Superdelegates Are Super Stuck!

[babylonsister]

Super stuck!

Democratic superdelegates who haven't yet chosen sides tell Salon about phone calls from Bill Clinton and high-anxiety nightmares. It seems most are not enjoying political superstardom.

By Mike Madden and Walter Shapiro
Pages 1 2


May 2, 2008 | WASHINGTON -- Richard Ray, one of 285 remaining uncommitted Democratic superdelegates, has a new joke that he's been trying out on friends. "I told somebody -- I was kidding with them -- I had a dream last night," said Ray, the president of the Georgia AFL-CIO. "I said I dreamed that all the primaries were over and we were at the convention, and we were taking a roll call, and for whatever reason it was tied and I had to cast the deciding vote. And I woke up in a sweat." Ray laughed and then added, "I don't want that responsibility. No thank you."

There is a common assumption, particularly among passionate supporters of front-runner Barack Obama, that the unelected superdelegates to the Democratic Convention are waiting for an excuse to defy the wishes of rank-and-file voters and install Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee. In truth, there is scant evidence that the 795 superdelegates (mostly members of Congress and the Democratic National Committee) who automatically go to the convention in Denver this August are reveling in their sudden importance. A member of the U.S. House of Representatives from the Southwest also spoke with trepidation about the recurring nightmare of casting the deciding vote at the convention. "My God, I don't want that," he said. "I don't know anybody who is looking forward to that."

In fact, most of the uncommitted seem like the gawky kids on Little League teams who silently pray on every pitch, "Please God, don't let them hit it to me." But with Clinton gaining in Indiana and North Carolina thanks to Obama's recent troubles, the odds increased at least a little bit this week that the ball might be hit right at them.

Most undecided superdelegates Salon interviewed this week wanted to see Democratic voters in the remaining primary states cast their votes before they weigh in. Even though Arizona handily went for Clinton in its Feb. 5 primary, the state's Democratic Party chairman Don Bivens says he believed that it was premature to make an endorsement immediately after the contest. "The fact that we voted on Feb. 5 was just serendipitous," Bivens said. "We could have just as easily been June 5, and I feel like the voter on June 5 counts just as much as the beginning."

Now Bivens knows what it's like in those final states, where every last vote matters. Just this week, he's been courted personally by Obama and Bill Clinton. In a phone call to lobby Bivens for his vote, Obama suggested paying close attention to the vote totals out of Tuesday's Indiana primary. According to Bivens, Obama's pitch was: "Well, I'm ahead, there's very little prospect that these numbers are going to move much. No matter what, nothing much is going to change." Meanwhile, Bill Clinton also urged Bivens to study the Indiana returns. The Arizona party chairman said the former president instructed him, "Watch that white middle-class vote, that's what's going to win it for us in November."

Most of the uncommitted superdelegates want to stay that way as long as possible. While there has been a steady drip-drip flow of superdelegates to Obama over the last two months -- all but erasing Clinton's initial advantage among these party leaders -- the largest subgroup remains uncommitted. According to the latest Associated Press tally, 285 are uncommitted, while 263 support Clinton and 247 are backing Obama, including former national party chairman Joe Andrew, who jumped from Clinton to Obama on Thursday. While some Obama supporters like first-term Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill have claimed that most of the neutral superdelegates are secret Obama-supporters reluctant to directly confront the Clintons, an equally persuasive guess is that the bulk of these fence sitters are what they purport to be -- Democrats desperate for conclusive proof about the identity of the strongest candidate against John McCain.

more...

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/05/02/superdels/

[tridim]

1. The word "install" makes me shiver like it's 1999

I hope we never hear that word again.

[DJ13]

2. This is why I so love Congressional Democrats

:eyes:

[Gman]

3. Two little words of great importance here: scant evidence

But don't tell that to Obamabots who, like kids drinking red soda and gorging on Hershey's kisses, revel in the hysteria they have worked theirselves into and don't want it to stop.

[Uben]

4. The last sentence tells the tale

"Democrats desperate for conclusive proof about the identity of the strongest candidate against John McCain."

It is their job to determine the answer to this question, "Which one is it?" I don't think we will know for sure, even in June, which candidate will do the best against McCain in November. The SDs can look at how each of them are polling against McCain and make their decision. They can go with Obama on the basis of more pledged delegates and states won, but what if he is still polling way behind McCain? Do they nominate a candidate that is losing to McCain, or the one that's beating him handily?

As there will be no clear winner with pledged delegates, they have a monumental task ahead of them to determine who has the best chance to win in November. That is what's best for the party, because without a win in November, democrats will have a very long road ahead of them.