10 More Delegates to Go

this is really happening.
what will hillary do? will she steal obama's moment and make it all about her or will she do the right thing -- tonight?

A Superdelegate Struggle

uncommitted superdelegates are struggling with their decision or at least feigning a struggle. the reason: the clintons, hill and bill, are so entrenched in the democratic party. they are the democratic party. there are so many loyalties that need to be delicately severed and that's proving hard for some people. it also points to the lack of backbone in the democratic party that helped get george bush elected twice .
here's superdelegate irene stein's "struggle:"

The major TV networks want to know whom she backs. She's been interviewed by the New York Daily News as well as newspapers in Ithaca, Albany and Buffalo. A corr- espondent representing newspapers in the Netherlands called.

"Mostly, I don't want to be interviewed because I feel I have nothing to say because I'm uncommitted," she said.

She also admits she's fearful that she'll slip and say something that would reveal her sentiments.

It's pretty unsettling for this Ithaca bookworm.

Stein grew up in Boston, the daughter of poor immigrant parents who were steeped in patriotism and Democratic politics.

"My father used to have a shot of whiskey before dinner every night, and he would say, 'Down with the communists,' " Stein said.

For 51 years, she's been married to Cornell University physics professor Peter Stein, who is secretary of the state Democratic Party and an Ithaca town board member.

Stein earned a doctorate from Cornell herself while raising three children. She worked as director of the Tompkins County Office for Aging for 13 years before retiring.

For the last three decades, she has been helping mayors, city councilors, governors and senators get elected.

Stein's success in getting Democrats elected in Tompkins County prompted Judith Hope, then the state Democratic Party chair, to ask Stein to run for election to the Democratic National Committee about a dozen years ago. All DNC members automatically are superdelegates.

In 2004, Stein was on the floor at the Democratic convention in Boston when Obama delivered the keynote address and burst into the national spotlight.

"The kind of thing we're hearing (in this campaign) is similar to what I heard. He was very galvanizing. People immediately said, 'He has a future.' "

"I've never met Barack Obama. But I would certainly like to," Stein said.

Stein is much more familiar with his opponent.

Then-first lady Clinton stayed overnight at the Steins' former home at 207 Ithaca Road in 1999 when Clinton was testing the waters for her first Senate campaign.

Stein said she was stunned when a Clinton worker called and asked if Stein would host Clinton overnight in their modest five-bedroom home.

"I said, 'My house? Well, you know she'll have to share a bathroom.' And the person laughed and said the first lady won't care about that at all," Stein said.

"The first thing that happened was 3 million Secret Service people came to visit and looked the house over," Stein recalled. Naturally, before Clinton arrived, Stein said she cleaned her house until it sparkled and purchased every fresh fruit being sold at the local farmers market.

"Her staff told me in advance, 'Eat in the kitchen; don't eat in the dining room. We don't want a fancy breakfast. Hillary mostly will just have tea and toast. Don't make a fancy breakfast.' So I didn't."

"She's very down to earth, very easy to talk to, not self-centered," Stein said of Clinton.

here's another superdelegate who says both candidates are electable but recently endorsed hillary. you have to wonder why would a superdelegate come out now for hillary? why wouldn't he just stay "uncommitted" through the end? what purpose does it serve especially when it's apparent that obama will win?
this q&a with superdelegate w. craig bashien is interesting because he condradicts himself on the point of party division:

newsweek: What about the virtues of party unity? Isn't there a chance that coming out for Clinton at this point is further splitting the party and hurting chances for victory in November?
The quicker that we can reach a decision on a candidate, I think the quicker we can start making John McCain the focal point and his open endorsement of Bush administration policies. Nor do I think this process is going to cause a rift in the party.

if they're both electable, why go with the one who's certain to lose the nomination? what statement is he trying to make? how does that bring the party together?

Add-On Superdelegates Bad For Hillary

what are add-ons? extra people who are picked (each state has different rules) to vote at the democratic convention. read the story below to see how they're chosen and why hillary is at long odds of winning the nomination.

for example, chicago mayor richard daley endorsed obama in february, not as a superdelegate but just as a super guy. today, he's an add-on for obama. and apparently, obama has the advantage with add-ons.

this story below is kind of complex but if you can follow, you will see hillary's chances are slim. not only is it difficult for her to overcome obama's 150 or so delegate lead, winning supers will be as tough. what the media is going to be reporting after obama wins the nomination, is that it was over for hillary after super tuesday. visit demconwatch's add-on page to see who's supporting obama.

cjr: Yes, she’d still like to see Florida and Michigan seated to her advantage. But even in that unlikely event, she can’t close the gap with Obama without a big share of the 330 unannounced superdelegates.

So that 330 number looms large. Under an extremely optimistic (for Clinton supporters) scenario, once the last votes are tallied in Montana on June 3, Clinton could narrow her pledged delegate gap by about ninety. That would leave her still sixty total delegates behind; so of the 330 unpledged superdelegates, she’d need to take about 59 percent of them to gain just a single delegate lead, as many in the press have noted. And the poorer Clinton does in the remaining contests, the higher that minimum threshold rises.
But here’s the thing: the 330 figure is inflated. And it’s inflated in a way that makes the math look better for Clinton than it actually is.

Lumped in with the 330 superdelegates are seventy-six “unpledged add-on delegates.” These aren’t the party leaders and elected officials that we’ve come to associate with the word “superdelegate,” the governors, senators, state Democratic National Committee members, and other big wigs who get an automatic ticket to the Democratic convention in Denver.

“These slots usually were given to someone special—a state legislator, a union leader, a funder,” says Stephen Ohlemacher, The Associated Press’s chief delegate counter. “This is not something to that was made to pick a nominee. This is something that’s designed to let extra people go to the convention.”

It’s been a long time since a Democratic race was still up for grabs by the time add-ons were picked, so this class of delegates have never before had an effect on the nomination. But this year, it would be naïve to think that add-ons will be picked without consideration of their presidential preference.

While rules vary widely from place to place, add-ons are selected long after a state’s primary election or caucus night. Most states, though not all, will pick them with a vote on the floor of their state conventions; others will be picked by state party executive committees. In many cases, these bodies will be choosing from a list designated by their state chair, which could effectively allow the chair to dictate the selection.

So the question is, which candidate’s backers are likely to control the selection of more add-ons?

Party leader preference and rules vary enough state to state that it’s hard to say. In caucus states, the voters at the state convention will be county or congressional district delegates who wound their way up from precinct caucuses. That strongly favors Obama, since he dominated those contests. But primary states will likely be a wash.

Candidates might have an edge in states that they’ve carried. But these sorts of assumptions get complicated quickly. What, for example, might happen in a state like Massachusetts, which Clinton won? The state party chooses its two add-ons through its standing executive committee. And the commonwealth’s three most senior Democrats (Senators Kennedy and Kerry, and Governor Patrick) have endorsed Obama. Those three men presumably have a lot of weight on that body, as “FlyOnTheWall,” the wise commenter at TPM who first brought the add-ons to my attention, pointed out.

Relatedly, it’s worth looking at where the add-ons will come from. Every state, plus D.C. and Puerto Rico, get at least one add-on, but bigger states get two, three, or more—New York has four and California will send five. Yes, as we hear again and again, Clinton has won more big states. But the party’s feint at add-on proportionality, which at this point would seem to favor Clinton, is deceptive: Wyoming’s 8,753 caucusgoers will have as much add-on clout as one-fifth of California’s Democratic primary voters—about one million people. There are many Obama-won small states to weigh down Clinton’s big ones.

...........
Again, under the rosiest scenario, Clinton will still be way back in the pledged delegate count at the end of voting. If she needs to get 59 percent of the outstanding 330 to close that gap, winning anything less than around 59 percent of the add-ons only makes that work harder. She’ll have to compensate for the underperforming add-ons among the remaining 254 or so superdelegates. If she takes a healthy 60 percent of the add-ons (a 46-30 split), her magic percentage—the number of remaining unannounced superdelegates she’ll need to catch—will hold steady at about 59 percent. A 38-38 wash among the add-ons would hurt her; she’d then need 62 percent of the remaining superdelegates. If Obama gets 60 percent of the add ons, Clinton’s magic percentage without deus ex machina help from Florida and Michigan rises to 65%. These numbers, of course, look worse the further back Clinton is, delegate-wise, at the close of voting.

On the Minds of Superdelegates 7

this is the seventh in my series of "what's on the minds of superdelegates?" this one is action packed.

supers will decide the race. in fact, they were invented in the 1980s as a way to override the will of the people.

supers seem to be leaning toward obama because of the new voters that he's brought to the table. see my superdelegate tally for clinton and obama in my sidebar.

interestingly, the idea has been floated to have the supers meet in june to select a candidate. but democratic national committee chairman howard dean doesn't like the idea.

WSJ:Yesterday, in an opinion piece in the New York Times, Gov. Bredesen floated a proposal for the superdelegates to meet in June, after the final nominating contest, to hear from both candidates and commit to one then. Otherwise, he argues, their battle will rage through the summer to the nationally televised convention, and leave the fractured party just two months to unite before November. He says the candidate who looked to have fewer delegates -- combining superdelegates and delegates won in the primaries and caucuses -- would come under pressure to step aside.

Clinton and Obama have been noncommittal. He says he also spoke with former Vice President Al Gore, another uncommitted superdelegate, and acknowledged that Mr. Gore, among others, pointed out the difficulty of pulling off a June conclave.

here's one who's trying to pretend he's uncommited but he's an obvious clinton supporter.

Superdelegates are watching to see whether the senator's oratory will assuage white voters outraged at Internet videos showing the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. suggesting that America be damned for its treatment of blacks. Separately, many worry that black voters will be outraged by a sense that Sen. Obama is being unfairly judged.

The superdelegates attempt to look at electability, and there is still a lot of water to go over the dam on that subject before most of them have to commit" at the convention, Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen, who is uncommitted, said in an interview yesterday. "Among the rank-and-file, persuadable middle of the road, I think the guy is a problem for Sen. Obama. It kind of reminds people of some of the wars in the past."

here's a definite obama supporter:

More than the average voter, the 795 superdelegates -- Democratic governors, House and Senate members and party officers nationwide -- are sensitive to calculations about a nominee's electability. Their own elections, and those of their party brethren down the ballot, could ride on the coattails of the presidential standard-bearer. Several hundred of these delegates remain uncommitted.

But most would prefer Sen. Obama to Sen. Clinton, Democrats widely agree. He has attracted record numbers of new voters -- especially younger ones, African-Americans and independents. Sen. Clinton, they fear, would lose many of those voters and, worse, drive more Republicans to the polls just to vote against her.

"Superdelegates tend to blow with the wind, and we don't know which way the wind is blowing," says Rep. Jim Cooper of Tennessee, an Obama supporter. "But superdelegates know two things," he added, "only one candidate in modern times," Sen. Obama, has so energized the younger generation as well as built so large a donor base.

kentucky governor is feeling the heat:

Beshear is one of the eight known Kentucky superdelegates. The state party will select a ninth in June.

"I've traded calls with Hillary Clinton," Beshear said last week. "We haven't connected up yet. And I understand Barack Obama's going to be calling."

Some of Beshear's Democratic colleagues in statehouses around the country also have been urging the governor to pick a side, he said.

here's one who went with clinton but his district liked obama:

Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Presidential nomination back in January. As a superdelegate, Thompson's support was pledged to Clinton.

Results from the February California Primary, however, shows that Thompson's District voted for Barack Obama rather than Clinton.

a possible attack by clinton:

Chris Van Hollen, a congressman from Maryland who has remained neutral because he is the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, argues that superdelegates should not overturn the will of elected delegates unless “some totally unpredictable event”, like a scandal, renders the leading candidate unelectable. Mrs Clinton's supporters may try to argue that the Jeremiah Wright affair does just that. The Daily Kos, a multi-author lefty blog, accuses Mrs Clinton of “fomenting civil war” among Democrats and plotting a “coup by superdelegate”. If that happens, the backlash from Mr Obama's supporters could be fearful.

On the Minds of Superdelegates 1
On the Minds of Superdelegates 2
On the Minds of Superdelegates 3
On the Minds of Superdelegates 4
On the Minds of Superdelegates 5
On the Minds of Superdelegates 6

Clinton Picks Up Naughty Superdelegate

the kind of supporter that apparently you wouldn't want to have: representative john murtha of pennsylvania.

Oh, but Murtha is so much more than that! He’s also the King of Pork in the House. Murtha has become the poster child for out-of-control earmarking and naked power plays using taxpayer funds as his weapon. Not long ago, he almost found himself the focus of an ethics probe for openly threatening another Representative on the floor for challenging one of his earmarks. In that sense, he might be the perfect Clinton backer.

clinton picked up one super yesterday and murtha today. (see my sidebar tally)
so far, obama has gained 16 since march 3 and clinton; net gain of 9. she lost one (hardt) and spitzer but it looks like paterson will replace spitzer. i've already included him in the count.
it's time for what's on the minds of superdelegates (the seventh edition coming up):
On the Minds of Superdelegates 1
On the Minds of Superdelegates 2
On the Minds of Superdelegates 3
On the Minds of Superdelegates 4
On the Minds of Superdelegates 5
On the Minds of Superdelegates 6

On the Minds of Superdelegates 6

this is the sixth in my series of "what's on the minds of superdelgates."
to recap: obama has gained 16 since march 3 and clinton netted 6, lost 1 (see my regularly updated sidebar tallies).
i'll also note that all the news outlets have different counts and some add supers and pledged delegates together when they really should be separate because they can't even get the pledeged delegate number straight and the superdelegate number is fluid. they can change their minds. the best site is demconwatch.
as i read what's on the mind of superdelegates, it occurs to me they're not so super at all. the obama supers say that whoever leads in delegates should be suppported and that the will of the people should not be overturned.
clinton supers say that it's all about "electability."
well, obama has the delegate lead, popular vote lead and electability.

here's one who thinks the pastor's comments might hurt obama but he's sticking with him:

"It does hurt his appeal," says Bill George, an uncommitted Pennsylvania superdelegate and the head of the state chapter of the AFL-CIO. "He may have lost those people who have some racial inner doubts about him." But Mr. George says he thinks that Sen. Obama has responded well to the controversy and that the episode won't affect his vote as a superdelegate.

here's one who says he's been getting a lot of attention:

Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, who is uncommitted, has been contacted twice by former President Bill Clinton, and he chats from time to time with both Obama and Hillary Clinton, along with their top surrogates.

"It's soft-sell, at best," Cardin says. The campaigns were taking his temperature "almost hourly" in the lead-up to the Ohio and Texas primaries, when he was rumored to be on the verge of an endorsement (he declines to say for whom).

this one feels slighted, not really:

Greg Pecararo of Westminster, a DNC member since 1996, said he complained in jest to a Clinton delegate tracker that he hadn't even gotten a call from the candidate's daughter, Chelsea.

"It shows where I rank," said Pecararo, who sees no reason to make a choice until the August convention and dismisses the notion that a prolonged nomination fight will help John McCain.

How Maryland and the rest of the country voted will be one factor in his decision, said Pecararo. But the rush of states to hold early primaries did "not allow the normal nomination process to play out" this year, and party rules "give us the obligation to substitute our judgment for what would have happened there."

He said it was a "philosophical question" as to whether other factors might also influence his vote, such as the interests of his trade association. Pecararo runs a lobbying arm of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, and "if your employer came to you" and expressed an opinion for one Democrat over another, he acknowledged, "you might take that into account."

there is no rulebook

Superdelegate Dick Durbin, Obama's senatorial partner from Illinois and a vocal backer, acknowledges that superdelgates have no rulebook to follow. But he says if one candidate leads in pledged delegates and popular votes after the final primary, then the superdelegates' path is obvious.

"If the elective process has produced a clear winner, whether by five delegates or 100 delegates, then it's extremely difficult to overrule that without undermining the unity of the party," Durbin said. "Many people would say 'it just isn't fair.'"

this one likes clinton. that's all.

By contrast, the Clinton camp and some independent observers say superdelegates who look ahead and add up electoral votes in November might reasonably choose Clinton even if Obama enjoys slim leads in pledged delegates and the popular vote.

Leticia Van de Putte, a co-chair of the party's national convention and a Texas state senator, said "A lot of Democrats are wary and worried, because they saw what happened to the popular vote (in 2000). I think some superdelegates are not saying, 'Who would be the better leader?' but 'How can we win?' They'll look at the math and the Electoral College."

Clinton points to her success in big states, richest in electoral votes, as reason for those superdelegates to select her.

this one likes obama and says the general election is not about big states:

"This is not a big-state nomination process," said U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., a superdelegate from Chicago backing Obama. "If that were the case, then one would need only to set up a campaign in the big states and ignore the rest."

Jackson said Obama can meet some of his big-state challenges by "ticket-building" -- strategically choosing his running mate.

He added a point largely borne out by primary exit polls -- one that also could help tip the superdelegate scales in Obama's direction as they calculate their party's chances in November.

"Only Barack Obama," Jackson said, "has shown the ability to reach out to both independents and Republicans."

On the Minds of Superdelegates 1
On the Minds of Superdelegates 2
On the Minds of Superdelegates 3
On the Minds of Superdelegates 4

On the Minds of Superdelegates 5

Clinton Exploiting Delegate Loophole: More Dirty Tactics

what's this? unseating pledged delegates? i didn't know is could happen but apparently, clinton is working on a way.
from newsweek:

.....After the 1980 battle between Jimmy Carter and Ted Kennedy, her chief strategist Harold Ickes noted, the party changed a rule that required pledged delegates to stick with their candidates no matter what. The current rule, adopted in 1982, states that pledged delegates "shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them." A "good conscience" reason for a delegate to switch, Ickes told NEWSWEEK, would be if one candidate—such as, say, Clinton—was deemed more "electable." If delegates believe she has a better chance in November than Obama, Ickes said, "you bet" that would be a reason to change their vote. (He added, however, that the campaign is "focused" on winning over uncommitted superdelegates "at this point.")

Ickes's comments prompted a fierce comeback from Obama spokesman Bill Burton. "Despite repeated denials," he said, "the Clinton campaign finally admitted that they will go to any length to win." One party official, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive matters, said the strategy behind Clinton's invocation of the 1982 rule was clear: "They're trying to open up a window for some of the Obama people to change their minds."

okay, here's what we have so far from clinton:
1) Her latest trick, before the above mentioned, is to repeat over and over that Obama is unelectable. In a conference call with reporters, Clinton’s strategist Mark Penn said that Obama is unelectable and even if he is electable, wink, wink, they will nonetheless hammer the idea that he’s not into the psyche of the American people. Clinton’s Pennsylvania mouthpiece Gov. Ed Rendell admitted that Obama is indeed electable.

2) Clinton went around floating the idea that Obama would make a great vice president. As if. That’s another ploy to appeal to those who don’t have a strong preference but think that if they vote for Clinton, they might get a two-fer.

3) She’s tried to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates, claiming that she won. Those states made a greedy power play by moving up their primaries, breaking the Democratic National Convention rules. Both Clinton and Obama and the parties agreed not to campaign in those states after the Democratic National Convention stripped those states of delegates.

Furthermore, Obama’s name wasn’t on the Michigan ballot. As Obama said, even his six-year old daughter could figure out that awarding the delegates to Clinton wasn’t fair.

In an interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep, Obama said: “Our position consistently has been that the Michigan and Florida delegations should be seated [at the Democratic National Convention] and that we should come up with a system that is fair to all the parties involved.”

But Clinton isn’t about fairness or what’s right. She’s about winning no matter what the cost. And that’s bad. I don’t care where she stands on policy. She’s lost on character. All I see is someone who will do and say anything to get what she wants.

4) She’s actually going to lose Texas when the final count comes in. She’s been trying to delay that.

5)she hosted uncommitted superdelegate soiree at her house. perhaps she promised some superdelegates a few favors in exchange for their votes.

6)There is evidence that it was Clinton (including her operatives) who instigated the ideas that are now fuel for the ignorant-- that Obama hates Jewish people, that he secretly hates white people and that he might be a related to terrorists because his middle name is Hussein and he once wore a turban.

In February, Newsweek said it had access to some of these Clinton camp emails:

As the race between Clinton and Obama has sharpened in recent months, other Clinton campaign operatives have sent around negative material about Obama's relations with Israel, according to e-mails obtained by NEWSWEEK. In addition to Brzezinski, the e-mails attack Obama advisers such as Rob Malley, a former Clinton negotiator at the 2000 Camp David talks who has since written articles sympathetic to the Palestinian point of view, and they raise questions about Obama's relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the former pastor at Obama's Trinity Church in Chicago.

Early on in the race, she tried this underhanded trick of pitting black people against hispanics.

let's see, have i missed anything? can anyone see a pattern here?

In short, Clinton’s actions are despicable. She’s exploiting the people in this country who don’t know any better. She’s playing on their fears, and she’s doing it at the detriment of several groups of people, Muslims, Jewish and black people. she's going to "kitchen sink" us.

Clinton has proven herself to be of poor character. Is this conniving kind of person really who we want to lead the nation?
Obama: the Un-Beholden President
Who Can Beat McCain?
Obama’s Pennsylvania Strategy

On the Minds of Superdelegates 5

this is my fifth in a series of 'what's on the minds of superdelegates and this one is action packed. the attention on the supers is heating up and we need to know who they are and what they're thinking. they will decide the contest, barring any major shift. the decision for them is also getting more complex. see my superdelegate tally in the sidebar, as well as add ons.

read on.

superdelegates are getting obstinate. the following set of blurbs are from a nyt piece:
Superdelegate Gray Sasser says he'll determine the "will of the people" - not your campaign.

"The will of the people is a very transitory term," said Sasser, an undecided superdelegate and head of the Tennessee state party. "The deciding factor for most superdelegates is, 'Who is going to be the best candidate to carry the Democratic banner?'"
............
"Hopefully they are not suggesting that any superdelegate who deviates from the will of the people is somehow acting inappropriately, because the rules were set up clearly to allow that level of discretion," countered Jerry Meek, a superdelegate and chairman of the North Carolina Democratic Party.

Meek told the Daily News that he and other superdelegates have been under "a lot of pressure" to "go along with the will of the people, however that's measured."

Measuring the will of the people may be more difficult than it sounds. Is it the number of pledged delegates? Or the final tally of the popular vote?

The two numbers don't always jive: Clinton handily won the Nevada caucuses, but Obama won more pledged delegates from the Silver State because of a weighted allotment system.

Obama now wields a nearly insurmountable lead in pledged delegates. But if Clinton has boffo showings in the Pennsylvania primary April 22 and nabs repeat wins in the re-do of Florida and Michigan, she could surpass him in the popular vote.
.........

While many superdelegates said they intended to keep their options open as the race continued to play out over the next three months, the interviews suggested that the playing field was tilting slightly toward Mr. Obama in one potentially vital respect. Many of them said that in deciding whom to support, they would adopt what Mr. Obama’s campaign has advocated as the essential principle: reflecting the will of the voters.

Mr. Obama has won more states, a greater share of the popular vote and more pledged delegates than Mrs. Clinton.

the new york times did a poll of superdelegates:
A New York Times survey of superdelegates last week found that Mr. Obama had been winning over more of them recently than Mrs. Clinton had, though Mrs. Clinton retained an overall lead among those who have made a choice. Over the past month, according to the survey, Mr. Obama, of Illinois, picked up 54 superdelegates; Mrs. Clinton, of New York, picked up 31.

“If we get to the end and Senator Obama has won more states, has more delegates and more popular vote,” said Representative Jason Altmire, Democrat of Pennsylvania, who is undecided, “I would need some sort of rationale for why at that point any superdelegate would go the other way, seeing that the people have spoken.”

Mr. Altmire said he was repeating an argument that he made to Mrs. Clinton during a session at her house in Washington on Thursday night with uncommitted superdelegates.

.........
“This was everybody’s worse nightmare come to fruition,” said Richard Machacek, an uncommitted superdelegate from Iowa, who said he was struggling over what to do.

.........
In Ohio, Senator Sherrod Brown would seemingly have an easy task. Mrs. Clinton won his state by 10 points. If the nominating fight had to be resolved by party leaders, wouldn’t he side with her? Not necessarily.

“It’s the overall popular vote, it’s the overall delegates, it’s who is bringing energy to the campaign, it’s who has momentum,” Mr. Brown said. “It should be wrapped up before the convention, and I think it will be.”
.........
Representative John P. Murtha, Democrat of Pennsylvania, is not wringing his hands. “I don’t see the problem,” he said. “People complain and criticize each other, and then they always work it out.”
.........
But Eileen Macoll, a Democratic county chairwoman from Washington State, is expecting something different — and not exactly looking forward to it. “I think it’s going to go all the way to the floor,” Ms. Macoll said. “We will take the vote and that will be the nominee. We’re going to see that happen.”
.........
“It think it has got to be brokered before the convention,” said Bill George, the head of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. in Pennsylvania. “I think there should be a couple of people — maybe Howard Dean and Al Gore, they have some credibility — to do it. Dean should call a meeting, and the two camps should be forced to do it.”

When asked how, Mr. George just laughed. “I just think the two campaigns have to do it,” he said. “I think we lose credibility in America if we let some group come in and do it.”
..........
But David Parker, a superdelegate from North Carolina, was not about to give much deference to any political leader in a contest that was of such consequence. “I don’t think too many people are going to listen to Howard Dean unless he appointed them,” Mr. Parker said. “The D.N.C. is not some monolithic group that is going to move as a body.”
..........
“Barack’s impressive showing in our state is attractive to me,” said Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota, where Mr. Obama beat Mrs. Clinton two to one in the popular vote last month. “If somehow 200 superdelegates decide this, it will be problematic.”

And there were indications that Mrs. Clinton is facing some questions among the superdelegates about her electability and her potential effect on other Democratic candidates in November.
..........
“A key question to me is how the candidates would affect the down-ballot races,” said Steven Achelpohl, the Democratic state chairman in Nebraska. “I think Obama would have a more positive impact on our other races out here in Nebraska.”

As of Friday, Mrs. Clinton claimed 254 superdelegates, and the Obama campaign said it had commitments from 213; the figures provided by the campaigns differed somewhat from those tallied by The Times.

Mr. Obama has won 1,367 delegates in primaries and caucuses, compared with 1,224 for Mrs. Clinton, based on a count and projection by The Times. A candidate needs 2,025 votes to win the nomination.
..........
There are 246 superdelegates who are not listed by either campaign as supporters and are viewed as uncommitted. Of those, 107 are from states where Mr. Obama won nominating contests, compared with 83 for Mrs. Clinton. An additional 56 come from states that have not yet voted.

Of the 246 uncommitted superdelegates, 75 are women, 10 are governors and 100 are in Congress. So far, Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are relatively even when it comes to competing for elected officials; Mrs. Clinton’s overall advantage among superdelegates has come from current and former party officials, reflecting the ties she and her husband have built over the years.

Some argued that the fighting between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama was good for the party, by keeping the candidates in the news and energizing Democrats. “People are just enthusiastic about their candidates — I don’t find any rancor here,” said Jennifer Moore, chairwoman of the Kentucky Democratic Party.
..........
The superdelegates said in interviews that more than anything they wanted the contest resolved before Democrats assemble in Denver at the end of August.

“Every day that this continues, people can surmise that this is going to the convention in Colorado and it could be decided by the superdelegates,” said Gov. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, the head of the Democratic Governors Association. “There is not a superdelegate that I have spoken to who wants that to happen.”

and there are some superdelegate spots that are up for grabs:
Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are eager to court the eighth superdelegate from South Dakota, one of the 796 officially uncommitted voters at the Democratic convention whose support could put either of the candidates over the top in the race for the party's presidential nomination.

There's just one problem: The state's last superdelegate spot is empty, and won't be filled until June.

"Any Joe Democrat or Jane Democrat can apply," said Rick Hauffe, the state Democratic party's executive director.

Indeed, while the candidates focus their attention on the remaining 10 primaries, beginning with next month's in Pennsylvania, a parallel process to pick the remaining superdelegates is unfolding that could have an equally important impact on the race.

here's a recent obama superdelegate:
A local superdelegate has endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for president, Obama's presidential campaign announced Friday.

Melissa Schroeder, a Merrill resident and secretary for the Democratic Party in Wisconsin's 7th Congressional District, had said she would not make a decision until after the state's Feb. 19 primary. Obama won 58 percent of the vote in Wisconsin to rival Hillary Rodham Clinton's 41 percent.

chroeder said Obama, D-Ill., would be the unifying candidate who could win the November general election.

"When all was said and done, I felt Obama was more electable," Schroeder told the Wausau Daily Herald. "He's going to be a unifier, and he will win over Independents as well as Republicans."

As she debated her decision, Schroeder said she fielded periodic phone calls from supporters of both Democratic candidates. After the March 4 primaries in Texas, Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island, however, Schroeder said she did not receive a call from either campaign.

"It was a process I went through without any persuasion," she said. "They pretty much left me alone for awhile."

Obama’s Superdelegate Momentum
new: demconwatch will be tracking those superdelegates that will back the delegate leader.

Who Can Beat McCain?
On the Minds of Superdelegates 1
On the Minds of Superdelegates 2
On the Minds of Superdelegates 3
On the Minds of Superdelegates 4

Obama's Superdelegate Momentum

demconwatch keeps track of superdelegates when they endorse, switch endorsements, drop out (eliot spitzer), take a coffee break (i kid) and i use that information to keep my own tally. since march 3, obama has gained 15 supers, including one today, according to my sidebar tally (i update it when it changes). clinton has lost 2 and gained 7.
here's more superdelegate news from bloomberg:

Both sides agree her chance to win the nomination rests on winning a significant majority of superdelegates because Obama is likely to maintain a lead of at least 150 pledged delegates - - those won in primaries and caucuses -- after the last contest is finished. If he does, Clinton, 60, would have to snag more than 70 percent of the remaining 334 or so superdelegates.

Clinton also has suffered defections, notably Georgia Representative John Lewis, a prominent civil-rights leader and early backer of the New York senator, who switched to Obama.

Underlying the movement to Obama, 46, is some politicians' calculation that he'll be the strongest candidate to face Republican Senator John McCain in November.

``All along he has been the one person McCain does not want to run against and that is still true,'' said Senator Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat who endorsed Obama last month.

.........

Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska said Obama, unlike Clinton, stands a chance of winning at least part of his state, which has voted Republican in every presidential election since 1964 and is one of two states that award some presidential electoral votes by congressional district rather than winner-take-all.

``Obama has coattails in Nebraska,'' said Nelson, who endorsed his Senate colleague two months ago. ``Our internal polls show he can win one, possibly two, congressional districts.''

.........

The same holds true in Ohio, which Clinton won, and Pennsylvania, where voter surveys say she is leading in the April 22 primary. Polls show Obama does as well or better than Clinton against McCain in those crucial swing states.

In Iowa, a February Des Moines Register poll showed Obama beating McCain 53 percent to 36 percent, while McCain beat Clinton 49 percent to 40 percent.

That is one of the reasons he's won support from governors in Republican-leaning states, including Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas, Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Iowa's Chet Culver.

``It comes down to electability in red states like Iowa,'' Culver said this week.

Among pledged delegates, Obama has 1,390 to Clinton's 1,248, AP's unofficial estimate shows. A total of 2,025 delegates is needed for the nomination.

Even if Clinton scores a net gain of 10 delegates in Pennsylvania, Obama can make that up with wins in smaller states such as North Carolina and South Dakota, which vote later.

obama has more support from congress:

Obama’s advantage over Clinton would be most pronounced in the Southern and Western states President Bush carried in 2000 and 2004, say lawmakers interviewed by The Hill. In total, 32 members of Congress from these “red states” have endorsed Obama. Twenty-two lawmakers from those states have backed Clinton.

On the Minds of Superdelegates 1
On the Minds of Superdelegates 2
On the Minds of Superdelegates 3
On the Minds of Superdelegates 4

Obama’s Pennsylvania Strategy
Clinton Must Win Pennsylvania
It’s Still Over for Clinton

On the Minds of Superdelgates 5

this is my fifth in a series of "what's on the minds of superdelegates?" after all, they WILL decide the race. so how are should supers vote? follow the will of the people? vote for whomever they want? yes, they can do that.
what are they considering? popular vote, delegate counts, states won, "big states" won?
the up-to-date superdelegate count is in my sidebar. the information comes from demconwatch, which has done a great job tracking.

one super started out in the clinton camp. now he's not quite so sure:

DAVID HARDT, PRESIDENT YOUNG DEMOCRATS OF AMERICA: Well, I disagree a little bit. I don't like the idea that somehow the will of the people has already decided this because we know, going into the convention, that neither candidate will have won enough delegates to be victorious. So I don't buy the argument that the will of the people has decided one candidate or another. I think we're still a very divided party. And part of the process of deciding our nominee is winning superdelegates. And those of us who are superdelegates knew this. The campaigns knew this going in from day one. And that's just part of the process. It's been that way for decades. And, you know, if people don't like that part of the process, then we should change it.

But it is what it is and I think we should abide by party rules. And I don't like the idea that somehow if my state votes for one candidate or another, that I should vote for that candidate based on how my state voted.

LEMON: Have you declared who you're going to support as a superdelegate?

HARDT: Not yet. I waiver back and forth every day. You know, one day I might be for Senator Obama and ask me the next day and I might be for Senator Clinton. It's just a very tough decision.

LEMON: Yes, why is that? Explain that.

We heard John Lewis. He said it really -- I mean it tugged at his heartstrings to do it. He's friends with the Clintons, but he thinks there's a wave afoot in the country that's swinging toward Barack Obama and change, as he puts it. And he said this was, you know, harder for him than the choices he made during the civil rights movement.

So why is it so tough for you? Is it a generational thing, do you think?

HARDT: Well, yes. I mean, obviously, my generation is overwhelmingly supporting Senator Obama. However, as a longtime party activist, I really appreciate and honor everything that the Clintons have done for our country. So I'm very torn.

You know, there's very little in policy between both candidates. But, you know, it's a very tough decision and I have to weigh a lot of different factors in. And I'm also elected as president of the Young Democrats of America. And I have to look at who's going to work best with our organization going into November. So that's of course, an important factor for me, as well.

LEMON: There are people who are saying you know what, if it comes down to the superdelegates, I am going to switch sides. I am going to remove myself from this -- and making a number of other accusations that -- things that they're going to do.

What do you make of this? I mean do you think people had this in mind, especially the Hunt Commission, when they came up with this whole thing about the superdelegates back in the '80s?

HARDT: I'm not sure they had this in mind. But to be honest, you know, it is going to come down to the superdelegates. Neither candidate is going to have enough unpledged delegates to win this.

LEMON: Yes.

HARDT: So someone will have to get enough super-delegates or automatic delegates to win this race.

LEMON: Now, I'm listening. Now, here's what I'm thinking, though. If it's not the candidate, it seems like if it's not the candidate that you're in support of, then people say, you know, they're going to change parties or vote for the other candidate. So it may just be a matter of that.

HARDT: I really don't buy that argument. I've heard that from a few people. But as soon as you remind them that your choice is either Senator Clinton, Senator Obama or John McCain, the clear choice is to stick with the Democrat.

LEMON: Yes.

HARDT: We have two incredible candidates that are well qualified to be president of this country and are, by far, better candidates than John McCain.

one super has had enough:

In a stern letter to both Obama and Clinton, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), warned that in recent weeks "the long term goal of beating the Republican nominee took a back seat to the short term goal of proving one's viability by tearing down the other Democratic candidate."

“We lost sight of the general election, we lost sight of the true opponent,” he said, “and if we continue to be shortsighted, I fear we will lose in November."

DeFazio didn't exactly say that he'll endorse the first candidate who makes nice in the Democratic presidential race, but believes the two Democratic senators should focus on their Republican rival, Arizona Sen. John McCain, rather than each other.

another stripped of super status is dealing with forgoing his job, his mission and his family to be with a prostitute:

Eliot Spitzer announced that his resignation as Governor takes effect on Monday, March 17. The St. Patrick's Day Parade starts up Fifth Avenue that day, and the Governor of New York traditionally has a role at the head of the New York State Police contingent. He also has a reserved seat for the mass in St. Patrick's Cathedral beforehand. Will Spitzer be at mass or in the parade? It wasn't immediately clear, but we do know now that -- as predicted -- he will not be a superdelegate at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

here's someone who isn't but who makes some rational reasoning giving obama the edge:

2) Who has the best chance of winning? This is the most important question but also the hardest to answer. Clinton may be tough enough to withstand GOP attacks, but she's also incredibly polarizing. More than 40% say they won't vote for her no matter what. And even conservative Republicans leery of McCain despise her so much that they might turn out in droves. But even her enemies respect her intelligence and competence, and women will certainly turn out for her. Obama, on the other hand, has brought a whole new generation into the party and if he can sustain that, it would be a powerful force in November. But he hasn't yet proven his mettle -- both in the sense of being tough enough to withstand GOP attacks and in fleshing out his rhetoric with a detailed policy agenda that rivals Clinton's. If he does that by August, I'd give him the advantage, but if he can't, then this question goes to Hillary.....
So who would I vote for if I were a superdelegate? Obama has a slight edge, if the convention were held today, but there are still a lot of factors in play. That's why I'm staying uncommitted. And looking forward to getting feted in Denver.

On the Minds of Superdelegates 1
On the Minds of Superdelegates 2
On the Minds of Superdelegates 3
On the Minds of Superdelegates 4
It’s Still Over for Clinton

Clinton Wins 3 States Nets Maybe 12 Delegates

delegates, delegates, delegates.

i see that there are some people (those who have better things to do and haven't learned the ins and outs of delegates) who don't realize that even though clinton wins states, doesn't mean she wins and that there is virtually no way she can win, even if she wins the next 16 states.

obama's lead is simply too big.

last night for example, she'll end up with less than 12 net delegates. the texas caucus vote is still being counted. so far, clinton won 185 last night, with her three "big" states and obama has 173, so far, with his vermont win.

in fact, obama is ahead at this point.
not to say clinton isn't going to try other techniques or apply hope, as in if she keeps going, she hopes obama will blunder.
this is how it stands:

Obama: 1360 delegates
superdelegates: 199 (obama added 2 to this number today)
total delegates: 1559

Clinton: 1220 delegates
superdelegates: 240
total delegates: 1460

for more superdelegates: Superdelegates explained

Superdelegates Explained

superdelegates are bad. imagine, all the work--and money for some people--that you have put behind supporting your candidate completely at the whim of a superdelegate.

well, that's the way it is. if neither candidate gets enough delegates, then these superdelegates can pick the candidate they want-- not the one who has the popular vote, or the most states but simply the candidate who they are beholden to. of course, they could do the right thing, but they don't have to.

they favor clinton at this point.
the superdelegate count: obama has 146; clinton 232
those that haven't picked a candidate: 339

a list of superdelegates backing a candidate
a list of superdelegates up for grabs

superdelgates explained.

News of the day:

McCain and Obama Turned Fire on Each OtherNew York Times
Open Caucus: Obama's Winning StreakNew York Times
Exclusive Interview: Obama Reaches Out to Critics and RepublicansU.S. News & World Report Debate intensifies over role of super delegates in Clinton-Obama raceLos Angeles Times
Clinton Goes Negative on Obama in WisconsinWall Street Journal
Analysis: Obama Crashes ThroughCBS News
Clinton Ex-Campaign Manager Backs ObamaThe Associated Press
Clinton, Obama speak to Texas Latinos with radio, TV ads in SpanishDallas Morning News
The Democrats Obama has the momentumEconomist
Obama sweep of Potomac states pierces Clinton baseGlobe and Mail
Barack Obama Datapoint of the DayBy Felix Salmon
John McCain Goes After Barack ObamaBy Nico Pitney
Barack Obama's Results in the 36thBy Anthony Stevens

Superdelegates or Voters to Decide Election

we all had better get out there and vote for a candidate because if the delegate math doesn't play out then the slimey world of politics would kick in. And then it wouldn't be up to the voters to decide who wins the democratic nomination. it would be the superdelegates. not a good scenario. we need to vote like mad.

today it's maine's turn amid big snow and wind today
thousands at maine rally.
the baltimore sun endorsed obama.
other newspaper endorsements
NYT superdelegate story
upcoming primaries and caucuses.

Magical Mystical Superdelegates

aha! superdelegates throw around their super powers if the candidates don't get the 2025 delegates needed to win the nomination. i hope this doesn't happen because it seems a very subjective thing.
There are 796 superdelegates and apparently, Obama has 96 pledged, which means they said "I do" to obama and clinton has 204 pledged, according to the NYT. so the rest of them are up for wooing.