New York Times says Superdelegates Prefer Pledged Delegate Leader

[slinkerwink]

Here's the New York Times article to be released in tomorrow's Sunday paper:

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.

....

The interviews were conducted at a time of rising displays of animosity between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama, with Mrs. Clinton repeatedly arguing that Mr. Obama did not have the foreign policy credentials to stand up to Senator John McCain of Arizona, the likely Republican nominee. Several superdelegates said they were concerned that this could hurt the Democratic Party in the fall elections and put pressure on some of them to endorse one of the candidates to bring the contest to a quicker conclusion.

....

“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.”

I wonder who's in the lead with pledged delegates, has won more states, and is in the popular vote lead at this point? Hmmmm. I wonder......could it be *GASP* Barack Obama?

[mdmc]

1. hello my old friend

peace and low stress

[slinkerwink]

hey :-)

[slinkerwink]

2. link to article is here

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/us/politics/16delegat...

[Scurrilous]

3. Gobama!

K & R

[jefferson_dem]

4. Between this and Pelosi's statement today...

the ClintonInc "superdelegates are the shiznit" strategy is coming apart at its seams.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jbmaeGHPflyoZifK0IsX...

[slinkerwink]

5. they're prolly freaking out over the NYT story

[IndianaGreen]

9. Except for Hillaryland, everyone is concerned about the damage the kitchen sink is hurting Dems

McCain has been doing well in polls since Hillary threw the kitchen sink.

[karynnj]

22. Also throw in the Boston Globe S-CHIP article

which has to be a shot across the bow. That they are saying that she is exaggerating her role on what has often been given first on her list of accomplishments is fascinating. I assume the real they kept quiet before was the fear that they would give the Republicans ammunition.

The NYT article is fascinating and a good counter to Mark Penn saying - it goes to the winner of PA.

[slinkerwink]

28. Clinton's a serial exaggerator

[IDemo]

6. Looks like it's time for a dishwasher

The kitchen sink ain't gonna be enough.

[goclark]

8. I'm sure she is set to throw that big old sink

right at Obama.

Ring,ring,Ring..... Where are your taxes?

If I have to pay mine,you need to show yours.

[writes3000]

7. You mean they planned to follow the rules and guidelines in making their choice?

Given the fact the SDs have NEVER overturned the will of the people, they aren't inclined to do it now?

I've been saying it for months but it's nice to have more confirmation.

Obama needs to manage this Wright flap and as soon as he does, the SDs need to start making their move. Let PA vote. Let NC and IN vote. And then end it.

[slinkerwink]

10. yeah

[journalist3072]

11. Newsflash: there IS no rule that says superdelegates have to vote according to pledged delegates

The superdelegates are independent, and they are NOT required to vote based on who won their district or their state or anything like that. If that were the case, you would have seen Senators Kennedy and Kerry endorse Sen. Clinton by now, since she won their state.

You Obamanians need to stop this false notion that the superdelegates would be violating rules if they voted for the person who didn't get the most votes in a particular state or something like that.

The superdelegates are permitted to cast their vote for whoever they choose.

[slinkerwink]

12. I guess you didn't read the article

[IndianaGreen]

15. I guess he/she didn't read the article like you said

We are getting knee jerk reactions from people in deep denial. The math ain't there for Hillary!

[writes3000]

13. And yet, SDs have never, ever overturned the will of the people - EVER

Clearly, there is a heavy, heavy weight put on the pledged delegate race. Clearly, the respect the outcome of that race. Officially, can they overturn it? Yep. But given the fact that they've never, ever done it, it would take something extraordinary for them to overturn it now.

The superdelegates are going to follow all of those superdelegates before them. They are going to respect the will of the people and the race.

And I'm glad to see it.

[wileedog]

23. No there is no rule

There is common sense dumbass. They are not going to rip the party apart for the Queen.

[karynnj]

24. Here they aren't saying vote by their districts - but confirm the leader of

the pledged count.

Now, back in early February, Kerry is on record saying that doing other would be a disaster for the party - whichever one was ahead. This leads me to think that he would vote the leader - either way. It would be beyond silly if Obama was the leader and he voted for HRC because MA went that way - and she won by 1 vote. The idea that the elected superdelegates vote as the district went, means in a close race - it would be the party insiders - all unelected - who would choose.

I'm glad that if the NYT is right, the superdelegates are rejecting that.

[anigbrowl]

20. I think the fact that he picked up 7 delegates in Iowa today

will reassure them that the voters aren't changing their minds. If things were as awful as Team Clinton would like people to believe, then why didn't any of Edwards' delegates break her way? Seems like she may even have lost one.

[meow mix]

14. they damn well better!

=)

[Upton]

16. It only makes sense

anything else will destroy the party.

[slinkerwink]

18. they're all about the party. Hillary isn't.

[Upton]

21. Exactly

[Quixote1818]

17. Of course. nt

[SunsetDreams]

19. Good to hear

You can't overturn the will of the people. Thanks for posting.

[papau]

25. reflecting the will of the voters" is phrase used - not delegates - so popular vote incl Mich/FL

[my3boyz]

26. Yeah..in your dreams! Those elections were NOT considered legal so they don't count! nt

[Cha]

27. And the whining, dining, and schmoozing

of the SuperDees by the hilarys that we read about yesterday.. Does this mean hilary's only chance is hilary creating a scandal so big that all the voters come flocking to her in the final stages of primaries?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[mdmc]

29. Barack!