Folks, do you get the feeling we're just being gamed?

[JFN1]

What is up with the superdelegates? It is mathematically impossible for Clinton to win this thing, because there is no way she will receive 100% of the remaining pledged delegates still to be decided.

The math is inescapable.

So what the hell are the supers waiting for? As McCain/Bush and the Republicans continue to focus on the general, Democrats flounder in primary-land, despite there being a clear mathematical nominee.

Are they just playing games? Because it seems to me if the supers have the party, and our beloved country, as the focus of their service, then this thing should be decided already.

And why are there supers out there still giving their support to the mathematical loser?

I just don't like this feeling that We, the People, are being toyed with...and for what...?

[SoonerPride]

1. Obama has all the supers in his corner

They refuse to release them en masse because it would make Hillary cry.

[DemVet]

2. There is no loser or winner yet.

[SoonerPride]

5. Wrong

There is a loser.

Her name is Hillary.

[JFN1]

8. Really? Then show us the math that makes it so

because all of the math I've been looking at on CNN, MSNBC, etc., tell a different story. We have a nominee, ie, a winner.

Let's see the math (and please show your work).

[DemVet]

18. Nope, no winner yet. No candidate has enough delegates to secure the nomination.

2026 needed...neither has that.

More will be required to clinch if FL and MI are seated.

[soothsayer]

27. Yup. Schroedinger's cat.

[NightWatcher]

3. strange things are afoot at the Circle K

The Supers should have come along the day after Obama got the majority, but they havent yet. I'm a little nervous

[TechBear_Seattle]

4. They are waiting to accept Clinton's bribes, perhaps?

There is ample evidence that her campaign is trying to buy off the superdelegates. Apparently, these bribes have been quite generous.

[book_worm]

6. everybody is trying to be so respectful of poor Hillary so they are waiting until the last primaries

and then I think they will weigh in in greater numbers.

[EFerrari]

7. I don't think so. A lot of those people are elected, right?

So, whoever they endorse, they can expect some kind of backlash among their own constituents. Why take an unneccessary risk with the people who keep you in office?

[JFN1]

12. Because it is unAmerican and unDemocratic not to

I'm really sick of politicians "for life." We've got to change being elected to Congress from winning the lottery back into a dignified term of service to our country. These people who think exclusively in terms of the next election really frighten me...

[EFerrari]

17. There is nothing unAmerican about waiting to endorse, lol,

one of these candidates until your own risk is manageable.

People who think in terms of the next election are generally called "politicians". :)

[JFN1]

23. I wasn't saying that

you almost understood me. My point is we need to change what defines, what motivates, a politician. Bill Clinton made $100 million after being President - in just 8 years.

It's too easy to get rich in politics - and my point was, this needs to change, because in such a system politicians base ALL of their decision on greed/lust/selfish personal considerations, instead of just doing the job professionally, and competently.

Politicians KNOW what awaits them - wealth. It is the carrot dangled by big business and entrenched special interests that motivates them - elections are more and more, just a formality.

Actually, I believe it was Clinton who, some time ago, recommended America start an academy, similar to one of the military academies, for public servants. I think that is a good idea.

Government is art, as well as science. Do we really want a bunch of selfish teenagers running things forever?

[EFerrari]

24. On that, we couldn't agree more.

I don't see how we're going to do it, but dismantle this corrupting system we must.

[IsItJustMe]

47. They have their heads so far up their own collective asses they can't even begin to see the day

light. I think they are gutless wonders.

[high density]

9. On June 4 they need to end this thing

I don't know what they think will be different between now and then, but that's the only logic I can think of behind all of these super delegates remaining undeclared.

[Hamlette]

10. I think they are waiting until May 31 to see if the party seats MI and FL and if that changes the

pledged delegate count in favor of Clinton.

Or maybe there was a deal cut that the supers would hold their fire until the committee meets?

I'm actually clueless. Seems he got so many, like 50 or so, in the last few weeks but hardly nuffin since Tuesday.

tick

tick

tick

....we wait.

[TBF]

32. Yes, it feels like something is going on.

Maybe they meet and tell the candidates the votes are split 50/50 and if that doesn't do it the rest of the SD's commit. My guess is that a bunch of people in Washington already know how that meeting is going to come out - the "meeting before the meeting" is always where the real action happens. Obama seems awfully calm so he's probably in the know as well.

[2rth2pwr]

11. Clinton has supers obstensibly committed to Obama, that will dramatically break

for her in the closing days. This will cement her position as the comeback kid. She will have the wind at her back going into the GE.

[JFN1]

14. So in other words

Clinton is counting on the dishonesty of the super's broken promises to win. Aren't we supposed to be getting rid of Bush and his neocon liars?

[2rth2pwr]

19. It's just tactics.

[2rth2pwr]

45. Where was your outrage when a Clinton super switched to Obama?

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dc/2008/04/harry_thomas_told_the_dc.html

[emilyg]

53. I just love selective outrage.

[TornadoTN]

15. If that happens, she'll be sailing alone

Seriously, she'll be sailing along on the goodship Hillaryis44 all the way to getting trounced in the general.

[KAZ]

33. Whack job.

[John Q. Citizen]

37. Nominated for a DUzy!

[sellitman]

40. Why would his supers switch? Splain plez.

[jedr]

13. I think that Karl gave HRC the rabbit hole that the repubs' use;

None of this has made much sense since Pa.:banghead:

[JFN1]

20. That's why I'm scared...

Hillary is using resources provided by Rove...and you can bet, if Rove is helping Hillary and wants her to win, it will not be good for Democrats - or America...

[rateyes]

16. In the case of my DINO Congressman, Jim Marshall, he won't

commit because he's a damned coward. Blue Dog piece of shit who will not get my vote this time around, and I don't give a damn if he loses to the puke by 1 frickin' vote. A Republican by any other name is still an asshole.

The majority of the Dems in Marshall's district (the vast majority) voted for Obama. But, he needs crossover Repukes to win, and he can't alienate the racists who make up that vote.

Again, he's a fucking coward, and he will probably vote for Clinton after Obama has already locked up the nomination--or won't vote at all.

I'm ashamed to call him my Congressman.

[dsomuah]

21. Many super delegates will not endorse until the primaries are over.

Many of the supers remaining are people like Nancy and Harry Reid, Jimmy Carter, and Howard Dean who already have a candidate preference but refrain from making a public endorsement because they feel they need to appear impartial or they don't want to damage their relationships with the candidate they plan to vote against. Some of them have hinted at their preference: For example, the Clinton campaign has said it believes Pelosi is privately an Obama supporter and Carter has hinted that he is an Obama supporter, but neither of them will endorse until all the primaries are over and we know what the final numbers look like, and settle the question of Florida and Michigan. Then most of them will probably just endorse whoever happens to be the winner at that point.

Remember that George Bush didn't endorse McCain until he mathematically clinched the nomination even though it was obvious for weeks before that, that McCain would be the nominee. I don't believe Bush nominated McCain because that's who he supports. He just endorsed the winner. Many supers will do that after everything is over.

[99th_Monkey]

22. If this isn't settled by June 5, as Pelosi and Dean have said it would, we need to raise holy Hell

with the Supers and with the Democratic Leadership in general.

I doubt they will allow even the Clintons to continue after all the states have had their primaries,
with the ONLY possible result being to weaken the Democratic nominee's chances in November;
but if it's not decided by June 5 .. they need to hear LOUD and CLEAR from the rank and file.

[Ysabel]

25. seconded...

[JFN1]

26. Agreed.

[IsItJustMe]

48. One hundred percent on that.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

28. I had a call last night from a democratic state organizer...I told her

not to ask me for a dime or a minute of my time until the Super D's get their shit together.

We need a resolution in order to move forward on national and state levels.

[Blondiegrrl]

29. They're waiting for the final primaries in early June.

That way, Hillary will have one less thing to squawl about when Obama wins the nom.

[dana_b]

30. you got it.

No "that's un-Democratic" b.s. then. iT will play out and then, I hope, most will declare.

[babylonsister]

36. Yep. She has an opportunity to do the right thing now. Will she is the question. nt

[emilyg]

54. She is doing the right thing.

I"m happy.

[MonkeyFunk]

31. You guys really should look up the meaning of

"mathematically impossible".

You guys keep saying it, and you're wrong.

[stillcool]

34. we're hoping for the "catastrophic event"..

or trying to cook something up...

Clinton campaign on ropes
BY JOHN GUERRIERO
Published: May 08. 2008 6:00AM
---------
Murray, who has supported Bill and Hillary Clinton since 1991, said these are tough times for people like him who are in the Clinton camp but want to unify the party.

"The sense is, absent some catastrophic event that would take place in this campaign, it's going to be very difficult to see a path to victory for Hillary given what happened" Tuesday, Murray said
http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080508/NEWS02/805080437

Sun May 11, 2008
Analysis: Could Clinton land the VP nomination?

Several Clinton associates say there is still a ray of hope among some in her campaign: that a "catastrophic" revelation about Obama might make it possible for her to win the presidential nomination. But barring that, Hillary and Bill Clinton recognize that her candidacy is being abandoned and rejected by superdelegates whom she once expected to win over and that, even if she were to win the popular vote in combined primary states, she will almost certainly be denied the nomination.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/10/bernstein.clinton/index.html?section=cnn_latest

CBSNews.com Reports: N.Y. Senator Now Faces Nearly Impossible Odds To Capturing Democratic Nomination
May 7, 2008

Clinton's Path To Victory Slipping Away
There is one scenario which does work for Clinton and that’s a massive movement of superdelegates leaving Obama and supporting her. The party leaders could do that, but it would take some unforeseen development in the race between now and the convention for them to do so. Obama, in some way, would have to be rendered so unelectable that the party rejects him at the convention. That’s not much to hang a hat on but it’s starting to look like her best option.

And even that might not be a viable option, said Joe Trippi. “Even if the catastrophic thing existed or happened, if she were perceived to have caused it, I think it would end her campaign too,” Trippi said. I don’t think there’s any way now for her to gain the nomination. She’s at the point now where if she tries to make a case against Obama, it will actually speed up superdelegates joining his cause just to shut the campaign down.”

But Trippi notes that the Obama campaign and Democratic leaders are still likely to give Clinton the room she needs to go forward on her own terms, provided that she does so in a positive manner. “I think there’s lots of tolerance for her going on, running the table into the convention and having a presence there,” he said. “But if she actually tries to compete in the trenches for the nomination in a way that looks like it’s damaging the nominee … I don’t think there will be any tolerance for that at all.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/07/politics/main4078586.shtml

[Triana]

35. How many Republicans like Rove are the Clintons in bed with in order to arrange...

...this "catastrophe" before Hillary finally gets her lard-arse out of it?

I believe she's just hanging on until they can arrange it - if she can make up enough excuses (no matter how rediculous) to keep on until the Repigs/Rove dig something out or make something up about Obama (more likely the latter) that will destroy him - she THINKS she'll win then.

Problem is - YEPPERS - SHE WILL BE BLAMED FOR IT and she'll STILL lose.

[stillcool]

39. it's the one that makes the most sense..

to me. Playing out the clock hoping against hope for the clouds to part, the skies to open and a huge bolt of lightening strike Obama...and then she and the celestial choir will sing.

[stillcool]

67. Is this not just too ironic?

what a difference a day makes...

[K Gardner]

38. Someone floated an interesting theory earlier... Obama already has all

the SDs he needs. He's rolling them out, as we've seen, when he needs them. He's left not much to chance and his team is good.

So..we see the longer Hillary stays in, the worse she looks, the more damage she does to herself and her viability as any kind of candidate.

Obama isn't worried.. he has this wrapped up and he's off campaigning for the GE.

Meanwhile, Hillary looks more like a fool every passing day.

Are we SURE he's not just giving her plenty of rope... and time..

[JimGinPA]

42. I've Heard That Said A Few Times...

And that's how I think this has been playing out for some time now.

[femrap]

41. And We, the People haven't been

toyed with before???? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[WhiteTara]

43. This is called the 50 state strategy

Everyone gets their say (well maybe not Fl or MI - but that's another story)

This is democracy. It is messy. It is not for the faint hearted or the unforgiving or the unbending.

Don't forget the four fold way
Show Up
Pay Attention
Tell the Truth
Don't be Attached to the Outcome

You will be happier and your blood pressure will stay under control

[BenDavid]

44. hell, maybe they believe there is a video out there showing

michelle obama using the word "whitey" in her speech at the wright church. Or they are waiting for the otehr shoe to drop on obama. who knows why......

do i personally believe there is a video with her saying "whitey". NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! If it were, then republicans would have played it since they believe HRC would be the easiest to beat....but then again looking at the polling showing HRC winning sgainst McCain and obama losing to McCain, the right might be holding on to that so called video......

[BlueIris]

46. I've been getting that feeling for *quite* a while.

Quite a while.

[Douglas Carpenter]

49. at least in the sense that the Republicans want to encourage this nonsense to drag things out

I doubt that it's a conspiracy though. But who knows?

[BobS]

50. Yes, Hillary has the same blind confidence Junior had his first election

later to find out, because he knew Florida was rigged.

[FlyingSquirrel]

51. Here's the deal

They are embarrassed about the system and their place in it. They do not wish to be the ones whose individual votes cause Obama to become the presumptive nominee. They'd much rather that the voters in the final primary states tip him over the edge so it will look more democratic.

So the ones who do not need much political cover are coming forward, a few at a time. But they will not come forward in sufficient numbers to put him at 2025. They'll come forward in enough numbers over the next 12 days that Obama will clinch the nomination under current rules with his victories on June 3.

After that, the remaining superdelegates will (for the most part) endorse this result, coming out for Obama and using as political cover the fact that he's already won the nomination under the rules we've been playing by since the beginning. This will put any talk of FL and MI to rest finally, as Obama will have enough endorsements that it would not matter HOW they were counted (even in the most beneficial way to Hillary). What the rules committee decides on May 31 will stand because there will be no point for Hillary to contest it at the convention, because Obama will have the votes regardless of any possible change she could be pushing for.

[wiggs]

55. Good point...supers wanting voters to put Obama over the top...still, something

doesn't add up in all this. Clinton would know about the supers, yet she's still campaining like she's on the verge of victory. Don't get it.

[FlyingSquirrel]

58. I think at this point she just wants to raise money to get herself out of debt.

She knows she's lost but if she pretends she's gonna go all the way she can wring a few more dollars out of her supporters and reduce her losses.

[casus belli]

52. The answer - June 3rd.

They're so close now it wouldn't make sense not to let her finish this out. Come June 4th however, i think the tone will change dramatically.

[VotesForWomen]

56. maybe you've never heard of a little thing called the GE; the SDs are supposed to pick the candidate

who can win. i know you guys just want to 'beat the bitch,' but some of us actually want to win in november.

[Political Heretic]

60. The people of the democratic party have already chosen the candidate they think has the best chance

of winning, among two remaining candidates who can both win.

I prefer a party of the people, not one where party elites overturn the popular process in a backroom somewhere.

[VotesForWomen]

63. what? the SDs aren't people? if caucuses count, the SDs damn well count, and in any case, those are

the rules. SDs were created specifically to choose a winning candidate, not just rubberstamp the other votes. otherwise, why have them?

[Political Heretic]

66. No, in this context they are not "the People" - when they veto the results of the popular process

What can I say? The rules are wrong.

But that argument is for the future. I'm certainly expect people to play by the rules, something Hillary has refused to do throughout this campaign. The problem is, both candidates are electable. And all the zealot bloviating about one or the other not being is ludicrous and based on pure uncorroborated speculation.

For every analyst, insider or ordinary person who gives their "argument" for why Clinton is unelectable, there is another analyst, insider, or ordinary person who gives their "argument" for why Obama is unelectable. To overrule the popular process - that would be the process in which I, and ordinary democrat can participate - it would take extraordinary failures of a popular candidate. We don't have that in either candidate.

Comparing super-delegates to caucuses is nonsense. I can elect to participate in my caucus if I desire. I can not elect to case a super-vote that has the potential to overrule the votes of ordinary folk. Superdelegates can do that.

A discussion about which formate - primary or caucuses - is better for participation, is a different discussion altogether, and I favor primaries.

[SwampG8r]

61. sexist much?

beat the bitch indeed

[VotesForWomen]

62. hey, i'm just repeating what i've heard from the O-ists here, and yes, it's sexist.

[AuntPatsy]

57. If any Republican stands a chance in hell of getting elected legally

and without deceitful tactics than America is lost period, Sen clinton will not be the cause, its a false argument meant to confuse from the facts.

[Political Heretic]

59. I'm guessing there's a lot of behind the scenes stuff going on about VP, Clinton exit, deal making,

...etc.

They might be trying to work a way for Clinton to agree to step aside, without SDs technically sealing the deal themselves, so that the process doesn't look like it was decided by party elites instead of regular voters. That could include some attempt at negotiating on a VP slot, or counter-offers (there was a story/rumor that Obama campaign has told Hillary Campaign no on VP).....

...I think there's a massive amount of behind the scenes wheeling and dealing activity negotiating the wind-down of this race. And I think the SDs are on hold while that plays out.

[McCamy Taylor]

64. In 1992 April Bill Clinton was the ONLY Dem standing and the SDs would not endorse him.

They were biding their time, because he was new and they did not want to commit for fear that the Bush machine would pull some scandal out of its ass.

You are witnessing the same thing now. The SDs are afraid that they will commit too soon and then the Bush machine will pull a Thomas Eagleton and prove that Dems made the wrong choice and that will show the country how stupid the SDs are.

[Dark]

65. Simple. They want to wait til all the (official) primaries have concluded, that way the

republicans won't be able to throw the "you disenfranchised your voters!" meme in the GE.

And no, Fla. and Mich. don't count.