New Petition Backs Up Pelosi On Superdelegates

Today, OpenLeft.com and MoveOn.org are co-sponsoring a new petition to Nancy Pelosi, supporting her position on superdelegates and telling her that we'll back her up when she is threatened.

Matt Stoller noted yesterday a letter that 20 major donors and raisers to Hillary and other Democratic Party causes sent to Pelosi, upbraiding her for saying that voters ought to actually determine the election. Now, I don't think there is anything wrong with donors stating their opinion about this issue, and I don't blame them for doing it. I'm sure that the Clinton campaign asked them to send the letter, and they are loyal partisans for Hillary, so they did what they were asked to do.

But I also think that the millions of us who are smaller donors to this party, who give through MoveOn.org and blogs and ActBlue, should have an equal voice on the important issues with the big dog donors, and we believe that the candidate who wins this election ought to be given the nomination.

If the donors and raisers who signed this letter plan to take their money away from the DCCC, that would be a terrible thing, and if that's what they are implying with this letter, shame on them and on the Clinton campaign for encouraging that kind of threat. But, if they do take their money away, I believe those of us signing this petition can more than make up the difference through our collective efforts. More importantly, it will be up to us to make sure that the actions of a few do not change the course that Speaker Pelosi and our House members have been fighting for.

Please sign the petition here. Also, here is the text to MoveOn.org's email.

Cross-Posted at OpenLeft.com.

Comments

[WAdem]

BFD, Mike. If we short circuit the nomination process, we're gone. Get it?

[LivingStardust]

And that is the truth of the matter.

[Lemeritus]

Define "short circuit the nomination process", WAdem? Btw, not meant as a challenge, just looking for your thoughts.

[asere]

We Need Public Financing for all Federal Elected Positions.
It's the only way to maintain a semblance of a popular Democracy.
What we have now is Neo-Fascism, American Style.

[WAdem]

Obama has already changed his position on Public Financing, so forget it!

[LeftRight]

No, he hasn't changed his position. He said a long time ago that he would NOT take federal funds in the primary season. He also said that he WOULD take funds in the General, IF his opponent also did. Since McBush has not said whether he will be taking federal funds in the General election, neither has Obama.

And let's be honest here, having an optional federal funds deal without REQUIRING tv and radio to run cheaper ads for the candidates is STUPID! It's also not workable if one candidate takes the funds and the other doesn't, since WHY would you place a handicap on yourself while your opponent runs free?

[LeftRight]

Not only that, we need to remove "personhood" from corporations! Since they are the ones doing LARGE amounts of not only financing campaigns, but "helping" Senators and Representa­tives.....­..

[AnninCA]

He's outspent her 4 to 1 in states and still lost.

The money spent on this primary is positively obscene.

People could have solved their credit card debt with what he's spent to win this.

It's disgusting.

[LeftRight]

You're right, it is disgusting how much money you have to spend to get elected, that's why we need mandatory public financing!

As regards the fact that Obama's outspent Hillary, and is still losing:

First, he's not losing.

Second, yeah, of course he's outspent her. He HAD to, because she's the former first lady with 150% name recognition, and everybody thinks that they already know her! That's why some of her supporters are there, because they haven't LOOKED! And the fact that he's gotten as close as he has in some of those races is DAMN impressive, because if he wasn't who he was, and didn't spend as much as he did, he'd have lost by 40% or more!!

[greejambri]

Hillary would have spent just as much or MORE than Obama if she had it to spend. If how she runs her campaign is how she would run the country, she would be the worst financial manager imaginable. Hillary had a HUGE advantage going into this campaign on name recognition alone. That Obama is ahead at this stage, and will most likely be the nominee, is nothing short of miraculous. He only had the money to spend because of immense grassroots support from small donors, and his sound fiscal management.

[Titonwan]

Yeah and all the money lost to American workers (courtesy of Clinton's NAFTA) could buy us all a spiffy lead paint covered toy :) :| :(

[nazgul]

"He's outspent her 4 to 1 in states and still lost."

The AMAZING thing is not how much he has spent but how much people have given him, and the fact that he has beaten the most famous active politican in America!!!

That tells you how damaged Hillary's brand is and why her only hope is destroying Obama.

[Fabienne]

Lost what?

[GemStone1972]

The Democratic party will lose a lot more then 24 mill from the big donors if they mess with this race! I know there will be a much larger percent then 28% of Hillary Clinton supporters who even now are not giving a penny to the DNC until those Florida & Michigan delegates are seated. They end this campaign early and they will have a mass exit by over half of there party! We just might become a 3 party nation over this! It is that serious! Hillary Clinton was to be this election year party nominee and everyone knew it. If this is not run in a way in which every single Democrat who wants a voice & vote and a delegate at the convention to choose this years nominee you will see most Florida and Michigan and Hillary supporters not be there with either money or votes! How many Obama supporters are only Obama supporters and not other Democratic interest supporters? How many Hillary Clinton supporters also support all other Democratic Party interest? Her supporter show up at the voting booth and vote straight Democratic tickets year in and year out. Can you say that about Obama's supporters? The Democratic Party also need Mayors, State leaders, US Senate, US House of Representatives not just the White House. Hey DNC are you sure you can afford the cost of a Obama nomination?

[em0199]

So what do you call Hillary and her supporters trying to over throw the vote of the people with Superdelegates. Hate to say it but that is the worst kind of disenfranchisement I have seen.

[greejambri]

So what you are saying only applies to Clinton supporters? As an Obama supporter, I feel exactly the same way you do, only in reverse. It is obvious that whomever is the nominee, the party will need to do a lot of healing to bring all the base back to the flock for the November election. That's why deciding this thing sooner rather than later is so important. Time to heal and reconcile is crucially important. As far as your assertion that Clinton supporters would split off half of the Democratic voters to form a third party, that's a bit of hyperbole. Hillary as the leader of a third party???? Now that would be fun to watch! The ultimate Democratic machine insider gets pissed and takes her ball away to play somewhere else? Ha ha ha ha ha! I'm sure Nader would be just DYING to run as her VP on a third party ticket!!! That's TOO funny!

[creativeone]

GemStone1972,

Do you remember when Bill Clinton was president he lost THE HOUSE & SENATE!
Leaving it Republican overwelmingly, Bill and the Co President Hillary did not help
win any Democratic seats. Obama is turning red states blue,and as we speak he
has helped get new democratic seat in the House & Senate. He's not even the
President yet.

[GreatFutureForAll]

If House Speaker Nancy Pelosi fails to realize that Hillary Clinton was primarily responsible for bringing peace to Northern Ireland AND for her heroic trip to Bosnia (where she and daughter Chelsea ducked sniper bullets before being whisked away into a top-secret armored vehicle), then something is wrong.

The media has it wrong! - Former Senator George Mitchell, who has been largely heralded for brokering peace between Irish Protestants and Catholics, in truth was nothing but a bit player.

Every move Mitchell made came from the direction and expert guidance of "THE ONE." - Full credit must be given to Hillary for directing Mitchell and establishing peace in Ireland.

Sinn Fein, itself, will release evidence that Hillary saved lives as a hostage negotiator during her stay in Belfast.

For this reason ALONE, Speaker Pelosi had better heed the advice of the Clinton elite. Nancy will never match the incredible courage of the fearless Hillary; someone that listened to bullets whiz by her and daughter Chelsea during a harrowing trip to Bosnia.

Nancy may be from working-class Baltimore. But Hillary has seen combat.

[rthom]

What do the Obama people want? How about the "will of the people" while disenfranchising voters in Florida, Michigan and the caucus states? How about losing big time to the GOP with a weak, baggage toting (Rezko, Wright, etc.), inexperienced, vulnerable candidate? How about starting over with all those who now suffer "buyers's remorse"?

[Fabienne]

Would that be the people of Ohio who bought Clinton's lies about NAFTA?

[LeftRight]

Really, Obama disenfranchised the voters of FL and MI? Huh! I guess that my memory's not what it used to be, because the way that I remember it the legislatures of both states broke the party's rules, and the DEMOCRATIC PARTY punished the states by removing their delegates.­... Silly me!

[AnninCA]

Silly you is right! There are other steps. The voters took those steps.

Obama blocked compromise.

Way smart of him, right?

Let's just hand Florida over to the Republicans.

After all, you Obama folks will overcome 30% attrition with your chanting "YES WE CAN!"

Oh wait......­.the Fall isn't a caucus?

Oh well......­..

Then we'll just learn to say, President McCain.

After all, we wouldn't want the Obamamaniacs to get mad.

[Fabienne]

How does Obama disenfranchise the "will of the people" in the caucus states? Any Democrat can come out to caucus if he or she wants to. Who suffers buyer's remorse? The Ohio voters to whom Clinton lied about NAFTA? The California voters, a state in which, according to the last poll, Obama beats McCain by a much wider margin than Clinton?

[colleen2]

Many thanks to move-on for this effort.
In WA state Obama won by a huge margin, 68-32 and yet the majority of committed super delegates are pledged to Clinton. I was heartened to see Maria Cantwell standing behind Speaker Pelosi today at the press conference as she is one of Mrs Clinton's delegates.

[LeftRight]

Good for Maria! I got to vote for her in my first election, back before I moved to IL!!!

[Manx]

"I don't blame them for doing it."

While I appreciate your post, I think you've taken a rather Christian attitude toward the motives of the donors. Of course they want Hillary to win so that they will benefit from the influence they've paid for should she become president. I think the letter was an implicit threat - and unethical.

[TurnThePageGA]

But not out of character for the Clinton Campaign.

[rinpochet]

The interesting thing is that actually threatened the super delegates!!! Who do they think makes up the this organization? Members of Congress .. SUPER DELEGATES!! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. I'm sure they'll take kindly to being threatened by Clinton.

Watch for super delegates to come out for Obama over the next few days.

[Rule Of Law]

The wealthy elites, represented by these donors with their visions of a corporate oligarchy fronted by Hillary, are seeking to silence the voices of the voters who followed the rules, and voted in sanctioned races. These Masters of the Universe want to do an end-around on the system and broker some back room deal for their candidate. They want to provide the winning margin by buying off the super-delegates, even though the majority of voters may have chosen another Presidential hopeful with their legitimate votes.

If Hillary allows this to happen, expect the Convention in Denver to be challenged.

[Fairfloss]

With the far left wing behind her, Nancy Pelosi is obviously "backing" Barack Obama,....­..or is she, even more obviously, looking out for her own interest? Everything, the Speaking of the House does these days appear to be self-serving.

[LeftRight]

Far left wing..... Huh. Who, exactly is the far left wing? Because I'll be honest with you, since the rethuglicants have been in power they've moved the WHOLE DAMN POLITICAL DEBATE to the right, which means that you are talking about centrist Americans views held by democrats. That's not far left wing, it just looks that way compared to the extreme right wing views held by bushco(tm)

[Lemeritus]

I'm throwing my cape over the puddle so that you may cross, LeftRight! You are so correct! The dialogue has been moving right for decades. It's long been my opinion that we don't need a third party in America, we need a second one.

[Computer Geek]

I've signed the petition and am including my comment that I posted when signing the petition:

$24 million over 10 years? That's chump change. Obama has received $100 million from those of us considered the 'unwashed masses' in 1 year. Tell 'em to take a hike.

[grendl]

Hmmmm my first post seems to have been lost.

But I'll post in again in the name of freedom of speech, and my god given right for redundancy.

Superdelegates are American citizens too, who shouldn't be told how to vote. And that's precisely the problem with the superdelegate system. If they didn't have that all so powerful votes, worth five times my vote, we wouldn't be in this mess. Ted Kennedy could vote for whomever he damned well pleasedm as would be his right. Just because they're party elite, doesn't mean they don't deserve a voice in a presidential election.

Just not as loud a voice, as the superdelegate vote affords them. Pelosi, Hillary and Barack have been strangely silent in their failure to condemn the system to which they are a part. Not strange, as they need those votes in Denver I suppose, but why talk about change, and fair play in this country while partaking in such undemocratic practices?

This party is walking around like a pregnant woman in denial. Time to call in an exorcist, and abort the demon spawn that is the superdelegate.

Thats my petition.

[krifos]

Yes, they shouldn't be told how to vote, but I don't think they will want to show their faces if they install a president that wasn't the peoples choice.

[LeftRight]

"...Ted Kennedy could vote for whomever he damned well pleasedm as would be his right...."

Actually, he already did. In the MA election. Come August he'll get to vote again, only it'll be a more important vote, since it's weighted so much more than regular votes.....­.

[Titonwan]

What Madame Speaker of the House is doing is delegating her power to see a fair and just outcome.
(is anybody going to tell him that pregnant girl in denial is his sister?)

[inthenitemare]

Thanks, I signed the petition.

[MrDeadeye2U]

In retaliation to to Hillary Clinton and her supporters attempts to extort the most powerful elected female official in the nation, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee I have just donated $100 to the DCCC.

https://dccc.org/page/contribute.

I ask everyone to join me in Denouncing and Rejecting these tactics by making your own contribution and thereby telling these rich fat cats to hit the road and they are no longer welcome in this party. WE don't want their money or their influence. They seem better suited to the GOP anyway.

[rinpochet]

I will use some of my "Obama money" and give it to the DCCC also. They need our support now.

[SamanthaJaneSalem]

When Bill Clinton is one of the superdelegates that tells you something is wrong here. Not that he shouldn't be a superdelegate but in this year of all years how is he supposed to exercise "independent judgment" about who the best nominee is?

And, come on, Clinton people: stop treating Obama like he is some dangerous threat to the future of the party (as well as country). The superdelegates must stop him! Stop who? The candidate who raises millions of dollars, has young voters excited, wants to end the Iraq war, restore habeas corpus, shut down Guantanamo, provide tax relief to seniors making under $50 thousand per year? Such crazy talk!

The tone of the Clinton campaign has encouraged a kind of disrespect among her supporters and the media. They act like Obama was elected to the Senate last week-- two days after graduating from high school.

And you're going to overule the votes for this candidate because of his *church*? Do they sacrifice virgins every other Thursday?

Finally, somebody tell Time magazine that Al Gore (awesome as he is) can't become the nominee with *zero* delegates.

[UrsaMajority]

The problem with the letter is its lapse of judgment by the Clinton supporters' -- as it was so characterized by every commentator to weigh in during Thursday's cable news shows -- attempt o extort the Speaker's silence by threatening to withhold Congressional campaign contributions. Their threats put the Dems in the position of looking beholden to big checkbook contributors if she caved, which would undermine Dems' ability to exploit that issue against McCain come Fall.

And she's is not forbidding and can not forbid the delegates from voting how they choose. As a party leader, she rightfully perceives that "If the votes of the superdelegates overturn what's happened in the elections, it would be harmful to the Democratic Party." The Clintonites are acting like she handcuffed superdelegates; in fact, they're trying to muzzle her.