Undecided superdelegates don't feel bound by primaries

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Undecided superdelegates don't feel bound by primaries stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

STEPHEN OHLEMACHER | April 20, 2008 03:15 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It

WASHINGTON — Many of the Democratic superdelegates who are still undecided say the most important factor in their decision is simple _ they just want a winner in November.

Problem is, after nearly four months of primaries and caucuses in 46 states, territories and the District of Columbia, they still aren't sure who that is, don't seem be in any hurry to make up their minds and aren't interested in any artificial process that might force them to choose between Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Most of the more than 100 undecided superdelegates who discussed their decision-making with The Associated Press in the past two weeks agreed that the primaries and caucuses do matter _ whether it's who has the most national delegates or the candidate who won their state or congressional district. But few said the primaries will be the biggest factor in their decision.

"I think it's really important that we keep our eye on the prize, and the prize is the win in November," said Gail Rasmussen, an undecided superdelegate from Oregon.

That's good news for Clinton, who cannot catch Obama in delegates won in the few remaining primaries and caucuses.

Obama has been arguing for months that the superdelegates would be overturning the will of the voters if they don't nominate the candidate who has won the most pledged delegates. He has a 164-delegate lead in that category. Clinton, meanwhile, has argued that superdelegates should exercise independent judgment.

Many of the undecided superdelegates say they don't want to be perceived as elite insiders, cutting backroom deals to select a nominee. But that doesn't mean they're ready to forfeit their status.

"The way the system is set up, the superdelegates are able to weigh in because we are the most experienced people in the party," said Blake Johnson, an undecided superdelegate from Alaska. "We are the ones who have been part of the party the longest and keep it running on a day-to-day basis."

Story continues below
advertisement

There will be nearly 800 superdelegates at the party's national convention in Denver this summer. They are the party and elected officials who automatically attend the convention and are free to support whomever they choose. They are in high demand now that neither Clinton nor Obama can clinch the nomination without them.

Clinton leads in superdelegate endorsements, 258-232, according to the latest tally by the AP. However, Obama has been eating away at her lead for much of the past two months, picking up 84 percent of the superdelegate endorsements since Super Tuesday.

About 250 superdelegates have told the AP they are undecided or uncommitted. About 60 more will be selected at state party conventions and meetings this spring.

AP reporters across the nation contacted the undecideds and asked them how they plan to choose. Of those, 117 agreed to discuss the decision-making process.

_About a third said the most important factor will be the candidate who, they believe, has the best chance of beating Republican John McCain in the general election.

_One in 10 said the biggest factor will be the candidate with the most pledged delegates won in primaries and caucuses.

_One in 10 said what matters most is who won their state or congressional district in the primary or caucus.

_The rest cited multiple factors or parochial issues.

Most undecided superdelegates surveyed said they hope the nomination is settled before the party's convention. However, by more than a 2-to-1 margin, they said they oppose any formal mechanism, such as a separate primary or caucus, for the superdelegates to decide the nomination.

"I think that is changing the rules in the middle of the process," said Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma. "Obviously there are some problems with the process; there need to be some reforms made. Frankly, I would favor the people making the decision rather than insiders and party bosses."

Many undecided superdelegates refused to discuss their decision-making process, showing discomfort with the subject. Eighty-nine undecided superdelegates didn't return repeated phone calls or e-mails in the past two weeks, and 42 refused to discuss their decision when they were contacted.

"If I answer any of those (questions), people might be able to divine which way I am leaning," said Wayne Kinney, an undecided superdelegate from Oregon.

Even some experienced pols demurred.

"I'm not saying anything," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois superdelegate and a former aide to President Clinton. "There's no value to it."

___

Associated Press writers Julia Silverman in Portland, Ore.; Steve Quinn in Juneau, Alaska; Ron Jenkins in Oklahoma City and Dennis Conrad in Washington contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Many of the Democratic superdelegates who are still undecided say the most important factor in their decision is simple _ they just want a winner in November. Problem is, after nea...
WASHINGTON — Many of the Democratic superdelegates who are still undecided say the most important factor in their decision is simple _ they just want a winner in November. Problem is, after nea...
Filed by Max Follmer  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
560
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 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
- AC500 I'm a Fan of AC500 5 fans permalink
    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 04/21/2008
- c1ee I'm a Fan of c1ee 4 fans permalink
    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 AM on 04/21/2008
- several I'm a Fan of several 6 fans permalink

You gotta love it when the AP runs a headline purporting to know how superdelegates "feel."

This has gone on waaay too long. The MSM and the blogosphere are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for 'stories' now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 AM on 04/21/2008

CLINTON UP BIG IN PENNSYLVANIA

April 20, 2008 - Pennsylvania Democratic Primary Preference
Pennsylvania
Democrats

April 17-19

Clinton 54%

Obama 41%

Hillary Clinton leads Barack Obama 48% to 47% among men (45% of likely Democratic primary voters). Among women, Clinton leads 59% to 36%.

Clinton leads 63% to 32% among white voters (81% of likely Democratic primary voters). Obama leads 86% to 12% among African American voters (15% of likely Democratic primary voters).

Clinton leads 52% to 43% among voters age 18 to 49 (51% of likely Democratic primary voters) and Clinton leads 56% to 39% among voters age 50 and older.

Clinton leads 59% to 36% among voters without a college degree (63% of likely voters) and Obama leads 50% to 45% among voters with a college degree.

20% of all likely Democratic primary voters say they would never vote for Hillary Clinton in the primary and 32% of likely Democratic primary voters say they would never vote for Barack Obama in the primary.

http://americanresearchgroup.com/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:45 AM on 04/21/2008
- kevenseven I'm a Fan of kevenseven 501 fans permalink
photo

And yet Obama will be the nominee.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:45 AM on 04/21/2008

Get off the crack pipe. It's detrimental to your health!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:57 AM on 04/21/2008
- neocon43 I'm a Fan of neocon43 29 fans permalink

Who says?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:49 AM on 04/21/2008

Clinton will be. I see it in the stars....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:36 AM on 04/21/2008

Oddly the ARG poll had that weird outlier with Clinton ahead by 20 pts last time, so this is actually bad news for her that the race is tightening since now it's a 13 pt lead. She's down 7 points since the last poll.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:53 AM on 04/21/2008

As much as I like those numbers, I am not sure how reliable that poll is. But you do have to admire the 12% of the AA's who are willing to vote for the candidate who will be serve and fight for America.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:41 AM on 04/21/2008

DNC rules that would hurt his nomination, like the ones granting independent voting power to superdelegates are horrific, draconian insults to humanity while rules that favor his nomination like the ones potentially causing the disenfranchisement of millions of voters in Florida and Michigan are shrewd, necessary edicts that maintain the strength and dignity of the party.

Obamites are the new fundamentalists.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:34 AM on 04/21/2008
- Marioth I'm a Fan of Marioth 32 fans permalink
photo

oh boo hoo

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:39 AM on 04/21/2008
- kevenseven I'm a Fan of kevenseven 501 fans permalink
photo

The rules that MI and FL violated were set long before we knew the outlines of this race. Obama did not write the rules. He is just operating within them. Stop your damned sniveling.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:44 AM on 04/21/2008

So I guess those grousing about the superdelegates possibly voting against the will of the people should stop sniveling too.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:43 AM on 04/21/2008

The truth of the election results is finally being made available:

http://www.diversityj.com/ElectionResults2008Primary.html

It is clear that with Florida and Michigan, that Hillary has a solid lead.

Even without Florida and Michigan, once you divide the counts between
primary states and caucus states, you find that the whole difference in
their position is due to the unrepresentative caucus states.


Clinton: pop-vote/delegates: 13,693,748 / 1,283 w/o MI/FL 12,494,453 / 1,105
caucus-vot­e/delegate­s: 180,092 / 149


Obama: pop-vote/delegates: 13,587,154 / 1,193 w/o MI/FL 13,010,940 / 1,126
caucus-vot­e/delegate­s: 391,148 / 289

As the above numbers show, in states where real primaries were held, incl FL/MI, Clinton
has a majority of delegates.

It is only after MI/FL are excluded that Obama shows any kind of lead, and
even there, his whole lead is due to the vastly distorted and misrepresented
caucus votes.

Pennsylvania could tip these results even more in Clinton's favor.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:20 AM on 04/21/2008
- kevenseven I'm a Fan of kevenseven 501 fans permalink
photo

Wee wee wee.

Caucuses. Too bad Hillary and her people never heard of caucuses before. Strange too, seeing as that form of democracy has three or four hundred years of history on this continent.

Perhaps all the contests were supposed to be primaries, but at the last minute, those sneaky Obamans changed ten of the primaries to caucuses. Do you think that is what happened?

Or could it be that Obama slipped bogus rules books into the Clinton campaign's brief cases?

Caucuses are an excellent measure of a campaign's ability to organize and motivate. Seems to me that this is not a bad thing for a campaign to be good at.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 AM on 04/21/2008

Please start looking at this math in a non-partisan (non-Obama/Clinton) way. The democratic nomination party rules mean nothing in the GE.

The ONLY math that matters is the GE math.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:34 AM on 04/21/2008
- TN I'm a Fan of TN 26 fans permalink

His friggin name was not on the ballot. He followed the rules. We have rule breakers, law breakers, constitution breakers already in washington, we don't want another one. The FL & MI debacle is over, they did it to themselves. In FL hillary's man Ikes voted for florida to be disenfranchised, just wait till that little tid bit gets to mainstream. Hillary didn't prepare for caucus votes because she thought the race would be over feb 5th, too bad for her that her planning was not adequate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:34 AM on 04/21/2008

Senator Obama's name was on the Michigan ballot along with everyone elses. He and John Edwards decided they did not want to have their names on the Michigan ballot so they submitted a written request to remove them. They choose not to run for President of the United States in the State of Michigan. Why should all of the others not get their votes counted for the actions of two candidates. Link here to view a sample ballot as proof.

Michigan Sample Ballot
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/sos/PriPresBal_final2_218616_7.pdf

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:48 AM on 04/21/2008
- Marioth I'm a Fan of Marioth 32 fans permalink
photo

A+ for effort on an the academic exercise.

However, it remains a delegate race: 2025 = winner. No academic exercise can undo that. And as the article reads, supers aren't paying attention to the math, however tortured.

Pax,
M.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:42 AM on 04/21/2008

Why is everyone arguing about the super delegates? There is a basic point that everyone seems to be overlooking. Billary is as bought as Bu$h, her politics are as old and tired, her campaign as outdated. We DESPERATELY NEED a new direction and it will NOT come from Billary. And it will not come from people like Pelosi or Reed. They are as much a part of the problem as Bu$h. They DO NOT REPRESENT US. They represent only their own interests and the interests of whoever paid for them.

Perhaps Obama will not be any better than the hacks from BOTH parties we now have running this country but I am willing to take a chance. This may be our last opportunity to save our country and restore some semblance of decency to Washington.

If nothing else, Obama has a firm understanding of the Constitution which seems to be beyond the grasp of even the present SCOTUS>

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:14 AM on 04/21/2008

It was a good explanation for huffers on how the super delegates work and what there purpose is. They want to get the nominee that has the best chance to win in November. That's Hillary.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:03 AM on 04/21/2008

Residentchimp. and Neocon43 admit they want McCain to win. And then these trolls say Hillary should be the nominee. Well gosh, I wonder why. Give your strained minds a break. Nobody is falling for operation chaos. Give Rush a big hug for me weasels. BASH!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:12 AM on 04/21/2008
- jadez I'm a Fan of jadez 3 fans permalink

bunch of idiots/
why?

because 60% of the voters dont trust clinton.
you think that she can win?

and if they really want the party to win why are they sitting back why hillary does everything she can to hurt Obamas chances?

i am no longer a democrat. the party has left me for good over their weakness.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:59 PM on 04/20/2008

I think Hillary will win PA by a small margin and they will tie in IN. Barack probably will carry NC and OR and she will win Kentucky and WV. Puerto Rico is probably more hers than his though. And then we are back to square one, with her being behind. I am telling you, the way to settle this is a joint ticket. A 3rd party candidate is not a sure bet, but a joint ticket is and it gives them time to get more into the party and campaign against McSame.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:55 PM on 04/20/2008
- acanthus I'm a Fan of acanthus 5 fans permalink

Those undecided superdelegates who consider themselves part of the activist base of the Dempcratic party should remember what she said about them when making their decision.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:58 PM on 04/20/2008
- Amminadab I'm a Fan of Amminadab 11 fans permalink

What did she say about them?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:03 AM on 04/21/2008

She didn't slam superdelegates.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 AM on 04/21/2008

I can understand how some might see a joint ticket as the answer, but I think it's a recipe for disaster. I think it would nullify the message of each. How do you argue that you want to get away from "politics as usual" (Obama), then choose a Clinton as a running mate? How do you spend months hammering the public with talking points about how Obama is unelectable, inexperienced, full of "empty speeches", and not ready to become Commander-in-Chief (Clinton), and then run on the same ticket as the guy?

I'm sure Clinton wouldn't mind a joint ticket, as long as her name was on top. She'd love to ride Obama's coattails into office, much as she hitched her wagon to Bill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:05 AM on 04/21/2008
- Amminadab I'm a Fan of Amminadab 11 fans permalink

The electorate forgets everything once the new campaign is rolled out.

Watch.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:55 AM on 04/21/2008

You guys are missing the point....i­ts about getting a democrat in office. If there is no joint ticket then it could be perilous to the party because neither Obama or Clinton is guaranteed a win in November. They both have baggage. She has more than he does, but baggage is baggage. And it would ensure Obama a win in 2016 and he will still be young enough to run and the idiot GOP will not be able to swiftboat him because America will know enough about him by then. They'll try to exploit Wrightgate and bittergate, but it'll be old news in 8 yrs.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:53 PM on 04/20/2008
- Aywaller I'm a Fan of Aywaller 5 fans permalink
photo

I disagree that a joint ticket would be a good option. One, I think that both candidates have supporters that will not vote for the ticket if the candidate they opposed is at the to, be it Clinton or Obama. Secondly, I don't think that either Clinton's or Obama's negatives, such as they are, will disappear because of a joint ticket and to combine them would just be a dream for the Republicans.

Finally, as an Obama supporter, I would be disappointed if he put her on his ticket for a more basic reason: her behavior during this campaign has, IMO, disqualified her from any office, let alone a hearbeat away from the presidency.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 AM on 04/21/2008

Aywaller you say that "her behavior during this campaign has disqualified her from any office..." That to put it plainly is absurd and silly! You sound like some chauvinist who thinks that ladies shouldn't misbehave. Sort of akin to saying that Obama is "upity" and shouldn't hold an office because he is arrogant. Think what you will of HRC, but I do not know one single 60 yo woman who has as much moxie and energy to not only run for the presidency but to actually keep up with the much younger Obama. The truth is that everything is based on perception. Obama hasn't exactly been the "good boy." I am of a generation that knows that politics is a contact sport and does not really lend itself to some kind of new age crap like many Obamabots would seem to think.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:19 AM on 04/21/2008

Aywaller, I am firmly with you on this one. You stated your reasoning very well:

" One, I think that both candidates have supporters that will not vote for the ticket if the candidate they opposed is at the to, be it Clinton or Obama. Secondly, I don't think that either Clinton's or Obama's negatives, such as they are, will disappear because of a joint ticket and to combine them would just be a dream for the Republican­s."

and like you, I hope Obama is not pressured to put her on his ticket. I can no longer in good conscience vote for this woman, even if she's in the VP slot rather than the top of the ticket. I am even dreading the possibility of a Hill run for governor of NY if she loses.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:15 AM on 04/21/2008

latest polls

Clinton beats McCain
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/Apr20.html

Obama doesn't get to the nedded 270 to beat McCain
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/Apr20.html

Obama loses in OH, FL, VA, MO.
Remember how the Obama supporters kept saying Obama would take VA and MO from the repugs?

Obama doesn't win in any of the red states he won in the primaries.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 PM on 04/20/2008
- kevenseven I'm a Fan of kevenseven 501 fans permalink
photo

Seems to me that that race is half a year off.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:53 PM on 04/20/2008
- jadez I'm a Fan of jadez 3 fans permalink

duh.

think you need to know polls you site are not theelection.

do you think the people dont need to vote?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 04/20/2008

apparently not in FL or MI

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 04/21/2008

Guy, the map says Obama still gets more delegates than McCain at 269. If he doesn't get 270 and still beats McCain, wouldn't he get the presidency? I don't get it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 AM on 04/21/2008
- Graywolf48 I'm a Fan of Graywolf48 77 fans permalink
photo

In 2000 the Supreme Court stopped the vote count in Florida, giving the Presidency to a man who lost the popular vote and would have won the electoral vote if the counting had gone on honestly. As a result we have had 8 monstrous years with an illegitimate President. I think 2004 was also stolen, but even if it wasn't, had the votes been counted in 2000, Gore would have run for reelection in 2004 and Bush would be playing with his baseball action figures and just a bad memory for the Neocons. So, perhaps now the Democrats will have Super delegates who will overturn the will of the Democratic voters and give the party a candidate who will be viewed by many as "illegitim­ate." A sure blue print for disaster. There is something seriously wrong with how this country elects its leadership.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 PM on 04/20/2008
- kevenseven I'm a Fan of kevenseven 501 fans permalink
photo

Dude.

Bush v Gore was about an election.

The Supers have nothing to do with any election.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 04/20/2008
- Graywolf48 I'm a Fan of Graywolf48 77 fans permalink
photo

kevenseven: So, primaries aren't elections? If by having primaries the respective parties do not elect their party's candidate for the general election, then why waste time and money on them? My point is, the Democratic "Super delegates" may choose to overturn the popular vote selection of the nominee, similar to what the Supremes did with Bush v Gore. Obama clearly, at this point has the Democratic popular vote. If the Super Delegates choose Clinton, the popular vote of the party is trashed. There's just been too much vitriol and the Democrats are polarized with little time left to heal the wounds before the general election. But, it's all academic since I doubt the party will heal and rally around either nominee at this point. I think McCain is pretty much a sure thing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:10 AM on 04/21/2008

Perhaps you meant to say "giving the presidency to a man who lost the popular vote and would have LOST the electoral vote if the counting had gone on honestly."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:50 AM on 04/21/2008
- Graywolf48 I'm a Fan of Graywolf48 77 fans permalink
photo

Dianaluisa: You are absolutely correct. Your revision is accepted. I must have been overly tired. Thanks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:02 AM on 04/21/2008

I predict Billary will win bitter PA by between 12-15 points, lose NC by 6-7, and win Indiana by about 5-7. If that happens, it may make SD's apprehensive about the GE and consider either Billary or a 3rd ballot alternative candidate.­...I can't wait for the primaries to be over so we can get on with it. This primary season is really on my nerve.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:29 PM on 04/20/2008

I think you got PA and NC backwards, she'll win PA by 3 to 7, lose NC by 15 to 20, and Indiana will be a virtual tie, win or lose by 1 or 2 points.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 PM on 04/20/2008

I am with you on this one. I think she will win PA, but not by the landslide she needs to justify staying in.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 PM on 04/20/2008

latest Zogby poll has her up by 15% (53 - 38) as of Sunday in PA and she has the momentum with the undecided voters

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/RCP_PDF/NewsmaxPADay5NR%204_21_2008.pdf

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 PM on 04/20/2008
- kevenseven I'm a Fan of kevenseven 501 fans permalink
photo

What sort of simple life form are you that you have only one nerve?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:34 PM on 04/20/2008
- jadez I'm a Fan of jadez 3 fans permalink

heres the real spread for the lier in chief.
she wins pa. by 5
loses nc by 15.
loses Indiana by 7-8

and only a fool would think a 3rd party candidate is even a billion to 1 shot.

sheesssh ....i can tell your not hitting on all nerves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 04/21/2008
- drkazmd65 I'm a Fan of drkazmd65 52 fans permalink
photo

Actually - after reading this article - I have a reasonable amount of respect for those Superdelegates that were cited.

They were originally created as part of the election process as free agents of a sort. It's just that this time they actually have a chance to be relevant to the process and not just rubber-stampers. Let this run out until either Hillary Clinton concedes (fat chance of that happening) or until the Convention this summer.

By not chosing to be committed to one or another candidate at this time they are actually doing exactly what they were designed (as a group) to do.

I will say though that IF Obama goes into the convention with a substantial lead in pledged delegates, and hasn't done anything obvious to self-destruct his candidacy, and at least a marginal lead in overall Democratic primary votes,...

IF this all happens, and the vote is swung to Hillary Clinton as the nominee anyway - I will be voting Green or Socialist for President this time out. Democrat (mostly anyway) in all my State and Local elections, but Clinton doesn't get my vote if she doesn't legitamately 'win' the Primaries from Obama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:26 PM on 04/20/2008
- kevenseven I'm a Fan of kevenseven 501 fans permalink
photo

One important point. This has squat to do with any election. This is a nomination process. The election is the thing that occurs in November.

The distinction may not seem important, but trust me, it is.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:36 PM on 04/20/2008
- drkazmd65 I'm a Fan of drkazmd65 52 fans permalink
photo

That's a good point kevenseven - at least to a point.

It does have to do with the November elections though. And if the process to get the final Democratic candidate winnowed out is not viewed as at least mostly 'democratic' by a subset of the potential Democrat voters (myself included), then 'we' will feel very disenfranchised.

At least in that sense the distinction isn't quite as important.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:55 AM on 04/21/2008

Aye, it seems silly to me to have people participate at all, with this "safeguard" in place.

I guess I assumed that it was there as some kind of emergency measure, in case the person with the most pledged delegates -really- self destructed, ala caught in bed w/ a catholic preist or something: - not- to overturn a choice of the people for no particular reason.

I just find it heinous that the 2nd place person is allowed to -actively- destroy the first place person, in order to justify overturning the people's choice.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 04/20/2008
- Amminadab I'm a Fan of Amminadab 11 fans permalink

Nobody is destroying anybody.

You are being hysterical.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:53 PM on 04/20/2008

It is pretty simple. The candidate with the most delegates wins the nomination.

Obama will go to the convention with the most pledged delegates. With the proportional allocation scheme, his lead of 163 pledged delegates is, for all practical purposes, insurmountable given the primaries that remain.

The only way for Clinton to win is for the Super Delegates to override the outcome of the primaries and caucuses. Of course the Super Delegate can do this. The question is, why would they and how would they justify it to the voters?

Take a look at the Super Delegates that have already announced their intentions.

• Among Super Delegates that are Governors, Senators and Representatives, Obama has the lead; Obama 104, Clinton 99. These Super Delegates are the ones that are directly accountable to their voters. Their preference shouldn’t be too surprising given that Obama has won the most pledged delegates, the popular vote and the most states.
• The only place where Clinton leads is with Super Delegates that are party insiders; Obama 126, Clinton 156.

A coup by Clinton using party insiders would result in enormous defections among Democratic voters. Doing this would be the ultimate “elitist” move. Many Democratic voters would simply not vote, and McCain and a raft of new Republican representatives would be swept into office.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:24 PM on 04/20/2008
- kevenseven I'm a Fan of kevenseven 501 fans permalink
photo

If Obama was ahead by 10 votes. Or 25. The supers could get away with overturning such a lead.

But Obama is going to have more than 150 more pledged come the end of this, minimum. No chance that they reverse that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 PM on 04/20/2008
- Myshkin57 I'm a Fan of Myshkin57 16 fans permalink

I don't know. Did you see the 21-year-old superdelegate who was on TV a month or so ago? He had never voted before, not even in the 2006 elections and yet he stated that he deserved to have more say than regular voters because he cares more. If there are any significant number of superdelegates like this yutz then we may see some supreme stupidity.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 04/20/2008

thePoliticalBreeze: You said, "It is pretty simple." No, it is NOT simple. If it were, the people on this Blog would not be yelling and screaming about rules they don't even understand.

They would not think that our election process was subject to "mob rule". They would not think that what happened in Palestine, where Hamas, a terrorist group took over the government would be good for the United States because that was a direct result of "the will of the voters".

The superdelegates were formed as a check on this very thing so let them perform their duties with as little intimidation, bribery, and threats from the peanut gallery as possible.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:00 AM on 04/21/2008

You do realize that supers can change their minds at any given time? Hypothetically, what if half of Obama's supers decide to pull their support; what happens then? Many of them would rather die than look like they backed a loser. My guess is that is why they are being so quiet. Some jumped the gun and it may come back to bite them in the butt.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:58 AM on 04/21/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

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

Connect