Three Thoughts

Surrogate remarks and speaking gaffes:
I posted thoughts on this blog on 4/3 and again on 4/14 stating that I didn't think that surrogate comments or speaking gaffes were going to sway me for or against any candidate.  The New York Times reports a  mini-poll of Supers who affirm this position, saying that impressions of speaking gaffes and comments made by surrogates don't really weigh all that heavy in the decision making process.  Further supporting this case is an article in the LA Times that notes the difference between who candidates know, and who actually helps shape their views.

On the perils of going negative in Democratic nominating contests:
Right as Douglas Schoen was opining that Senator Clinton needs A New Strategy of going negative in order to win, an LA Times story reveals a poll displaying the opposite.  And today a New York Times story says:

"Yet despite giving it her best shot in what might have been their final debate, interviews on Thursday with a cross-section of these superdelegates — members of Congress, elected officials and party leaders — showed that none had been persuaded much by her attacks..."

And finally...

On public endorsements from Superdelegates...
Chairman Dean says that in addition to wrapping this thing up by June, he would also like Supers to start making preferences known earlier than that.  This is no doubt fueled by the notion that the DNC is probably seeing it's general election fundraising abilities slowed down as donors continue to donate money towards continued primary contests.  I'm a big fan of Gov. Dean and I feel his pain.

But should undeclared Supers endorse when there is no resolution to the Florida and Michigan scenario?  Because as much as I stand by my comments in that I don't want to see the nomination tipped one way or another by Supers, I would much prefer that Supers decide this thing than allowing delegates from unsanctioned Florida and Michigan elections to determine the nominee.  That would be the ultimate injustice because it would be rewarding to rouge states, no matter who the nominee shall be.  And Michigan will meet this weekend to select its delegates.

Perhaps the silver lining is that Supers can endorse now so that Florida and Michigan delegates can be seated, allowing them to participate but not necessarily allowing them to determine the nominee.

Now that's a reason for any Super to publicly declare sooner rather than later...

Comments

[CrankyKate]

I've been wanting to write for awhile to thank you for doing what you're doing. You've let some sunshine into what had been a confusing process, but more than that, you've helped me believe again that our party leaders and elected officials are intelligent, rational, contemplative, and fair people. As much as I would love to see you line up behind my candidate, I think what you're doing is more important. You truly are Super!!!

[Susan]

I second the poster above...you are super for what you are doing!
I think there is a silver lining in all of this as well ...just like you stated in bold print...I agree with your statement totally...
Obama vs McCain = Obama as US president

[Sam]

"But should undeclared Supers endorse when there is no resolution to the Florida and Michigan scenario?"

Why should Florida and Michigan be considered to be unresolved? They broke DNC rules in their primaries, and they were penalized for doing so. They attempted to have a legal contest recently, but failed to do so. And the credentials committee simply won't allow Florida and Michigan to be seated in a way that impacts the winner of the nomination.

[zorro]

Mr. Super,

You've got me confused. What "resolution to the Florida and Michigan scenario" is necessary? Didn't the Rules Committee already vote not to seat the delegates from those states? Please explain...

[Mr Super]

The committee made a ruling, but there are still appeals being made by the states to seat their delegates in some way or form.

[eagleye]

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=1090#comment-20372

Mr. Super,

Check out this post from Al Giordano about the Rush Limbaugh effect in Pennsylvania. The Republicans are making it clear that they would much rather face Hillary in the general election.

They did the same thing in Ohio and Texas, and the exit polls show that she picked up 4-8 points as a result of GOP voters registering as Democrats simply for the purpose of thwarting Obama. They view him as the tougher candidate to beat in November. The fact that Clinton has drawn a fair number of Republican votes also undercuts her 'popular vote' argument to some extent.

If I was a superdelegate, I'd be mighty reluctant to cast my vote for the Democrat who the Republicans would prefer to run against.

[Mr Super]

Siting anything having to do with Rush Limbaugh is generally not a good basis for arguments (sorry that's a swipe at Rush - not at you).

But seeing as Pennsylvania is a closed primary (only Dems can vote) and that polling and studies demonstrate that an *insignificant* amount of people switch parties to vote for someone who they *do not* want to win, I would take that with a grain of salt.

[Mr Super]

I have a LOT of experience with polling, campaigns, elections and mass communications.

Here is what is happening. The Democrats are registering voters in record numbers. Our Party is growing at probably its fastest pace in history. The way the Right Wing Noise Machine counters is that is to say that the only reason we have this growth is because they are switching registration to thwart our nomination process. These are flat out lies to distract the public and weak attempts to undermine Democrats. It's not working.

Hey, if all of these masses of registrants were Republicans attempting to nominate Clinton, she would then be winning by bigger margins.

IN ADDITION - I cannot begin to explain to you the nightmare which would ensue for Republicans in the general election if they are unable to identify their base supporters because they had all registered as Democrats. Are they going to go out and now try to re-register every voter that registered as a Democrat between January and April? Let me tell you how complicated and expensive that is. Add to that, the GOP is running thin on cash - I don't think that this is an added expense they want coming their way.

Trust me, take anything you get from Rush Limbaugh with a grain of salt.

[Susan]

I agree with Super above...
Rush should be taken with a grain of salt..
That is not to say that the Right won't come at us in the Fall...They will with Gun's Blazing...that being said...this is a good year for us...and no one can tell me that Obama can't stand up to McCain...
McCain can put himself in a hole by just opening his mouth... gaffe, gaffe, gaffe...
Shite ? Suni? Which one is it Johnny?