comment #1

JHRussell says ...

Who can blame her? If neither candidate has enough delegates from the primaries, then the super delegates are fair game. And I can't blame her for pushing for the Michigan and Florida delegates, too...I am going to enjoy every minute of this debacle...

comment #2

Todd says ...

One can only hope if it did get down to that type of decision making that the Democrats put up a candidate that can be beat John Mccain. I'm sure the race card trumps the sexism card though. Americans still like to keep the woman in their place.

comment #3

BurmaShave says ...

It will have become clear by then that she values her own sucess over the future of this nation and the party, and I dont think that will attract many superdelegates. They were never intended to decide the nomination, many of them have expresed discomfort at this whole process.

And remember: Obama beats McCain. Hillary doesnt. Zee cards don't lie!

comment #4

tophertilson says ...

So Obama could get more votes from American citizens than Hilary but still lose the nomination to her? Where have I heard that song before?

Our democracy sure ain't what it's advertised to be...

comment #5

ksmith says ...

Actually, super delegates were created to decide the nomination. Their role was created by the Hunt Commission after the debacles of McGovern (crushed by Nixon) and Carter (squeaked by Ford; beaten handily by Reagan), both of whom were able to win the nomination because the party played no role in the process at that point. They have never been needed for the nomination till now is all.

comment #6

Dirty Harry says ...

JHRussell is ABSOLUTELY correct.

And it's also possible one may have more delegates and one may have more popular votes. Then what?

And this thing is far, far, far from over. Hillary's got the eye of the tiger now and is finally hitting Obama on his record and his messianic hollow speechifying. This is the perfect strategy for her in these big states. It's not dirty politics that can blowback on her and will either force Obama to talk specifics (never good, it will cost him votes) or not talk specifics and make people wary.

This things is far from over.

The Clintons are at their most effective in the position they're in right now. Oh, man, is this fun.

comment #7

AJW says ...

KSmith, would Gary Hart agree with that assessment?

comment #8

Celebrity Werewolf Hunter says ...

This is going to get very ugly from both sides, it seems almost unavoidable. The fact the she is even remotely trying to make a case for getting the Florida/Michigan delegates is absolutely ridiculous. If she wants to have another contest where both candidates are on the ballot fine. But otherwise she shouldn't even bring the topic up as a point of discussion. Somehow the democratic party will find a way to piss away all their momentum and what should be a cakewalk of a general election will become an embattled dogfight and eventual loss.

The only shot Democrats have to avoid all of this is if Obama takes 2 of the 3 big remaining states and wins everything else on the map, otherwise be prepared for an all out melee. Then she clearly couldn't make a case for being the choice of the American people.

comment #9

dangovich says ...

While such a fight wouldn't help the Dems, it's worth pointing out that the Republicans are far from united behind their candidate.

comment #10

BurmaShave says ...

ksmith, they were intended to give the establishment candidate a cushion, not to decide against the will of elected delegates.

As for Michigan and Florida, there is no fair way to seat them. Do it by proportion of delegates won nationally I suppose. Obviously pissing off their delegation does no good for the fall. Is Howard Dean smart enough to know that?

And dangovich, they may not be united, but they'll be behind him. Remember "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line."

comment #11

SpinDozer says ...

"Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line."

JW's animosity to everyone except Obama is nothing compared to the Right Wing's (asinine) hatred of McCain. There will definitely be some protest voting and non-voting protest, enuff to make a difference? I don't know.

It wouldn't surprize me if Obama's race is more effective in getting them in line as more than a few of these folks don't mind a Hillary victory so they can rally against her during her time in office and they believe it will lead to a lock GOP victory in '12 with a "real" conservative.

comment #12

ksmith says ...

When super delegates were created the hope was that the nomination would not be determined before it went to the convention. Even though they can commit to voting for a candidate, there is nothing that makes them do so. (See John Lewis's recent announcement that even though he had previously endorsed Clinton he now plans to vote for Obama.) They are formally uncommitted until they caste their vote.

I'm not saying they were created to go against the will of the rank-and-file voters. I am saying they were supposed to be the deciding factor at the convention.

There is understandably a lot of hand-wringing over the possibility that one candidate could win more votes but still lose the nomination. I think the ghost of 2000 looms too large for Democrats to overturn the results of the primaries.

As for Gary Hart, never tempt the media to play gotcha. They will.

comment #13

ksmith says ...

Although I should say that if the voters picked another McGovern, the party leaders might have considered picking someone else. Thankfully, Gravel and Kucinich never really caught on this year.

comment #14

moviemaniac2002 says ...

Have said this before....
McCain Vs. Hilary = comes down to a handful of
votes. Election, a la 2000, gets thrown into the
Supreme Court. Supremes (big spoiler here) annoint McCain as Prez.
McCain as Prez = guaranteed 4 more years of war in Iraq, Iran and God knows where else..and another President who functions as a massive
lightning rod for worldwide hatred of America..and guaranteed 4 more years of USA in a state of perpetual fear and anger, with half the
electorate feeling they've been swindled again.

comment #15

Dirty Harry says ...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23172428#%2323172428

Watch this video at 4:37 it's priceless. Absolutely priceless.

Sadly, Obama couldn't answer any better. "I'm a good politician."

comment #16

Abbey Normal says ...

My comment at 1:41 pm, in your 9:01am post's comment thread:

"There's no longer any doubt about Hillary's intentions, and it saddens me. I have defended her here and elsewhere, but I'm done with it.

The reason why is that her communications director today baldly stated that she's going to take it all the way to the convention no matter how the pledged delegate count works out. Apparently, she and her team have no qualms at all about letting a bunch of party poobahs decide this thing, as long as it's in their favor. The will of the people, such as it is, matters not a whip to her, nor does the prospect of a deeply splintered party heading into the general election.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/02/clinton_counts.html

There's only one word for it: Shameful. She should abide by how the actual earned delegates work out. The notion that delegates from elected officals, decided in smoky backrooms, should count just as much as delegates won in primaries and caucuses is bullshit. Anyone with even a base understanding and affection for true democracy intuitively gets that.

Also, just so you know, the Quinnipiac poll was taken before the Potomac primaries, and doesn't contain whatever bump you would presume Obama would get out of those huge victories."

If you're going to steal my link, give me a credit why don't you???

comment #17

Rich S. says ...

I have one question to which I honestly don't know the answer. Are the pollsters that are saying that Obama would beat McCain in the general election (but Hillary wouldn't) the same pollsters that claimed that Obama had double-digit leads over Hillary in California and New Hampshire? If so, why would those polled lie then, but tell the truth now?

comment #18

JHRussell says ...

"The notion that delegates from elected officals, decided in smoky backrooms, should count just as much as delegates won in primaries and caucuses is bullshit."

Umm, dude, it is not a "notion" and it is not "bullshit," it is the rule of the Dem Party...if you don't like the rules, get involved in changing them NEXT time, but these are the rules in place NOW and Hillary is simply playing by the rules as they were intended to be used.

comment #19

Movie Watcher says ...

I did not think it was possible, but the democrats can actually LOSE THE ELECTION! If the delegates are almost equal come convention time, this is going to get nasty. I can see McCain, smiling, saying 'Look, do you really want a democrat as president?' He could narrowly win. I am still not voting; if you think your vote counts, ask Al Gore if your vote counts. It will be a fun show to watch. Can you imagine if McCain wins?

comment #20

MAGGA says ...

For the good of the planet, Obama is the one.
For the good of comedy Huckabee is the one. But I guess he is out now. I will miss the laughs, but his website is still up, so the golden era of comedy is not quite over yet.

comment #21

Jay T. says ...

To be fair, Obama would do the EXACT same thing. If it's not over, it's not over, and there's no reason she should step down in those circumstances.