WSJ: Some Superdelegates May Delay Decision

Even if Obama secures enough superdelegate endorsements to clear the 2,117 hurdle, some superdelegates may still delay deciding who to endorse until the Denver convention in August, the Wall Street Journal reported yesterday.

Many May Delay Deciding Who to Support:

Dozens of superdelegates may throw their support behind Barack Obama after polls close in Montana and South Dakota on Tuesday, possibly settling the nomination within days. But other superdelegates may see no advantage in taking sides just yet, and some even say they may arrive at the August convention uncommitted.

That is unlikely to alter the outcome of the Democrats' presidential nomination race, but it shows that at least some superdelegates -- despite continuing pressure from the campaigns -- aren't eager to resolve the nomination when the voters themselves remain closely split.

Sen. Obama led Sen. Hillary Clinton by 2,074 ...

The article remains behind a subscription firewall.

There's more...

Obama & the Orgasmic Orgy of Approval

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project& My Left Wing


click to enlarge

There's more...

Missouri SD for Obama, 38.5 Delegates Needed

Obama's first Superdelegate on the last day of the primary election comes from Missouri.   State Rep. Maria Chappelle-Nadal plans to announce today that she's endorsing Barack Obama for president.

...the deciding factor was the enthusiasm that Obama has generated among young people and unaligned independents, said Chappelle-Nadal.

"This is a year that the mere existence of a single candidate, Barack Obama, has inspired people in my district to believe in the greater good," Chappelle-Nadal said.

With this endorsement Senator Obama now needs 38.5 delegates to secure the Democratic Party's nomination.

There's more...

The Unity Express Derails in DC

"One final word....Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the credentials committee."

-- Harold Ickes, Hillary Clinton Campaign representative, Washington, D.C., May 31, 2008

Saturday, the Democratic Party's Rules & Bylaws Committee (RBC), in a surreal act of political suicide, awarded Barack Obama 55 "uncommitted" delegates from the Michigan primary, even though he voluntarily removed his name from that ballot in a tactical move to curry favor with the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

As Ickes noted, "uncommitted" is a constitutionally recognized presidential status, the same as a named candidate, and therefore delegates earned by "uncommitted" cannot legally be reallocated to another candidate.

But the RBC didn't stop there. They also STOLE 4 delegates earned by Hillary Clinton in the Michigan primary, and transferred them to Barack Obama, as if punishing Clinton for winning an election that Obama boycotted.

Then the RBC had the audacity to call their ruling a "compromise" and cloak it in sugary calls for party "unity." Trying to shove unity down the throats of 18 million angry Democrats, a bit of a joke...Message to the RBC: See videotape of Harriet Christian from Manhattan, voter who was ejected from your meeting. That should give you a flavor of our reaction and a taste of what to expect in August, in Denver.

More from Ickes' closing statement on Michigan, which is already written into history:

"This is in the charter, this is not a bylaw..this is in the highest document of our party.. this is in the constitution of our party....fair reflection..you cannot take delegates from one candidate and give them to another..."

~interrupted by raucous cheers~

"Finally...there's been a lot of talk about party unity...let's all come together, wrap our arms around each other...I submit to you, Ladies and Gentlemen, that hijacking 4 delegates.... is not a good way to start down the path of party unity."


It's ironic, given his unique history, that Barack Obama would seek to benefit from an election in which his name was not on the ballot, especially since he removed it voluntarily. If anyone understands the importance legally of being on the ballot, it should be Obama...

In 1996, when Obama first ran for public office in Illinois, he employed a cut-throat gimmick of challenging petition signatures to knock long-time community activist Alice Palmer off the ballot for the state Senate. There is much more to the story, but the bottom line is that Palmer had been a mentor and supporter of Obama's before he steam-rolled over her in his eagerness to serve the public. Ms. Palmer, not surprisingly, campaigned for Hillary Clinton this year in Indiana.

Seems like the party elite and the hope-change candidate are clueless when it comes to "unity." But us regular folks have a pretty good idea of what needs to be done in Denver to unify the country.

Note on the Popular Vote: The silver lining for Clinton from the RBC's ruling is more like platinum: Now that the Michigan and Florida primaries have been "recognized," Clinton is justified in adding those votes to her popular vote total. At the end of the primaries on June 3rd, Clinton will be the official popular vote leader, even excluding Michigan. If memory serves me correctly, it wasn't so long ago that party officials such as Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and Donna Brazile were touting the popular vote as the appropriate metric for super delegates to certify the "will of the people."

Cross posted at TexasDarlin



TexasDarlin, all rights reserved
Not affiliated with the Hillary Clinton campaign

There's more...

100 delegates hijacked, not 4

It seems everyone's angry about the RBC's decision to partially reject the Michigan vote. Everyone finds something wrong with the 69-59 split.

Among the complaints:

  1. FL and MI Should have been seated in full
  2. 59-49 is the worst choice, at least 50/50 would have rejected the vote. This compromise made votes up.
  3. Its just 4 delegates, why didn't the Obama campaign just give in?

First, to address the last point, its because no matter what the solution, there would have been complaints. Seriously, unless the Clinton campaign got everything they wanted (and knew they couldn't get), they would have made the same threats about going to the convention. The 69-59 split just made it slightly less difficult to reach the magic number.

Now, the second point. This, I think, must be a joke. There is no way Jerome or any other Clinton supporter would have actually found 50/50 better than 59-69. That would have rejected completely the will of the people and boy would everyone be mad. But the RBC didn't make up anything. They took the Michigan results in full. Then they took the Obama argument, that the Michigan results are completely flawed and should be thrown out. Both arguments had merit. So they did an interesting thing. They compromised. They met in the middle. They didn't "make up" primary results, they compromised between two arguments.

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads