Hillary Clinton: Pledged Delegates Can Switch Candidates

In an interview with Newsweek, Hillary Clinton raised the specter of pledged delegates, nominated by voters, switching their votes at the Democratic Convention.

How can you win the nomination when the math looks so bleak for you?

It doesn't look bleak at all. I have a very close race with Senator Obama. There are elected delegates, caucus delegates and superdelegates, all for different reasons, and they're all equal in their ability to cast their vote for whomever they choose. Even elected and caucus delegates are not required to stay with whomever they are pledged to. This is a very carefully constructed process that goes back years, and we're going to follow the process.

It was only a few weeks ago that the Clinton camp was accused of seeking the vote of pledged delegates. A Politico article in mid February suggested the camp was thinking about the strategy down as the convention drew closer:

"I swear it is not happening now, but as we get closer to the convention, if it is a stalemate, everybody will be going after everybody's delegates," a senior Clinton official told me Monday afternoon. "All the rules will be going out the window."

That article prompted the unequivocal response from the campaign:

We have not, are not and will not pursue the pledged delegates of Barack Obama. It's now time for the Obama campaign to be clear about their intentions.

UPDATE: Ben Smith is reporting that the Clinton's statements do not represent a change in stance on pledged delegates, according to a campaign aide.

Comments

[iPolitics]

Mississippi superdelegate Everett Sanders endorses Obama.
North Carolina superdelegate Joyce Brayboy backs the Senator form Illinois.

http://thepage.time.com/

[Weathermaker]

omg, this woman is the reincarnation of Henry VIII....

[stonepier]

Excellent. In that case, I suggest that Clinton's delegates switch to Obama at their earliest convenience.

[nellie]

Hillary, you're losing. Stop acting like you're winning. If you want to win, cut the spin and get to work.

[atp2007]

Hillary wants the elected delegates to become just like a Clinton--U­NFAITHFUL!­!!!

[Notapathetic]

About 20% of the Democrats despise Bush. The rest hold him in contempt. Most Republicans like Bush.

About 20% of Republicans despise Clinton, the rest hold her in contempt. Most Democrats do NOT like Clinton.

Add up all the people who REJECT Hillary Clinton and her disapproval rating would be lower than Bush within a month.

Then we'll be stuck with the same crap we've been living with, only worse.

[kennedy]

You mean like Obama being unfaithful to his wife.

Larry Sinclair says that he has new evidence of his affair with Obama. I wonder when Sinclair is going to drop the bomb shell on Obama?

Throwing stones can come back on you real quick.

[Lindy222]

God, I am sick of Hillary Clinton. Sick sick sick.

Have I mentioned how sick I am of Hillary Clinton.

I am sick unto death of her. Her and the -- a cow now, is it? -- that she rode in on.

[standforpeace]

As this primary/caucus process draws to an end, I am left with just one question. Why did we bother? Next time, I propose that we only hold primaries in the big states (but not Michigan or Illinois of course). Also let's be sure that we build a Friends of Bill (FOB) safeguard into our new process. Just in case the voters in the big states somehow manage to muck it up, we'll build in a step at the Democratic National Convention when the FOB elites can override any honest mistakes on the part of the voters. Because let's face it, small d democracy is a pretty limited way of selecting the big D Democratic nominee.

[atp2007]

I keep asking -How did a party that is suposed to care for the poor and needy wind up wasting so much money on just selecting a candidate to do that. Most of this money will go to high paid consultants, local politicians for endorsements and TV stations (take a look at Hillary's campaign expenses for the first half). No poverty was defeated, no health care provided, no hunger satiated.
And now they want to spend tens of millions more to revote in Florida (a state that will never vote for a Demo president anyway) and Michigan. To accomplaih what? The delegate count will change little given all the past proportional results. Maybe Hillary will win another 'big' state to add to her list of winable states (most big states were ones that Kerry the stiffest, most unlikeable candidate to run in ages could sin). Is that worth the waste of money?

[Herrington]

I just love the caucuses don't count ruse. Somehow, people informed and motivted enough to caucus are less important than people who just show up and vote based on the 3 AM slime job. You're right Hillary, America will be better off when fewer people are actually willing to participate in the election process.

[mvpeach10]

I THINK IT'S TIME TO GET REAL. If the Democrats want to win in November they better start looking not just at the number of states Obama won vis a vis the states Hillary won, but at the likelihood of carrying the states Obama won in the general election.

Mar. 10, 2008 - 12:56 PM EST

Obama Cult Members : Here is a question, WHICH OF THESE STATES CAN OBAMA WIN IN NOVEMBER? You know the answer: NONE OF THEM. Yet the tally is constantly put forth to show his strength. It's all a house of cards.

1. Alabama

2. Alaska

3. Idaho

4. North Dakota

5. Utah

6. Nebraska

7. Wyoming

8. Louisiana

9. Kansas

10. South Carolina

[gba]

You are right. Students and other persons who can to take some time off to participate in a caucus are more important that those that cannot lave their job or kids. They are more motivated and, in particular, better educated

[useyourbrain]

The total number of people who went to caucuses is less than 1/10th of who voted which means a caucus vote carries the same weight as 10 of use voters in California, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Texas and a lot of other States.

[kennedy]

And Obama is the only con in the race. He is dirty Chicago con politician.

Caucuses are con jobs. People for years have been trying to get primaries instead of caucuses. Count the number of people who show up at the caucuses to the vast numbers in contrast that vote in primary's. There is no comparison between the fairness and numbers. Primary's give millions of more people a chance to vote for their choice. And all day to do so. In sharp comparison to caucuses. And no chance to put the screws to potential voters.

So your in favor of less people having a chance to vote??

[LiamR]

I will not hold my nose and vote one more time. I'm 57-years-old and I've had it with voting for some half-assed candidate because he or she is the lesser of two evils. Been there, done that.

No more.

If I'm not voting for Obama in November, or Al Gore, then I'm leaving the presidential selection blank. I wouldn't vote for a Republican even if you waterboarded my ass. But I will not vote for another Clinton, not in November, not ever. Period. End of story.

No more Bushes. No more Clintons.

Super Delegates take notice. You can doublecross the voters if you so choose. But don't expect us to sheepishly follow suit.

[BetterDays]

I agree with your sentiments exactly. I will not vote for a Clinton ever again.

[Cherielabombe]

Agreed. Although I voted for Bill in 92 and 96 , and I was undecided between Obama and Hillary all the way up until the day I voted in my primary, I have grown so disgusted with Clinton's "Kitchen Sink" strategy and blatant ignoring the will of the people in order to get on the ticket that I don't think I could stomach pulling the lever for her in November after all this.

[2liveNdie]

More than she can!

[armadillious2002]

Amen - the Clinton day is done as far as I'm concerned. Funny thing is - she had my luke warm support at the outset - what the hell was I thinking?

[mvpeach10]

Obama Country : here is a question for Sen.Obama and his supporters, PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHICH OF THESE STATES HE CAN WIN IN NOVEMBER, ***NONE***

1. Alabama

2. Alaska

3. Idaho

4. North Dakota

5. Utah

6. Nebraska

7. Wyoming

8. Louisiana

9. Kansas

10. South Carolina

[GuiltyUndertaker]

Here's a question for Sen. Clinton and her supporters. PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHY YOU THINK HER NOMINATION, WHICH LOOKED LIKE A SURE THING A YEAR AGO, NOW LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING THE WAY OF THE 1969 CHICAGO CUBS?

What's that? Because she's a woman? Oh, yeah, I forgot. Thanks for reminding me.

[mcfried]

You are missing around 20 others

[SlithyTove]

He has a better chance than Hillary in pretty much every one of them.

[Notapathetic]

I think Obama or Clinton lose all of your clever list.

I think Obama OR Clinton win all of Hillary's so-called "big/crucial States" in November, except Missouri (Obama wins, Clinton loses), Wisconsin (Obama wins, Clinton loses), Minnesota (Obama wins, Clinton loses), South/North Carolina (Obama wins squeaker, Hillary gets crushed), Washington (Obama wins easily, Hillary may/may not win).

If you are intending to say, without saying it, that only Clinton can win in blue States, you are mistaken.

Republicans want Clinton so bad they are drooling. They know that she will shredded by the exposure of her own history, and the Republicans will win VERY easily.

[profmsf]

It would be a shock for any of them to go Blue, but it is not impossible where Democrats are running strong statewide races. Alaska may elect a Democratic senator this year. Idaho will be "quitting" to Senator Craig. North Dakota has two Democratic senators. Wyoming almost elected a Democratic congressman in 2006 and may do so this year. Louisiana went for the Clintons at least once and is still reeling from Katrina. Kansas has an immensely popular Democratic governor who supports Obama. What seems clear is that none of them will be in play with a Clinton on the ticket. Obama on the other hand may have coattails that help statewide candidates and make the Presidential races at least a bit interesting in some of these places. The Republicans just found that out in Denny Hastert's district.

[ApolloniaCreed]

I feel the same way...

[estreya]

Well said.

[LoloZ]

I'm with you, pal, the latest shenanigans of HRC's have clinched it. She'll never get my vote.
And i am also sick of voting for the lesser of two evils.

[karenann]

It's 3:00 a.m. and the superdelegates' phones are ringing.

It's the Clinton robocallers, asking them to pledge their support for Senator Clinton.

But it's hard to clearly understand the words being spoken -- because the sobbing gets in the way. . . . .

Someone PLEASEcall a wambulance, because Senator Clinton is having a meltdown!

[TekTami78]

For a lot of people in my generation, voting during an election means choosing the lesser of two evils. For once, we have a candidate that is NOT a lesser evil at all, he's a candidate we actually WANT to vote for because we believe in his message of a government by the people and not a government by the politicians.

I am an Independent who whole-heartedly voted for Obama. I patently REFUSE to vote for Hillary Clinton if she wins the Democratic nomination. The same is true for John McCain...not that there is a whole lot of difference between the two:)

Something that I have noticed over about the last week or so is that Hillary Clinton will make a statement, and then expect (or basically taunt) Barack Obama into saying the same thing or something similar to what she has said. I'm not sure why she is playing this game (other than to try to screw Obama somehow) but it's getting old. BARACK IS NOT YOUR PUPPET and is capable of saying whatever he wants.

And please do us one more favor, Shrillary - Stop trying to cut into Obama's coalition by telling people you'll draft him as V.P.! You won't do it, it's just your newest ploy. And it's yet another reason that you annoy.

[Cherielabombe]

She's doing it because she wants to drag Barack down into the mud with her. Personally I want him to fight back hard, but I'm happy to see he hasn't stooped down to her level.

[nazgul]

A few words for the delegates and superdelegates who switch and/or overrule the popular vote (paraphrased from Tommy Boy):

"We know where you live and we know where you sleep and we swear by all that is holy your families will tear their eyes out when they see what we've done to you!"

There, that felt good.

BTW, wasn't it Hillary who made an attempt to get rid of the electoral college??? Hmmm. Just sayin'.

[GLaB]

"BTW, wasn't it Hillary who made an attempt to get rid of the electoral college???"

I f she did, that's one more great reason to vote for her!!!

[DRHoen]

What's the other reason? I still don't understand her appeal, especially to the poor. She's gonna shaft ya, again! You have a choice between a corrupt WalMart board member and an honest community organizer... and you choose the WalMart lawyer???

[paixa3]

The electoral college is so retro....geezuzz, nearly every country has a better system of choosing leaders...­.........g­o figure.

[AvgPseudoIntellectual]

I urge all readers who are undecided, and who have yet to vote in the Dem primary, to consider things from this perspective:

We have 2 candidates who are both very intelligent, and who each bring different valuable experiences to the plate. However, please realize that Obama has stringently attempted to keep all criticisms and campaign strategies on point -- not personal or manipulative. Clinton, conversely, is willing to do anything to cut Obama down, including leveling attacks that she herself knows are untrue or, at best, inaccurate. This is not a show of strength, but a show of hunger for power and victory at all costs. Clinton is keenly aware that the only way she can hope to secure the Dem nomination is to strong-arm the superdelegates into overturning the majority who have participated in a democratic process. This is disgusting and blatantly self-serving.

Furthermore, this does not show that she would be a better fighter against McCain. Obama's avoidance of harsh and unfair attacks on Clinton shows that he is unwilling to tear down another Democrat, NOT that he is unwilling to fight fiercely in the gen'l election. Their are WIDESPREAD reports that Republican spoilers contributed to Hillary's victory in Ohio and primary edge in TX, and it is entirely possibly they made the difference in the TX primary. Clinton's own camp must know this, yet she is gloating, and is again willing to grab a win at any cost.

Please research Obama's positions and his record. Lastly, look into yourself and ask if you are willing to let yourself be inspired! Speeches are not policies, but they are indeed actions! Obama has bipartisan appeal amongst his fellow congresspeople, and for good reason. How can the tone of Washington ever change for better if not led from the top? He did it in Illinois, and he will do it in DC.

[OtayPanky]

As BushCo rides off into the sunset, welcome back to BillaryCo.

Our long national nightmare continues...unless Obama really does have the right stuff.

[ctom]

This is funny.