Congressional Supers Deciding

Politico says that Obama has an edge on Congressional Supers.  Further supporting the notion that there are no undecided Superdelegates, only undeclared ones.

"While more than 80 Democrats in the House and Senate have yet to state their preferences in the race for the Democratic nomination, sources said Tuesday that most of them have already made up their minds and have told the campaigns where they stand."

UPDATE: Confirmed with another Capitol Hill source that while some members of Congress have held their own opinions for some time, many of these preferences are just now being relayed to the presidential campaigns.

Comments

[Kasturba]

Dear Mr. Super,

According to that article they have already told the campaigns about their position. So does one of the two parties know that the the math is impossible for them? And if so, why are they continuing?

Do the supers perceive this as an attempt to kneecap the other person?

[heather]

If this is true, then what is she doing?? What is her strategy?

[Mr Super]

Well let's not get too carried away. An "edge" doesn't necessarily mean a majority of all uncommitteds now does it?

The only numbers reported in the article are the ones which are already publicly known. So, for all we know the "edge" could be a margin of one more delegate gained, with still dozens left to claim.

[Joe]

Hmm, is this a new move? A number of supers seem to have endorsed recently (although that's been happening for a long time).

Is there any new sense of urgency over getting things done sooner after the recent news?

[walker]

MrSuper-
Dean saying last week that "either of the candidates will know when to drop out" was worrying for me as an Obama supporter. Is the general climate in the DNC that either one of these candidates will win? It's fairly obviously that Hilary is not going to catch up in the popular vote or in the pledged delegate counts; even giving her 5-10% gains in the current polls of all the remaining states will not help. Given that it appears mathematically impossible for her to surpass Obama in either benchmark, why are all of the Supers still insistent upon holding off? What is the opinion of Obama that makes a decision so impossible? Is it simply that Bill Clinton still holds enough sway to keep a decision from being made?

[Another Mike]

Walker,

How do you think it would look to Clinton supporters if she were basically forced out of the race, while she's on a major win streak and before all the states have voted? As has been said elsewhere about whether there will be lingering bitterness between different camps, it's not how long the race goes that matters, it's how it ends that matters.

[Nate]

Walker,

Obama supporters seem to have an endless capacity for anxiety. Read over the past posts--Mr. Super has declared several times that whoever gets closest to 2025 will most likely be the nominee. That's the most we can get at this point, but the news today is really good for us Obamafans. Hang in there. It'll all be over soon, and we have a Republican to take down.

[bcSparky]

Nate -

Agree with you wholeheartedly; although it is very disconcerting to see HRC continue to pound in her advertising. Our party is turning people off - yes, we will be able to get most back; but we need the fringe to ensure November success.

[Joe]

Yeah, well, we Obama supporters have had a bit too much cause to worry. But hopefully this break with Wright will get it out of the system so that it's old news by the time we get to the actual election. Call me crazy, but I'd really like to see an election where we decided things on the issues, rather than who has crazier relatives...

Speaking of which, if it weren't for the circus, I think Obama would see some real gains from attacking the other two over the gas tax. Anyone who has taken ECON 101 knows it won't help; it's just a feel good measure (that we pay for later) and I think it's a good thing to hit John "I don't understand the economy" McCain with.

At least that's a real issue.

[patagonia]

Is the gas tax holiday issue resonating at all with super-delegates? Do they see this as an inconsequential matter? Or are they disheartened to see Hillary co-opt a pandering move from McCain? Are they worried that Obama, by not agreeing to the holiday, will lose more support with "downscale" voters.

(I hate that euphemism, btw.)

[Mr Super]

No traction. IMO.

[walker]

It's been reiterated thousands of times but the question gets even more relevant the more this race drags on. Simply put: almost every election involves a candidate being 'forced out' to make way for another. This happened both times with Clinton; of course it is correct that the Hilary supporters are much larger a contingent and are much more vocal than those of the past, but it's mathematically impossible at this point for Clinton to win; how much longer can/should this drag on, and what are the motives behind it? Every election involves a certain level of interference from those 'on high'; this one should be no exception especially since the electorate will not be able to decide any 'clear' winner (as Hillary supporters like to point out).

[Mark]

Mr. Super,

If I may, was not Senator Obama *expected* from the outset (assuming he survived the once-pervasive, now-debunked "Clinton inevitability" juggernaut) to perform less than spectacularly at the end of the Democratic primary process, as the poorer, less-educated, overall more economically downtrodden states (OH, PA, IN, KY, WV) came into play? Do the Superdelegates keep that in mind as they watch these late primaries unfold?

Also, despite Senator Obama's being too much a gentleman and too interested in long-term Democratic Party unity to do so, are the Superdelegates keeping in mind the murderous anti-Clinton GOP blitzkrieg that would ensue were she to become the nominee, with the right going after Clinton *savagely* over her and her husband's myriad scandals from the nineties, her Bosnia sniper-fire "misspeak" from earlier this year, and other potential Clinton scandals currently bubbling just below the surface (the Peter Paul trial, Librarygate, Pardongate, their incomplete 2007 tax returns, et al)?

And finally, how do the SuperDs feel about Mrs. Clinton's increasing coziness with the various media appendages of the "vast right-wing conspiracy," of which she complained so frequently and so bitterly until just recently?

Thank you. This is a fantastic forum, by the way!

[MM]

Obama supporters,

It's pretty obvious based on campaign behavior, superdelegate statements, delegate math, and inferences from Mr. Super's blog that Obama will be the nominee. It's just a matter of ending it at the right time because, as stated numerous times, how it ends is much more important than when it ends. Neither candidate can win without votes from the other's supporters.

[Tony]

Another Mike asks "How do you think it would look to Clinton supporters if she were basically forced out of the race, while she's on a major win streak and before all the states have voted?"

What's the major win streak? Obama won 11 states in a row. Since then, I beliebve it's been:
Ohio - Clinton
Rhode Island - Clinton
Texas - Obama
Vermont - Obama
Wyoming - Obama
Mississippi - Obama
Pennsylvania - Clinton

Looking at CNN's numbers, Obama was 70 delegates ahead on Feb 19. Today, his margin is 137 delegates.

As to why she should quit before all the states have voted, it's because she can't win.

The add-on superdelegates have been going largely Obama. If the remaining add-ons split between the two and Obama does anything resonable in the primaries that are left, Clinton will need 90% of the remaining SDs to go her way.

[Joe]

It figures that it would turn ugly at the end. Hillary probably isn't happy with the GOP calling her an "ally" in recent press.

Mr. Super, do you think there's much chance this will end early if Ms. Clinton loses the next couple of contests? I've heard a few of her supporters calling the states "must win" and it seems like some of the SDs are starting to move up the timetables of making their preferences known.

[Joe]

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/30/america/NA-POL-US-Huckabee-Obama-Pastor.php

Ooh, now here's an interesting story. Any reaction to this, Mr. Super? Or is that like asking you about that asking you to tiptoe through a minefield? :)

[Tony]

The issue isn't when Hillary leaves, the issue is how Obama can get those supporters. Even though I am a HRC supporter and believe that she is the more electable candidate, I've also resigned myself to the fact that, unless Obama really stumbles (he's come close, but not yet), this is his nomination, and it'll take a major faux pas (although once again, he's come close a couple times) for me to even ponder not voting Democrat (both sides supporters need to chill on that, any Democrat is better than McCain. Even if he does make a major faux pas, at worst, I just wouldn't vote, but I'd put that at a minimal chance).

I don't think when Hillary leaves is the big issue, it's how can Obama actually connect with blue collar workers that, on the whole, have not been going to him. I know, Obama supporters on the blogosphere are arguing that he doesn't have the white working class vote, but he does have the blue collar vote. Huh? Are we really going to argue that the white working class isn't part of the blue collar?

Granted, he's faced two candidates, in Edwards and HRC, that have been two of our better economic sellers in recent history, both of whom recognize the necessity of short term moves coupled with long term strategies. The easiest way for Obama to do this is to find a candidate for VP that can sell the message. At this point in time, I don't believe Edwards would consider the VP slot, and I am not one of those individuals that thinks a superticket is a good idea, that a superticket is feasible, and that a superticket will occur (from either side).

This far along in the process, the rhetoric is where it's at, and I think the chances of Obama dramatically improving his "sell ability" is minimal. Is it enough to topple McCain? That's debatable, probably, but debatable. But if he can get a good VP, a populist VP, that can hammer home the economic message, he'll alleviate a lot of the burden. At this point in time, the best candidate does seem like Jim Webb, although I don't know if he'd consider it. Perhaps, but then again, I also wonder if Webb is the VP type. I don't think a candidate like Kaine is the right choice. Easley coming out for HRC removes one possibility that was mildly intriguing. Perhaps a bridge with Evan Bayh would be a thought. Personally, I'd love it if it was Mark Warner, but I doubt that happens as that would mess up the VA Senate dynamics. To be honest, it does seem like the VP options that make the most sense for Obama are in the HRC camp, so if he's willing, and if he can find someone willing, then perhaps that's where the healing process begins if Obama becomes the nominee.

I will say one thing - I do believe that Bill Richardson is not the right fit to run with Obama. I don't believe Richardson can, in the shape of a few months, change the bureacratic perspective that most have of him, and Richardson isn't exactly the best speaker. I think Richardson would do fine in another post, if Obama wants to give him SecState, okay. But VP? I don't think that's the right move. And post-State of the Union Counter (along with other things), I can't help but think that Kathleen Sebelius isn't the right option either. Not sure how I feel about Napolitano. Deval Patrick is too similar. Definitely not McCaskill, nothing against her, just don't think she's right.

Freudenthal is a thought. Maybe Schweitzer. I'd actually be curious about Rahm Emanuel, but I doubt that happens. Mildly curious about a Ben Chandler possibility.

[G Davis]

All the Obama fans might do well to take a different look at this scenario at this moment in time.

We are RIGHT NOW in the general election. Obama took over the frontrunner slot a while ago and has been facing the media ADHD heat that all frontrunners take. The Clintons have been relegated already to second seat, not only in the math but in the media. McCain has almost become an afterthought and is relegated even further behind both Dems.

There simply is no major problem with Obama...Reverend Wright, et al, are the only things the dark ops folks can find on him and he's being tested heartily on it now. If they had anything else, they'd have thrown it but they don't.

How Obama takes command of fighting the other two candidates AND the media at the same time will tell the tale of his electability. It's a tough row to hoe, especially breaking through the shiny metal object ADHD of the media, but he has to do it whether it's now or later.

Take a deep breath, keep repeating to yourselves and anyone else who will listen that we can't fix our problems if we insist on tearing each other to shreds, have some patience and above all vote.

This too shall pass. They have nothing else, and the next shiny metal object will come along with time to distract the media off this ridiculous drumbeat they're on.

If any of us thought breaking the traditions of politics was going to be easy, we are incredibly naive. It's going to be hard, and will require immense amounts of work.

Obama is a great candidate and would be a fine president. If you believe that, get out and work your heart out for it...phone bank, blog, whatever you can do. It;s our responsibility if we really want change.

[AntonioMaceo]

"The only numbers reported in the article are the ones which are already publicly known. So, for all we know the "edge" could be a margin of one more delegate gained, with still dozens left to claim."

But Obama doesn't need a majority of the remaining super delegates due to his lead in the pledged delegates. Actually, I think the figure he needs is closer to 20%. Mr.Super posted a website with a careful estimate at one point.

[suekzoo]

Joe,

The article you linked about Huckabee's take on Obama and Rev. Wright is kind of interesting. If Huckabee is correct, I wonder if it could get Obama some sympathy or "we'll show him (meaning Wright)" votes. Hmmmmm....

[Mr Super]

AntonioMaceo - what you say is true, but keep in mind that the article doesn't discuss all Supers, just Congressional Supers. So, there are still a lot of other Supers left to collect. Best web sites to go for delegate counts are Democratic Convention Watch and Politico.com/superdelegates

[Nate]

I find it very odd that Obama hasn't been able to "connect" (whatever that means) with working-class voters. He is a man who passed up a six-figure salary to work with employees laid off at the U.S. Steel factory in Gary, Indiana. He has payed his own way through college, along with his wife, and has a robust proposal to roll-back the Bush Tax cuts and pass them onto the people who need them most.

I think this is a stark contrast with McCain, but I also think his VP will be an important "bridge" to this demographic. Also, I think a Clinton supporter may be the best choice to help consolidate the party.

At this point, I think there is relatively no chance that the joint ticket will happen, as has been stated about five times by Nancy Pelosi and both candidates. Thinking it will occur is just wishful, and frankly naive.

[Joe]

There have been some very good points made about the public and 'shiny objects' ... and it's not like there isn't any other salacious news out there right now (polygamous sect, the guy who kept his daughter locked up for X years, etc.).

But one danger is that emotion can linger even when knowledge evaporates. I believe I mentioned being an ex-Republican who has come to hate what that party has done, so it should be no surprise that I started out hating Hillary Clinton.

Why? I _don't_KNOW_ why. And it bugs me.

I honestly do not remember, and yes, I'm discounting that feeling for that very reason (not to mention the fact that the Republicans _cannot_ be allowed to hold onto power after what they've done).

But that doesn't change the feeling. Even if I honestly don't know why I felt that way, the feeling is real. My best guess is that I simply don't remember Clinton-era scandals, but old feelings linger. But if I don't remember the reasons I felt that way, I can't very well change my mind about them, either.

So yeah, people will forget things once it all blows over. But we should pay attention and try to change the tone, or the feelings won't vanish even if people forget why they felt that way in the first place.

If there's an Obama v. McCain general election, you just KNOW the muckraker types are going to try and cast it as "honorable, patriot reformer" vs. "shady, liberal terrorist" no matter how little grounding any of those adjectives have in reality.

[Kasturba]

Dear Joe,

The difference is that some adjectives don't have a basis in reality, and some do.

When they are manufactured adjectives, they won't get traction with many people. Specifically in this election there are many independents and Republicans like you who are sick of their party. It is unlikely we will fall for the name calling.

There are Republicans who will NEVER vote Democratic no matter what (and they will definitely fall for the name calling).

I believe all the hand wringing about electability in Nov. because of Wright etc. is not important. The game will be different by then as will be the war, the economy, etc.

To win an election you don't have to win every vote. It will be the job of the Democratic party to make sure that Democrats line up behind their candidate. It is the job of the candidate to attract Indys and cross-over votes (because the party will not be able to rally those voters). The person who can get those Indys and cross-overs will win the election, be it Obama/McCain or Clinton.

[Bilbo]

Mr Super, do you have your endorsement announcement all written out yet? I enjoy reading them and seeing the reasons behind the supers choice. Can you give us a highlight without giving anything away?

Best,
Bill

[Tony in MI]

AntonioMaceo writes "Obama doesn't need a majority of the remaining super delegates due to his lead in the pledged delegates. Actually, I think the figure he needs is closer to 20%."

That's correct.

I've been keeping a spreadsheet with numbers from CNN, DemConWatch, and others. I've made some assumptions, such as PA going 84-74 (the last two are still up), Jimmy Carter being a member of the Pelosi club. Here's what I have:

Delegates - Current + Projected Primary + Projected Add-ons + Pelosi Club
Obama 1735 + 208 + 30 + 7 = 1980 (Needs 44 more to win)
Clinton 1596 + 200 + 30 + -1 = 1825 (Needs 199 more to win)
Edwards 19 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 19

After the primaries and add-ons, there are 222 uncommitted delegates left.
Obama needs 44 of them, 19.82%
Clinton needs 199, 89.64% of the remaining SDs.

That's not going to happen. On Feb 10, she had a lead of 97 SDs. Today, the lead is 20. Over the past 2 1/2 months, she's getting about 30% of the endorsements.

(Note: there are two Tonys posting here. To avoid confusion, I added the "in MI")

[Joe]

Kasturba: You're absolutely right about who falls for the name calling and who doesn't, I just think it's important to change the mood.

And I do think that Obama can do that. After the Rev. Wright flap first hit, that speech did wonders. Yes, it unsealed the hatred of the hateful members of the party I reject, but it also made Obama look marvelously presidential and changed the tone of things. Many people went from "oh crap! he is toast!" to "wow!" when they watched it.

I just hope he can do something like that again. I think the gas tax holiday helped, but it barely got noticed under all the other news.

Alas, there are plenty out there who don't frequent reality-based news outlets, though, and surprising numbers of them seem to vote. But I think that's part of the reason: they don't pay attention to the news. God knows, the fact that I read and follow so much of the news certainly contributed heavily to my disgust with my former party.

I'd hate to think there was any chance they'd get away with having military analysts infiltrating news sources to persuade us to allow an unnecessary war, not to mention all the unconstitutional, illegal and un-American things they've done in the mean time. Because, you know, it's not like we have time to search for Osama ...

*sigh*

Don't mind me. I'm just feeling a little bitter.