Clinton Donors Object to Pelosi Comment

UPDATE: It doesn't sound like the letter had much effect on Pelosi's attitude towards the nomination. From her press office:

Speaker Pelosi is confident that superdelegates will choose between Sens. Clinton or Obama -- our two strong candidates -- before the convention in August," Daly said. "That choice will be based on many considerations, including respecting the decisions of millions of Americans who have voted in primaries and participated in caucuses. The speaker believes it would do great harm to the Democratic Party if superdelegates are perceived to overturn the will of the voters. This has been her position throughout this primary season, regardless of who was ahead at any particular point in delegates or votes.

UPDATE: The Center for Responsive Politics has calculated the financial heft that the donors involved, and it is substantial. From the press release:

The 20 Democratic bigwigs who wrote to Nancy Pelosi re: superdelegates yesterday have contributed nearly $24 million to Democratic candidates and committees over the last 10 years, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics has calculated. They've given Hillary Clinton's Senate and presidential campaigns about $315,000, or nearly $554,000, if you include contributions to her leadership PAC. By comparison, Barack Obama has collected $34,700 from them for his Senate and presidential campaigns, plus $17,500 to his leadership PAC. And there's no telling how much this group has helped raise for Democrats over the years.

WASHINGTON — Twenty top Democratic donors who are supporting Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for saying superdelegates should support the presidential candidate with the most pledged delegates.

No matter what the outcome of the 10 remaining contests, it will be nearly impossible for Clinton to overcome Barack Obama's lead in pledged delegates because they are awarded proportionally based on the outcome.

So it will be up to the nearly 800 superdelegates _ party activists and elected officials who aren't bound by any vote _ to put one of them over the mark of 2,024 delegates needed to win the nomination. Obama has 1,406 pledged delegates to Clinton's 1,249, according to The Associated Press count.

Pelosi, who has not endorsed either candidate as chair of the Democratic National Convention, said during a March 16 appearance on ABC's "This Week" that it would be harmful to the party if superdelegates don't support the pledged delegate winner.

In their letter, Clinton's supporters said superdelegates "must look to not one criterion but to the full panoply of factors that will help them assess who will be the party's strongest nominee in the general election."

The letter also noted the donors "have been strong supporters" of the House Democrats' fundraising apparatus.

"We therefore urge you to clarify your position on superdelegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the national convention in August," they said.

Pelosi stands by her comment, said her spokesman, Brendan Daly.

Story continues below

"The speaker believes it would do great harm to the Democratic Party if superdelegates are perceived to overturn the will of the voters," he said. "This has been her position throughout this primary season, regardless of who was ahead at any particular point in delegates or votes."

Obama spokesman Bill Burton called the letter "inappropriate."

"We hope the Clinton campaign will reject the insinuation contained in it," he said. "Regardless of the outcome of the nomination fight, Senator Obama will continue to urge his supporters to assist Speaker Pelosi in her efforts to maintain and build a working majority in the House of Representatives."

In response, Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said: "Few have done more to build the Democratic Party than Bill and Hillary Clinton. The last thing they need is a lecture from the Obama campaign."

The letter was first reported by The Washington Post and the political blog Talking Points Memo.

___

On the Net:

http://www.house.gov/pelosi

Comments

[GhostOfSchlesinger]

"Criticized" should probably not be the lead in this piece. "Threatened" would be more apt.

Indeed, these are the people our founders feared the most: A dark confluence of money and power openly seeking the overthrow of the will of the voters.

That makes this story a VERY BIG DEAL. This should be the headline on every single US daily. And it should stay that way until Hillary Clinton either bows out of the race (a graceful near-impossibility given her behavior thus far) or apologizes profusely, disavowing her donors and signing an agreement to NOT accept the nomination should it become a coronation (the original Clinton approach) via the benefices of the oligarchic elite.

Here we see, for among the first times in our lifetime, a bald-faced attack on Democracy. The big money elites are telling us, "Yes, we're going to nullify your votes, because we are wealthier and more powerful than you, and WE OWN THE CLINTONS, not this other guy, who in refusing our money has turned himself into a potential threat to our interests."

If we are not raging against the machine on this one, we've lost our sense of what it is to be American.

Indeed, I for one, would question the patriotism (YES, "question the patriotism") of any so-called "American" that would support politically brutal threats by a powerful elite aimed at FORCING OUR REPRESENTATIVES to overthrow our will.

I'd say it's time to take action.

[on2them]

Beautifully said! Bravo!

It helps to send this to all MSM outlets, the more they hear from us the better our chances this indignation is brought to light.

Power to "We the people!"...they shall not dim our light!

[Binea]

Taxpayers usually have no way of finding out where their money actually goes or how it is truly spent. Government reform groups are trying to change that by pushing efforts at the federal, state and local level that would shine the light on government spending.
Enter Sen. Barack Obama, Rep. Ron Paul, Sen. Sam Brownback, Sen. Mike Gravel, Rep. Dennis Kucinch and Mr. John Cox. These presidential candidates have all embraced the concept of "Google government" by signing the Oath of Presidential Transparency— which is sponsored by a non-partisan coalition led by the Reason Foundation.
By signing the oath they are promising, should they win the presidency in 2008, that they will issue an executive order during their first month in office instructing the entire executive branch to put into practice the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, a Google-like search tool that will allow taxpayers to hop online and see exactly how their tax dollars are being spent on federal contracts, grants and earmarks.
We need the Transparency that Obama has been fighting for.

[frappe]

Well said. Thank you.

[Giglawyer]

Excellent post. This is exactly what's wrong with America.

[Opus007]

Ghost

I have been angry that the Clintons have been dragging out this primary, but now I am delighted.
We have finally had a reality check on who the Clintons really are. In the words of Maya Angelou- "People will show you who they are- BELIEVE THEM!"

Their lying, intimidating, cheapshots, even supporting McCain over Obama- all paint a very unflattering picture but the most important thing this letter shows once and for all is:

The Clintons are total sellouts to special interests and corporations.
THE TRUTH HAS SET US FREE!

[Loculi]

To the donors who are threatening Pelosi (who frankly I am not a huge fan of) so long!

We don't need your kind or your threats, this is a grassroots movement and we will be a party controlled by the people again, not just by a few deep pockets. This is just proof that the fatcats are getting desperate. Thank you Howard Dean for the 50 state strategy!

[Kasandra]

I'd like to know who the 20 bullies are and what businesses they run or are major investors in so I can not use those businesses. Maybe we could get one name and agree to all try to impact that one business for a few weeks and see if we can teach them about democracy and the will of the majority over the few and how inappropriate it is for them to try to influence (buy) the election.

[FirstShirt]

Thats probably confidential information and you are not privileged, as a democrat, to know how your party does what it does.

Kind of chilling when you think that a president could have the same attitude. Isn't that the indictment of GWB?

[TekTami78]

It seems pretty undeniable that the Clintons are in full support of this letter that was written to Speaker Pelosi. The Clinton campaign just reeks of sour grapes in stating "the last thing (we) need is a lecture from the Obama campaign" as their only comment on this. No statement to stand behind uniting the party regardless of the primary outcome.

It also seems pretty undeniable that the letter was threatening to withdraw financial support for Dems if Speaker Pelosi didn't fall in line and perpetuate the myth that Clinton has a snowball's chance in hell.

Makes me wonder who these people are. I mean, I'd at least like to know who my country is beholden to should Clinton win.

[borderorder]

It was under Bill Clinton's term that the Democrats lost their majority in congress. And it took a blithering idiot of a Bush to get it back in 2006. Bill Clinton lost the right to lead the party when he bungled the last two years of his final term. He should have been expelled earlier with his rabid support of the Republican agenda. Hillary has been a war hawk and just one freckle left of Lieberman since hightailing it up to New York to gain her prominent profile and early run for the presidency. Now they have been engaged in slash and burn tactics that would make Sherman grimace. This election cycle has seen truely unique participation and interest on the part of democrats and almost an assured victory come November, except the Clintons have turned this race into a slimefest. The party would be better off without them.

[FirstShirt]

Not only did he lose it he lost it after two years. He has always been a survivor. Look for a deal to be in the works that bypasses Nancy Pelosi, the DNC and goes after the supers. Good old democratic politics at it's best.

[ChangeNow]

Big money threatens Pelosi for having the nerve to propose democracy.

Yet another reason to vote for Obama.

[ChangeNow]

Or maybe they are just scared that they may not get a return on their inventment. By God, they're gonnna get those favors they were promised!

[ohnoyoudidnot!]

Like more overnighters in the Lincoln bedroom...

[thewritingguy]

Clinton needs to stop seeing the White House as an entitlement and start looking at it as reality. To say that the Clintons are pro-democracy is ludicrous. She is trying everthing in her arsenal to steal the election from those who already voted in the primaries. Now she wants Pelosi to not only change her belief but change the belief of voters who already voted. Clinton is gone. Why are we wasting so much time speaking about this woman? That's what she wants. I support Sen. Pelosi on her views and hope she will stick to them and follow the people...not the Clintstones.

[on2them]

Clinton thrives on negativity. It's the only way she knows. She has been trying to press every button, touch every nerve with Obama. He's on to her, he won't retaliate tit for tat. He will never stoop to her grade school level.

Just look at the difference in postings from people pro-Obama and pro-Clinton all over the net...in the majority of cases, the Clingons use the same methodology as Clinton by trying to make people irate. It some cases it works but I suggest we who support Obama not let ourselves sink to their level.

Case in point, Samantha Power called Hillary a monster. Clingons have said words about Obama, I have never said in my whole life because they are so nasty. To me, monster is hardly a hard core insult.

[Sundialsvc4]

So "impeachment is off the table" and the power of the Speaker of the House is merely to be used as a campaign tool. How ironic that in the frontispiece of this story Ms. Pelosi is standing next to what some people believe is a truly ancient man who has lead his country at the risk of his own (current) life, and she will not lift a single finger to help save her own. She is not worthy to stand in that man's shadow.

[Abie56]

Pretty risky business for the Clintons to try and corner the Speaker, and it will have not payed off. You would think they would play this card a bit later in the game, e.g., chalk up a win in PA, somewhere else, etc. They're becoming more desperate by the hour. I believe the anxiety is evidence of division among the rank and file, i.e., many supporters (including the donors) don't want to wait and see, throw good money after bad, without something in hand. Look for people jumping ship in the next 10 days or so.

[pdsldl]

It's great that Obama has a base that is willing to support him because that makes these big money folks much less important and thus less powerful to dictate what the party does. If the democrats can depend more on large number of smaller donations from everyday people then the party will be more democratic. What a concept. The voice of the many being heard over the few.

[ntmessage]

It is about time. Between Dean, Pelosi, Kerry, Bradley, Hart and other so called non partisan DNC and Democratic party members the mischief, malfeasance, appearance of corruption regarding rule changes and disenfranchisement may make the DNC process illegitimate to many Americans. Why they could not just play it straight is beyond all judgment and sanity. The DNC and the DNC alone has created a mess that they need to fix. Now Dean is trying to stack the credential committee while Obama turned his back on FL and MI voters.
Therefore, is there any evidence at all to make you think that the DNC will not pull defeat from the jaws of victory again?

[NC4Obama]

Marc Aronchick

Clarence Avant

Susie Tompkins Buell

Sim Farar

Robert L. Johnson

Chris Korge

Marc and Cathy Lasry

Hassan Nemazee

Alan and Susan Patricof

JB Pritzker

Amy Rao

Lynn de Rothschild

Haim Saban

Bernard Schwartz

Stanley S. Shuman

Jay Snyder

Maureen White and Steven Rattner

[Abo]

Ahh, a threat.
Interesting that it was leaked.

[vietveter]

Threat? nope.
Just a cat fight
behave girls

[vincealy]

Really is time for superdelegates to rein in the Clintons. This type of extrotion so typical of why It is time to pick the candidate. Superdelegates you can let HRC destoy the party or you can reclaim the party from the "Clintonians" who based on the "Judas " comment evidently have an almost religious view of HRC

[Ammobob]

Ninny Nancy, following her own constituency, will HAVE to vote for Obama. But, why have Super Delegates at all if they are to follow the pledged delegates? The purpose of the Super Delegates is to rescue the party from itself, sometimes the popular vote is not the 'best' vote. The Founding Fathers recognized that a long time ago.

[SCG]

"sometimes the popular vote is not the 'best' vote. "

Try that in the fall.

[sadcitizen]

SOG Gore won the popular vote.

[ATL78]

Superdelegates were not established by the founding fathers.

[fixbone]

they were established after the 68 debacle - thanks to hrc we seem to be headed there again.

[on2them]

"WE THE PEOPLE" chose our leaders.

Do you really believe that a handful of politicians should decide who is and who is not right for the country?

By your theory, Bu$h is???

Your statement is the scariest thing I've read in days and I've read some down right scary things.

[FastMovingCloud]

Not the Founding Fathers, Ammobob.

"Ninny Nancy" knows that the delegate distribution is a matter of party politics and not government institution. That's why the Republicans can have a 'winner take all" allocation while the Democrats have a proportioned method, based on previous election voter turnouts.

[Halsey]

Wait...ammo...are you saying that "super delegates" are IN THE Constitution? Rescue the party from itself? Oh wait..so..Bush's policies...also to rescue me from freedom?..to save me for..um..what?

Nancy has disappointed me a LOT of late..but THIS one she got RIGHT ON!... I will call her office today and thank her for standing up to the clinton JUGGERNAUT...(which our founding fathers could not have fathomed)...