've wondered if Mr. Obama has the fists to tangle with the big boys. But you can't call it high-minded or visionary.

Mr. McCain is pounding Mr. Obama on his pledge, and that's to be expected. But he'll have to tread carefully. Too much focus on the public money question will only remind Republicans he is the goody-two-shoes coauthor of McCain-Feingold. A bigger risk is that Mr. McCain -- who is now being hit on his ethical record -- will fall for this and unilaterally disarm in an effort to burnish his credentials. Doing so won't help him win his base, or an election. (His bigger concern should be sorting out the FEC mess he's created with his November campaign loan.)

The real shame is that voters must suffer through all this. As two believers in complex campaign-finance laws, Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama helped create a system that now requires both to engage in games over 527 spending and tax subsidies. If they really believed in better government, they'd call for a system in which donors can give what they want, so long as it is transparent. That's called having faith in your citizens, and it would be change we could believe in.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:52 PM on 02/22/2008

Has our 350 word limit gone out the window? Dendy's screed is a damned novel.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:24 PM on 02/22/2008
photo

And a poorly written one at that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:20 PM on 02/22/2008

Your blog is too long for me to read, so I will just ask you a couple of questions.

What do you think of your candidate Hillary, siding with the repubs against a democrate?

Is her true colors showing, a repub in sheeps clothing?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:40 PM on 02/22/2008

Well she was president of the young Republicans in college.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:35 PM on 02/22/2008
- KRANKY I'm a Fan of KRANKY 14 fans permalink

Repuke crap.
Lots of Repuke crap.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:35 PM on 02/22/2008
- horacekent I'm a Fan of horacekent 10 fans permalink


Summary: Vote Obama!

~HK

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:10 PM on 02/22/2008

Well were these superdelegates black or white? Oh, they must be white because it's only worth noting their race in the headlines if they are black. Right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:50 PM on 02/22/2008
- Grunty1 I'm a Fan of Grunty1 216 fans permalink

Sadly, the logic is probably sound.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:23 PM on 02/22/2008
- ArchAngel I'm a Fan of ArchAngel 10 fans permalink

Good point, no doubt he won in Wisconsin with the cheese eating African Scandinavian voting block...

;-)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:42 PM on 02/22/2008
- truthyguy I'm a Fan of truthyguy 42 fans permalink

Even though I would not vote for Hillary, the fact is that there is a long way to go before it's over.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:45 PM on 02/22/2008
- PKSSK I'm a Fan of PKSSK 15 fans permalink

Agree.

I am an Obama supporter and I know that anything can happen when you are not the candidate of choice for the republican opponent. Think back to voting fraud in 2000 (Florida) and 2004 (Ohio)!!

I for one am waiting until "the fat lady sings"!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:56 PM on 02/22/2008

This is what I and others have been saying for a month while everyone's been running around with their hair on fire. Most of the SDs are politicians (duh) and they will blow with the prevailing political breeze.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:44 PM on 02/22/2008
- AdLib I'm a Fan of AdLib 277 fans permalink
photo

Hillary's camp has been whipping up this issue, she even set up a web site yesterday to make the case for SDs overruling the popular vote. Not to mention using Bush/Rove doublespeak and renaming them "automatic" delegates.

If someone keeps threatening to steal something, a certain amount of people reasonably come to the conclusion that they may indeed try to.

In the end, as you say, it would be political suicide for elected officials to counter the voters they represent but don't forget, there are a whole section of SDs that are not in elected office. They would have no one to answer to if they vote against the majority.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:57 PM on 02/22/2008
- illinoisan I'm a Fan of illinoisan 23 fans permalink
photo

Like me! I referred to it as super delegate migration.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:36 PM on 02/22/2008
photo

CAN 'superdelegates' accurately represent the will of the People? Or, are they in a unique position to influence the 'vote' in ways that will effectively counter the will of the People?
Can a 'superdelegate' be influenced by other things besides their apparent desire to support a given candidate/are they sufficiently objective to carry this responsibility?
For that matter, is Obama? Is Billary? Is McCain? Paul? Representative government means
that these various actors are supposed to be intermediaries on behalf of the People, not on behalf of the Texaco, or Army, Inc. etc. Lots of money on the table, lots of money on the table...lots of red ink on the floor, kind of like spilt transmission fluid...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:41 PM on 02/22/2008

Jumping ship to Obama is not what's needed. What each of the Super Delegates should do instead is pledge to support the candidate that emerges as the winner of the primaries and caucuses. I only hope that Democratic voters have been educated enough about this shabby process to insist on pulling the plug on these delegates after the race. I think in the end, they will as a group throw the bulk of their weight to Obama once he scores the victory in the cumulative primaries. It's just gotten too hot not to. Even Hillary knows this and seems to be planning her exit strategy when things don't break big for her on March 4. As far as the Super Delegates go, they will attempt to slink back into the dark when this election is over because there are too many goodies attached to their status for them to easily give it up permanently.

So Democrats we need to make it clear that we expect the Super Delegate vote to break the same way as the primary/caucus result in this election. And then we expect the Super Delegates to peacefully dismantle their anti-democratic operation and disband never to be heard from again. If this group of political hacks wants to influence future races, they should do it by going out and mobilizing voters to support their candidates rather than by trying to hijack an election.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:30 PM on 02/22/2008
- iPolitics I'm a Fan of iPolitics 33 fans permalink

The superdelegates have no choice. I'm sure their votes will be public. They will forever be known as stealing the election from the American people. Those who are in office will see a movement to get them out.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:28 PM on 02/22/2008

Texas will end in a split vote netting neither candidate a significant number of delegates. Sen. Clinton will win Ohio with a margin of 7-10%. At best, she could expect to net 20-30 delegates on the night, leaving her still 130 or so pledged delegates short of Barack Obama and leaving her in the same condition she's in now of needing to win 55-60% of all remaining pledged delegates. Since Super Tuesday, and presumably after March 4th, she will have demonstrated her inability to do so. If Mrs. Clinton does not pull out on her own accord, prominent figures within the Democratic Party (Gore, Carter) will put pressure on her to do so. If she resists, they will publicly endorse Senator Obama signaling the super delegates to line up behind the presumptive winner and thus achieving the magical number of 2025. Do you really think Al Gore would stand idly by and allow this primary race to divide the party for another 4 or 5 months? The writing's been on the wall since Super Tuesday and 'twill be set in stone the morning of March 5th.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 02/22/2008
- kramskoi I'm a Fan of kramskoi 7 fans permalink

add to the fact that WY (caucus) and MS (high AA population) primary would favor Obama and any net from Ohio would be further minimized with wins in those two states on 3/8 and 3/11...afterward there would be a long 6 weeks to Pennsylvania on april 22, which favors Clinton "currently" though the polls are tightening, but Obama counters with big North Carolina on 5/6

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:28 PM on 02/22/2008
- BitJam I'm a Fan of BitJam 15 fans permalink

Minor correction. You said that if Clinton picks up 30 delegates and is still behind by 130 then she will be in the same situation she is in now.

Strange enough, she would actually be in WORSE shape than she is now. There are roughly 1,000 pledged delegates left and Obama is up by about 160 so Clinton will need to win by an average of 16% (160/1000) to catch up.

There are roughly 300 delegates up for grabs on March 4th. If she nets 30 then she will be behind by 130 with only 700 to go. This means she would need to win the remaining races by 18% (in delegate count) in order to catch up.

According to my back of the envelope calculations, Clinton will need to win 48 net delegates on March 4th in order to be in the same situation she is in today. If she does worse than this then she will need to do even better in the races that follow in order to catch up.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:12 PM on 02/22/2008
- StephenJK I'm a Fan of StephenJK 21 fans permalink

There are over 300 delegates in TX alone. lol

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:27 AM on 02/23/2008

they will be THE STORY

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:44 PM on 02/22/2008

It is aggravating that the Super Delegates are still a goddamn story. Not one them would have the audacity to overturn the popular vote and EVERYONE knows that. It's a non-issue. If Hillary looks like the presumptive winner, all the SD's will align behind her giving her the key 2025. The same would apply for Obama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:39 PM on 02/22/2008
- kempis I'm a Fan of kempis 8 fans permalink

Of course you're right. But what you're saying is too sane, too boring, and takes the air out of a lot of "OH NOES TEH CLINTONZ R GONNA STEEL TEH ELEKSHUN" fearmongering from the Obama-supp­orters/Cli­nton-demon­izers.

So it will be soundly ignored, I'm afraid.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:33 PM on 02/22/2008
- mooph I'm a Fan of mooph 8 fans permalink
photo

Gotta love the half-delegate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:28 PM on 02/22/2008

I'm a half-delegate to my county convention.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 02/22/2008
- gcee I'm a Fan of gcee permalink

Down in the valley,
Valley so low,
Hang your head over,
Hear the wind blow.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:59 PM on 02/22/2008
- snruB I'm a Fan of snruB 5 fans permalink
photo

Ja Ja Ja Ja!!!

Auchtung!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:52 PM on 02/22/2008
- snruB I'm a Fan of snruB 5 fans permalink
photo

Ja Ja Ja Ja!!!

Auchtung!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:52 PM on 02/22/2008
- snruB I'm a Fan of snruB 5 fans permalink
photo

Ja Ja Ja Ja!!!

Auchtung!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:50 PM on 02/22/2008
- larry278 I'm a Fan of larry278 47 fans permalink

Fig, heil, Fothermucker, raust! Oh, yes, seasons greetings. No, I don't eat pork & kraut or hog jowl & black eyed peas on New Year's Day. Bring me a shrimp cocktail, 1 doz oysters on a 1/2 shell, a salad with vinegar & oil but no crutons or cheese, french fries, a rare steak that's ,warmed to body temperature, taken off the grill or fire & served to me at once [I can't abide over cooked beef.] a slice of key lime pie & a constant refill of my iced tea glass, an espresso with a lemon twist & the check. Krauts & crackers don't know how to live or speak. Serve them in the parking lot; use paper plates, plastic, knives, forks & spoons so they don't hurt each other in a fight. Put them well away from the building, near the dumpster in the parking lot. They have a foul odor.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:39 PM on 02/22/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 (6 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect