Bring on the Supers

As I've stated before, I expect to see quite a bit of movement on Superdelegates in the next two weeks.  If this gets wrapped-up before Memorial Day - it's good news for Senator Obama.  If it extends to June 4th - it's good news for Senator Clinton.

There are now more unpledged Superdelegates left than there are pledged delegates.  Senator Clinton's win in Indiana was symbolic in that it is still a victory.  However, the net delegate gain on the night went to Senator Obama since North Carolina has more delegates - and his wider margin of victory netted him a larger percentage of delegates.  The overall math doesn't look good for Clinton, either.

I've stated before that most Supers do not revel in the notion of putting one candidate over the top.  Having said that, Kos recommends waiting two weeks until Oregon.

Note: Congressional recess is Memorial Day week, which is right after Oregon.  Unless Senator Clinton has enough momentum generated from potential wins in West Virginia and Kentucky, many undeclared Members of Congress will be dealing with a looming issue of a presidential nomination when heading to their home districts.  Not a prospect to revel in.

Finally: Obama memo on Superdelegates here.

Comments

[milkyway]

As an Obama supporter, May 21 is my preferred date for Clinton to drop out of the race. If she were to do so now, the first contest would be in WV where the new presumptive nominee will take a big loss. I would rather Obama be crowned after a big win in Oregon. A big Clinton win in Kentucky that same night will give her and her supporters something to feel good about.

I also can't imagine that the party wants to see our likely nominee having to fight for votes in Puerto Rico. But it might help with some segments of the Latino vote if he were to go there on a victory tour.

[Jon]

When will you endorse? What are you waiting for?

[Judy]

There is a block of voters (myself included) that cannot vote for Obama. It is not a racial thing - I cannot vote for a man for President that stayed in Rev. Wright's church for 20 years, has associations with known terrorist, associations with Rezko - the laundry list goes on and on. It is a deep matter of principle. You say it is not Obama who has done those things or who believes those things - I don't buy it.

Some reporters are revisiting the Obama/Clinton ticket - calling it the dream team. I would love to believe in the dream team - it would be so easy. If he was anyone but who he really is - I could vote for a dream team.

I have supported and admired Hillary, but if she is on a ticket with Obama - my vote is gone.

I really believe pundits, DNC, supers, etc. really are delusional or they really don't care about a block of voters that cannot and will not vote for Obama. It is real. It is not empty threats.

So, when it all comes down within the next 2 weeks; remember, you are losing a block of voters that don't seem to count for anything.

NO OBAMA/CLINTON
NO OBAMA/WHOEVER

[Dan]

You said: "Most Supers do not revel in the notion of putting one candidate over the top."

I don't understand that statement; superdelegates were created precisely for the purpose of exercising independent judgment, and--in close contests--putting one candidate over the top. Whether it's Clinton or Obama, whether it's May 20 or June 4, this race won't be over without supers putting someone over the top. One can argue (as you have) that supers should just "rubber stamp" the delegate leader. However, that in itself is no more than a personal judgment about how superdelegates should exercise their voting power. It still amounts to the same result: supers crowning a nominee (even if under the guise of "following the will of the people").

So, I ask: why wait? We all know where this is going to end. Seems like now is as good a time as any.

[Joe]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/07/AR2008050701425.html?hpid=topnews

Clinton backer calls for her to drop out.

Mind you, I actually don't think she should, although I support Obama. Get a compromise to give her the lion's share of Florida and Michigan. Get the supers to start declaring more publicly. And, if at all possible, let Oregon put Obama over the top. I think it would defuse things a little.

[observer]

What do you mean by "good news" for Clinton? Simply prolonging her agony isn't good news, I think. The only good news would be an actual lead in delegates, which seems pretty unlikely.

[OlderVoter]

Mr. Super,

When do you think you will declare?

[Carol]

With all due respect to the process I say ENOUGH already. It is time for this to be over. The math is final. It is now up to the superdelegates to do their job and endorse the candidate who has won the most popular votes, pledged delegates and states. The only one who benefits from this going on is McCain. Senator Clinton has lost my respect. She should bow out graciously. Since that hasn't happened the superdelegates should step up to the plate and put an end to this primary. Do you want to win in November or not?

[TMo]

Does this mean you will declare before Oregon?

[Dave]

In all measures this race is over. This is the time to heal our party. As long as we stay away from negative tactics I see no reason for the candidate who is behind to withdraw except for monetary reasons. At this point we would be better off joining up and running as a party against McCain.

We now have a nominee of the party this will not change. The minds of the voters and the fact that we are one party pulling together will change. With the backing of all Democrats we can use the next few primaries to allow Oregon to put our nominee to be placed over the top. This would show that the winner was placed there by the people who showed up in record numbers.

The supers need to keep their powder dry for the moment and let this play out. We we know on May 20th. I don't want to see either candidate wounded for such a strong campaign.

You can do the math and know where we are headed, but you can not heal the deep wounds without allowing each candidate the time to speak to their supporters.

Take a deep breathe and start to prepare for August.

[patagonia]

It's over. Time for you to endorse and end this thing.

[J S]

Or Supers endorsing in sufficient numbers to allow the voters of Kentucky and Oregon to put him over the top might make for a better narrative?

I notice that we're down to WV, KY, OR, PR, MT and SD. No states with substantial African-American population.

I also notice that today the Clinton campaign has begun to substitute "white voters" for where they used to say "working class voters". As in "Sen. Clinton is the better G.E. candidate because she can win white voters."

Do I need to spell it out? Your comment as to your own opinion of this? The feeling of other Supers?

[Grapevine]

Working it out so that Obama clinches the nomination in Oregon seems like a good way to go. As a Hillary supporter who has finally, reluctantly, signed on to the fact that Obama is the nominee in the wake of last night's results, I was hoping she'd concede today. Looks like we've got a couple more weeks of this, but there's really no question as to who wins this thing now. It's time for the Democrats to come together behind Obama. Just wanted to let you and any other interested supers know that while Hillary's still going on, some of her supporters are ready to move on to November with Obama now and get past this whole thing. Get this thing to 2209 so that there's nothing left to contest.

[Chuchundra]

Four more Supers for Barry O today. That includes one defection from Clinton. HRC gets one today too. That makes it a +4 day for Obama.

[TheSteve]

Mr. Super,

Why would it benefit Clinton if it extends to June 4th? Is it because of Puerto Rico, or do you think the DNC Rules Committee are going to seat FL and MI?

[Will]

To those HRC supporters,

Let's face it. The "highly probable" Democrats' nominee is Obama. I don't mind HRC continues to run until the last primary, but for those HRC supporters who are no longer involved in any primary, you should take a closer look at Obama and compare / contrast with McCain.

So here are 3 possible things that will happen to you.
1. Unite and vote for Obama
2. Stay at home and don't vote
3. Vote for McCain

At the end of the day, Obama's agenda will be the Democrats' agenda. And it boils down to Democrats vs GOP agenda.

There may be some of you that will not do option "1", but I just can't see why you would go as far as option "3".

Can you enlighten me to any positive aspect from the GOP's agenda that I am not seeing, especially after going through 8 years of this?

[Tony]

I am a HRC supporter, but I have long resigned myself to the fact that Obama is the likely nominee. I still believe that she is the one candidate that can definitively win in the fall while strengthening American liberalism and enhancing the party for future generations based upon voting blocs, policy measures, and other attributes. I think Obama can win, although the fight is much closer than many seem to be acknowledging. I don't care that much about Rezko, Weahter Underground, and what not. I care about his inability to sell an economic message to blue collar workers. Granted, perhaps this is a nod towards HRC's extraordinary ability to "sell", something this party has lacked for many a generations. For once, though, we have the ability to mobilize labor as a political entity with power again, and this extraordinary opportunity should not be passed. I know a lot of Obama supporters argue that he has blue collar, but not white working class. I find that delineation to be a bit too thin of a line (for full clarity's sake, I'm Asian). If Obama is the nominee, I hope he takes the wise course of selecting someone to buffer up his economic "sellability". If this means reaching across to a HRC supporter, he should do that.

There's been this huge assumption made that the economic vote will go to us. This is predicated upon a current economic climate. The problem is, as history has shown, more often than not, you still need to complete the sell. Certainly, the environmental dynamics will be a boost to Democrats, but it is likely not the decisive factor. Again, one must ask - is this an election about ideology or is this an election on Bush. If it's the latter, which I believe it to be, then selling becomes more magnified. At this point in time, I do not see a clear VP option within the Obama "camp" that looks like someone that can win broad appeal in a GE and sell the economic vision. There are certain SD's that have not aligned that offert his opportunity.

That said, as noted, I've long resigned myself to the fact that Obama will be the nominee. To be frank, I never found either one of these individuals to be "rock stars" or however it was stated. Good candidates, yes. Perhaps I don't have a clear idea on what it takes to be "rock star" political candidates. I don't dislike Obama - I think he seems like a decent guy overall. My focus and hope is on definitively winning the GE, though, and that is why I could not support him personally. I will vote for him unless he does something really macaca-ish (and let's be honest, he's come closer than anyone would acknowledge, perhaps not in the same context as what Allen did, but in terms of stepping near the edge).

In terms of this GE, I think the drop date is likely after Memorial Day and after the decision on Michigan and Florida has been made. She needed a game changer, and she missed. That's the reality of it. Had she even gotten a moral victory out of NC last night (say, single digits), then the dynamics may have shifted. She didn't, and that's that. That said, with Dean inching away from certifying 2025 as a definitive measure on "winning", the Michigan and Florida decision is critical, unless SD's come out en masse. The chances of MI and FL getting full seating from Credentials seems slim, and at that point, no matter the "score", it is game, set, match. We're basically at Ad-Obama right now. If they do come out en masse pre-Memorial Day, I'll be surprised, but then again, mrsuper would know more than any poster here. I just don't see the rationale behind an en masse move when the indications for this past Tuesday was basically a draw (both sides got what they needed), and the fact that late deciders were won by HRC, which should be a warning sign for SD's towards Obama's policy planks.

Clearly, Obama is attempting to bridge the gap within the party based upon his speech last night. I think for him to win over HRC supporters, one small change in tone from his camp needs to occur over the next week. For me personally, the idea that there will be a "coup", as certain bloggers have argued, is ridiculous. It gives the idea that half of the party (and yes, it's basically half and half) is involved in a coup is ridiculous and antagonistic. Beyond that, I'd like to see him reframe some of this rhetoric. The idea that the man makes the politics is wishful thinking. I know, I'm 26, college graduate. I should probably be this doe-eyed idealist based upon the mass generalizations we get through this primary season. Reality is reality, though. The politics of things are always a level on its own.

I hope the party recognizes this amazing opportunity we have to do right for liberal and progressive ideas. I hope the party recognizes that having blue collar support isn't something that's part of the old coalition (as Ms. Brazile put it). It's something that we haven't had in a long time as a national political force. It is an area for this party to expand. I hope the party reocgnizes that we need to sell to these individuals. We cannot risk giving these individuals other justifications to base their vote upon, and it seems clear that "It's the Economy, stupid."

[elrod]

Judy,

I'd like to know why you are so uncomfortable with Obama's pastor, but somehow you're OK with Hillary's outright lies about Bosnia and NAFTA.

Puzzled....

[basil]

I wonder if Hillary would like some cheese with her whine?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMlfYgbOLVs

[Beck]

An article in today's The Hill says that most congressional supers don't feel any need to follow pledged delegate totals and/or popular vote, but plan to vote for whoever they believe is most electable (or in some cases, who they believe would be the better president.)

I think they are deluded. If either candidate is ahead in pledged delegates, super delegates and popular vote - but is awarded the nomination because the remaining supers consider him/her more electable, his/her electability is going to drop immediately. And if the perceived rationale is that an African American -- or a woman -- will not be nominated because the super-supers decide that such characteristic makes the candidate unelectable, look for defections in droves.

I am a 58 yr old white feminist who strongly supports Obama, although I was a vocal Clinton supporter prior to this election. If voters ultimately choose Clinton I will be unhappy, but will live with it in order to end the Republican reign. But if the elected supers override an ultimate Obama lead in delegates and popular vote, and deny him the nomination because of his race or associations, regardless of whether they cloak the decision as a test of "electability", I will abandon the party in a heartbeat because it no longer will have any claim to represent my values.

[Judy]

James Zogby is a superdelegate? I just saw him on CNN - calling for Clinton to withdraw. He owns a poll company and is a superdelegate - this should be against the law.

His company did the polls that many said threw the polls off? Also, isn't there some scandal whirling around with the Zogby family and ties with islam groups. Also, Obama has had ties with the Zogby family????

I think we need to do away with the superdelegates - this is suspicious.

I am sick of this. Mr. Super can you please answer about Zogby????

[G Davis]

This shows the difference between the Reps and the Dems.

This race is over. There is no metric whatsoever that would allow the Clintons to get the nomination without political chaos reigning.

The Reps would face it and move on. The Dems are jumping through all make of hysteria hoops, weighing every conceivable (and many unconceivable) ways this could work out remaining bogged down in some facade of fairness.

What malarky. This country is in dire need of honest, forthright leadership and if the Dems hope to convince the country they should be the leaders, they'd best start acting like leaders.

The media will NOT focus on McCain (or Obama for that matter) so long as the Clintons cling to center ring in this circus. Obama has been saying virtually the same thing for a year and a half yet folks still don't seem to know him and what he represents. Of course they don't as all anyone is ever talking about is the Clintons! McCain is running around the country making one faux pau after another and no one hears it as the media is so focused on the Clintons.

The Clintons were party leaders for years and most think they've done good for the party. But they're like the loving family pet that is old and sick. Many love them, emotionally many hearts are breaking watching it but intelligently we know it's time to take the old dear to the vet and put it out of it's misery.

Having the Clintons running around WV and Kentucky appealing to the basest of those states instincts is NOT helpful to the party or more importantly the nation.

The Dem party installed the supers to take charge over a renegade candidate. Just because the renegade isn't the new guy doesn't relieve the supers of that responsibility. Take charge of this *problem* and solve it like true leaders.

If the supers can't muster that leadership, they should either not have a vote or they should do away with the whole superdelegate as wise sage party leaders charade altogether.

Imagine what would be happening if the two campaigns positions were reversed. Would there be any question at all that the supers would have declared wholesale by now against the new guy?

It's long past time to stop this circus. Imagine what good all this energy and money could do for exposing McCain for what he is, not to mention highlighting and helping all those down ticket races that are the REALLY important issue in this next election.

[Jennifer]

Enough with the Rev. Wright nonsense. How many gays and women stay members in the Catholic church which tells them gays will burn in hell and women are unfit to lead a church? How many parents stay in the Catholic church despite the decades of child molestation by priests? People do not leave their church family because they don't agree with the pastor.

Hilary should continue to run in a way that is not negative and cause damage to Obama. If she will continue to give the republicans ammunition she needs to get out right now. Otherwise, let her have her little "victory" in W. Virginia and Kentucky and phase out slowly with whatever dignity she has left, if any.

Finally, this whole "white voter" argument is pointless in light of Obama's taking of states such as Wyoming, Virginia and other states with almost non-existent black populations.

[Joe]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/07/limbaugh.obama/

Limbaugh flip-flops. Even though I was once a Republican, I consider him now to be just as much of an **** as he's always been.

[Beth]

Judy -

I have really got to ask you two things:

1. Do you really believe EVERYTHING the MSM tells you?

2. Do you ever do your own research on the candidates yourself?

I ask this, because I live in IL, where Sen. Obama is from. The Rezko trial, amounts to absolutely zippity doo da in terms of Sen. Obama. Heck, they are still searching to tie Rezko to our Gov., but that's failing as well. I'm inundated here in the Chicago Media market with Rezko trial junk, and it's seriously nothing. I wish I could help to feed those flames of Rezko for you, but I really can't.

As for Rev. Wright... did you bother to go see his full sermon? It's on YouTube, you really can't miss it, just search it out. I don't condone his words, but I do truly understand his context. And might I also point out, that if you think what Rev. Wright said was inflammatory, may I remind you that MLK said FAR more inflammatory things in regards to our country and soldiers in Vietnam. He's now got a national holiday named after him. Go figure.

As for William Ayers... he was EIGHT years old when William Ayers did those things? Are you so shortsighted, that people must run every person they meet through an investigation immediately to make sure they are "vetted" because they MIGHT run for public office? If that's the case, please apply the same logic to your esteemed candidate, as her laundry list is a LOT longer than Sen. Obama's.

That's about the whole list I can think of that runs against Sen. Obama. I'm sure you'll repost when you think of some other arguments against him, whether real or imagined.

I do remember the Clinton era, VERY well, as it was my very first voting experience. And I can tell you exactly why I would NEVER vote for your candidate, dream ticket or no:

1. Bill's repeated "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" on the airwaves, over and over, on the taxpayer dollar. I loved spending my hard earned tax dollars to be lied to. Please do not point out that this has nothing to do with Hillary, for she also went out of her way to demonize every female who stepped up. My memory is quite clear on that thanks. And if she wants to run on his record, which she has, then she can run on his mistakes as well.

2. NAFTA - wow, where to go. I live in Chicago, want to ask Sen. Obama about our steel plants here? I dare say he knows far more about them than your esteemed candidate.

3. Colombian Free Trade - Her husband is lobbying for it, took $800k for it, her top strategist Mark Penn paid $300k by the Colombian government to lobby for it, but yet she is saying she's against it? If you're going to judge Sen. Obama over Ayers, then I suggest you judge her for Penn, then you can judge Obama for Wright, and justly judge her for her husband. That wipes both those slates clean huh?

4. Her Hillary-Care in the 90's, is representative of her Gas Tax "holiday". She doesn't need experts, she's not going to put her lot in with them. I had TONS of respect for her when she started working on Hillary-Care, right up until it was shown she did not bother to request both sides viewpoints. It was her way or the highway. We are not a dictatorship, and thank god for our Senate and Congress!

5. And now I've watched this campaign... she was the presumptive nominee. It was hers to lose. And she did, spectacularly. She planned poorly, ran her finances wrong, betted on the big money running her to Washington, and lo and behold, we the people, have said enough is enough.

6. Obliterate Iran - JUST what this country does NOT need, to make threats against a country whose leadership is already anti-US. I notice that little coverage has been given by the MSM of Iran writing to the UN on this threat by her, and the UN's response.

7. The Gas Tax Holiday is in and of itself a gross pander. I live in IL remember, we tried it. It failed MISERABLY. It's her way of trying to convince those low information voters of how she "feels their pain" while she can't even get a cup of coffee from a local gas station. But she's not an elitist... nooooo.

8. Bosnia, do I EVEN need to go here? Several times she lied about this event, she did not mis-speak. She out and out lied. Not once, not twice, but three times from what we've seen.

9. Her Republican talking points are simply not Democratic and to use these against a fellow Democrat are disgusting.

And it's been close when I've been close to tell the Democratic Party to go to hell while I watched Hillary slam her opponent with the worst sort of negativity and race-baiting. I may still, if they somehow manage to give this to her. I'm an Independent, and so I'm not tied to one party or another. But I will tell you what I will do if she becomes their nominee, I will write Obama's name in, rather than pick between one power hungry Repub or the other. I no longer consider her a Democrat, under any definition. And if she decided to run in 2012 as a Republican because the Democrats don't give this to her, then more power to her. She'll fit their bill quite nicely.

And on a side note: I'm a 37 year old white single mom of two children. And a feminist on top of that. I would LOVE a female president, really I would, but not her. I need to vote for one that has morals, ethics and really truly cares about this country more than she cares about power and making history.