Posted on 03/26/2008 3:29:59 PM PDT by SmithL
Twenty top Democratic donors who are supporting Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for saying superdelegates should support the presidential candidate with the most pledged delegates.
No matter what the outcome of the 10 remaining contests, it will be nearly impossible for Clinton to overcome rival Barack Obama's lead in pledged delegates, because they are awarded proportionally based on the outcome.
So it will be up to the nearly 800 superdelegates — party activists and elected officials who aren't bound by any vote — to put one of the two candidates over the mark of 2,024 delegates needed to win the nomination. Obama has 1,406 pledged delegates to Clinton's 1,249, according to The Associated Press count.
Pelosi, who has not endorsed either candidate as chair of the Democratic National Convention, said during a March 16 appearance on ABC's "This Week" that it would be harmful to the party if superdelegates don't support the pledged delegate winner.
In their letter, Clinton's supporters said superdelegates "must look to not one criterion but to the full panoply of factors that will help them assess who will be the party's strongest nominee in the general election."
The letter also noted the donors "have been strong supporters" of the House Democrats' fundraising arm. "We therefore urge you to clarify your position on superdelegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the national convention in August."
Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, "This letter is inappropriate and we hope the Clinton campaign will reject the insinuation contained in it."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
That only means when it counts for a klintoon.
Condemning Chinese oppression in Tibet, sticking fingers in the eyes of Hillary... who is that woman, and what did she do with Nancy Pelosi?
As it becomes clear that they are out of power, more and more will jump ship and start dishing vile dirt on them to boot.
After this, I’m wondering if Hildy might even have some trouble getting re-elected Senator from NY. Maybe people there are getting sick of this crapola and the Spitzer/successor-whatzhisname debacle only reminds them what the Rats are like.
She’ll keep that gig: She knows how to cheat; and once she’s in power, she own’s the ballot boxes.
Make every vote count for Hillary.
There you go again, getting all rational.
The whole purpose of installing the superdelegate system was to be able to override the Rat rank and file when the politicos determined that they were going to take the party down the toilet---as in McGovern.
Truly, the superdelegates were created for just such a situation as exists today, in this race, between these candidates.
But there's no way politically the superdelegates can function as such. Not gonna happen. The only way I see them brokering a ticket is if they get Al Gore to come in and run with Obama, as Pres or VP, after pretending to offer it to Hildy and announcing that she turned it down. Of course, thereafter she'll witch and moan, but by that time, even the Rats will have come to understand that she's a pathological liar and no one will take her seriously. Plus the moonbats simply LUUUUUVVVVVV Al Gore. Once he's on the scene, everything else---including Her Thighness---will be quickly forgotten.
You’re probably right.
But it says a lot about the state of the ‘Toon brand that someone rational such as myself can wonder such things at this point.
And trust me, the war gets worse if the Beest takes the big prize. We get rid of the last RINO, and the rats eat each other up while we find the next conservative leader to take over in 2012. And we will give him a Republican Congress that we take back by 2010.
Sometimes you gotta have a Jimmy Carter to get a Ronald Reagan.
Guess since the Clintons sold the Lincoln Bedroom, as well as our nuke technology, they think they can sell the highest elected office of this great country.
When will Pelosi, Gore, Edwards, and Reid throw their support to Obama and give the Clintons the thumb down?
Get it over with already.
junior mint? They’re very refreshing.
I thought it was worth a second read. Good post, both times!
“If the candidate with the most pledged delegates should win every time, what do the Dems have Superdelegates for? I thought that system was instituted as a firewall against a radical, unelectable in the general, moonbat candidate (i.e. George McGovern redux) somehow getting the majority of delegates in the primaries and winning the nomination. Seems to me Obama is exactly the sort of situation they came up with Superdelegates to prevent.”
Yeah, but the ultra-moonbat wing of the party is trying to change the rules for superdelegates as fast as they can, while simultaneously arguing that MI and FL situation is set in stone. The democrat party will dissolve before our eyes on convention night.
Re#48 True, however, I prefer that Hillary destroy the party as she is doing and McCain serve one term with a young conservative vice president to take over. We live in different times and when the peanut farmer was in office, i.e., the war on terror...
As for the times being more dangerous now, I'd dispute that. The Soviets were still a co-superpower that deserved the name "evil empire", Marxists were invading our hemisphere through Nicaragua, and the oil sheiks were jacking up oil prices, threatening to wreck our economy. It was the American people needing to see that these problems needed a real leader to solve them, and not just some dreamy idealist. The mood of the Rats surrounding Obama reminds me of their foolishness in thinking Jimmy Carter was man enough to be President after the Nixon-Ford era. Our enemy is technologically stupid, not the nuclear and rocket scientists of the old USSR. The only real weapon they have is that we've been far too timid to really blow them to bits, the way even a WWII Democrat would have done.
When a leader does a reasonably good job of keeping the American people safe for a long period of time, the liberals among them think anybody can do it. It takes a bad President to make them re-appreciate a good one.
Points taken and would agree but for 9-11, 7-7, Bali etc...
Oh, that is going to happen regardless I fear.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.