Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Exclusive: In New Video Obama Girl Pleads for Hillary to Stop Attacking Her Man | Main | For Her the Bell Tolls,* by Sen. Hillary Clinton »

Hillary Wants to Flip Pledged Delegates?

March 25, 2008 10:25 AM

In Monday's ed board meeting with the Philadelphia Daily News, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., was asked about the basic math obstructing her path to the nomination.

Specifically, she was asked her plans if, come June, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., remains in the lead with pledged delegates, how she would try to convince superdelegates to give her the nomination if Obama does end up the choice of primary voters and caucus goers?

"I just don't think this is over yet," she said, "and I don't think that it is smart for us to take a position that might disadvantage us in November. And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged. You know, there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They're just like superdelegates."

Say what?

This notion that the Clinton campaign will try to flip pledged delegates has been floated and knocked down before, but I'm failing to arrive at any other interpretation for what she means here other than: we will convince pledged delegates to vote for us, as is perfectly within Democratic party rules, despite the voters who elected them to support Obama.

The Clinton campaign was just asked about this in a conference call.

Clinton senior adviser Harold Ickes said, "No delegate is required by party rule to vote for the candidate for which they're pledged. Obviously circumstances can change and people's minds can change about the viability of a candidate."

Clinton campaign deputy communications director Phil Singer then added: "We are not seeking or asking pledged delegates for Sen. Obama to flip over . . . We are not engaged in any efforts (to flip Obama delegates)."

Is the Clinton campaign's continual reminder to voters (and delegates) that they're allowed to flip not an effort?

It all seems to feed into some negative memes for Sen. Clinton out there -- fairly or unfairly -- of ruthlessness, at the very least.

- jpt

March 25, 2008 in Weblogs | Permalink | User Comments (351)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/27436532

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Hillary Wants to Flip Pledged Delegates?:

User Comments

I heard that a delegate in Texas, pledged to Obama, received a robocall from the Hillary Clinton campaign informing them that they were under no obligation to vote for Obama, and encouraging them to vote for Clinton instead. If this isn't campaigning for pledged delegates to switch, what is? Please investigate this so we can know the truth.

Posted by: SL | Mar 26, 2008 12:16:11 PM

As for Richardson giving his approval to Obama, has anyone considered that he was up to the highest bidder? He had already been in the Clinton cabinet once and is obviously seeking the VEEP spot and when the Clintons wouldnt offer it to him, where else did he have to go. Don't be surprised folks if he is your next VEEP...for Obama would then have most of the minorities to help him win against McCain, which might be the only way he can get elected.

Posted by: lee | Mar 26, 2008 9:18:32 AM

DELEGATES SHOULD BE FLIPPED!!!
If the GOP is not to take the White House again then the DNP must select a different candidate!

Obama & Clinton have become HIGH RISK candidates for the nomination for pres. of the DNP!

Aren't there worthy Democrats (or party crossover)that the delegates--that do NOT have to vote for--select a viable candidate for president? Of course there are many!

The DNP is clearly unable to control this nomination process--as they expected to--SO IT IS TIME FOR ALL GOOD DEMOCRATS TO STAND UP FOR PARTY VALUES AND GET AMERICA BACK ON THE PEOPLE'S PATH!!!

CONTACT YOUR sTATE'S ELECTORATE & TELL THEM TO LOOK ANEW FOR A DEM. OFR PRESIDENT!

Respectfully,
Billy Bob, Florida, where votes don't count unlike Chi-town where even the dead votes are counted.

Posted by: Billy Bob | Mar 26, 2008 9:13:06 AM

There is a lot of Buyer's Remorse by Obama voters. Thanks goodness they can change their mind at the convention. Hooray for those who can stop the DNC from leading us over the cliff. The DNC has a history of choosing UNELECTABLE candidates. Obama can NEVER win in the GE and I sure hope the pledged delegates are waking up to this fact.

Posted by: KathleenVT | Mar 26, 2008 5:36:41 AM

I'm seeing more and more people are getting the same feeling about Clinton: ick! What the Clinton supporters need to ask themselves is why a lot of people who don't care one way or the other have been so turned off by her campaign? Most of us never really knew she had this type of disgusting
"gutter" fighting instinct. Now that we've seen it we are appalled. I am very pleased to see people in the media and cooler heads in the party establishment try to warn her off her attack dog tactics. What amazes me is she actually thinks she stands a chance in November. Beleive me, she has so alienated and yes, literally frightened me, with her unbalanced behavior that I not only will not vote for her, I'll volunteer for McCain to keep her out of the White House. I've never done that before. I'm no crazy Obama person. At this stage I'll settle for someone with the least sleaze, and it sure isn't Hillary. I am very, very offended at her behavior as it impacts the entire nation. And goodness, one would never guess from the tone of the Hillary supporters that there's anything the least bit wrong with the way she does politics. People want her to leave, not because they want the race over, but because she is conducting a campaign that is severely damaging the Democratic Party. We want her to drop out if she cannot conduct a constructive campaign. She has miserably failed at that. I think voting is great. Let's just tell Obama and Clinton to go home and rest for the next 2 months, if they can't behave themselves. I'd love to vote, because I'm in Oregon, but I don't want her to carry her dirty campaign to Oregon, wrecking the party's chances in November.
She got herself in a bind by going to sleep at the wheel in February while Obama built his momentum. That she thinks she is entitled now to claw her way back into the race has taught me a lot about her. She is simply unwilling to accept the consequences of her own mistakes. If this is how she runs a campaign, in perpetual crisis mode, what will she do to our country? Her campaign is an instance of the most grievous failures in judgment. If Obama's not good enough, then sad to say, she isn't either. There are a lot of things worse than McCain. If she gets the nomination she will set back the cause of women by 50 yeears. I'm embarrassed by her, and I'm a woman only 5 years younger than her. It's sad to think that what she has experienced in life did this to her. I'm beginning to think that living as a wife in one's husband's administration is a crazymaking situation when one has talents of one's own. But, it seems to me, her experience, far from helping her, has led her into this netherworld of "extreme" politics. Hillary, you are blowing it, right now, and if you don't see this, then that's proof you should not be in the Oval Office, anywhere near the red phone. I just don't think this can possibly end in her being the nominee. Why should anyone decide she should get the nomination instead of Obama? If she succeeds in wooing superdelegates with the idea that she is the most electable of the two, and that the voices of the voters do not count, well Great! That means we can give the nomination to Gore, or Edwards, or Jimmy Carter, or anyone but her. If she thinks working through the primary season should win her any brownie points, why would it work that way for her but not for Obama? If you are going to go for technicalities as she has you should be willing to admit it doesn't just apply to the other guy. She has bloodied herself so much she is unelectable . This isn't a case of choosing the lesser of two failures, between Obama and herself. The Democratic Party is going to have to be nimble like Bernanke to contain the damage Clinton has inflicted. They are going to have to do the unimaginable and turn to someone else. Of course, Obama has to be no. 2, and Hillary can get Secretary of State. Gore/Obama: I think it's fabulous that the superdelegates and pledged delegates have so much leeway, because it means that a person who doesn't feel like slashing and burning their way to the nomination can still be the nominee, and a winning one at that. The process is brutal, which means that a person has to be almost crazed with blind ambition the way presidential campaigns are run these days. Much better to have a dignified and calm nominee, a statesman.

Posted by: Tina | Mar 26, 2008 4:30:10 AM

If the delegates for Florida and Michigan are counted there should be another vote. I beleive Obama was not on the ballot in one of the states. That wouldnt be fair.

Posted by: Ann429 | Mar 26, 2008 1:00:40 AM

I can’ t understand how Hillary Clinton can accuse Sen. Obama of not wanting the voters of Michigan and Florida to be able to vote for the candidate of their choice and she states how they are being “disenfranchised” then say to all those voters who have voted in their Primaries/Caucuses that their vote can be overturned by the simple act of the Clinton Campaign saying “ your vote doesn’t count because you didn’t vote for Hillary, so we are going to ignore your votes and cause the delegates to switch to Hillary because she knows best!
This level of conceit and disregard for the rules is the reason we need to get George W. Bush out of the White House, why on earth would we want to replace him with the same thing, only this time in a pantsuit ?

Posted by: KR | Mar 25, 2008 10:59:35 PM

I can’ t understand how Hillary Clinton can accuse Sen. Obama of not wanting the voters of Michigan and Florida to be able to vote for the candidate of their choice and she states how they are being “disenfranchised” then say to all those voters who have voted in their Primaries/Caucuses that their vote can be overturned by the simple act of the Clinton Campaign saying “ your vote doesn’t count because you didn’t vote for Hillary, so we are going to ignore your votes and cause the delegates to switch to Hillary because she knows best!
This level of conceit and disregard for the rules is the reason we need to get George W. Bush out of the White House, why on earth would we want to replace him with the same thing, only this time in a pantsuit ?

Posted by: KR | Mar 25, 2008 10:57:21 PM

Poll: Obama way ahead in N.C.
21-point lead the largest so far
(Raleigh) News & Observer

Hillary Clinton in N.C. on Thursday
Barack Obama is way up in the latest Democratic tracking poll.

A survey by Public Policy Polling showed the presidential candidate with 55 percent to rival Hillary Clinton's 34 percent in North Carolina.

The results came after two high-profile speeches by Obama: One on Iraq in Fayetteville, and another in response to video of his minister, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, condemning America.

"This 21 point lead is the largest he has shown in any NC polling to date, and an indication that the Wright controversy isn't causing him any long term harm at least in this state," wrote pollster Tom Jensen on his blog.

The automated poll of 673 likely Democratic primary voters was conducted on March 24. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.8 percent. The Democratic polling firm is based in Raleigh.

In the March 17 poll, Obama led 44 to 43.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by: chyke1 | Mar 25, 2008 8:33:04 PM

I don't think Hillary will be the one to damage Obama. She may have to point things out given the media bias, etc. Obama was never on the national scene before and now that he is finally getting vetted, things will keep coming out. I don't think he can win the WH this year with what has already come out. I think most people who aren't blinded by the Obama light know that as well.

Posted by: sarnorton | Mar 25, 2008 8:31:31 PM

Gov. Richardson, Sen. Kennedy, Congressman Lewis, and Sen. Kerry all gave their Super Delegate to the Senator from Illinois although in the past they said that the Super Delegates should vote for the winner of their states. Although Sen. Hillary Clinton won their states, they gave their votes to her competitor. This reflects how they did not mean what they said.

Super Delegates can vote for anyone they want and not the winners of the state contests.

Posted by: Dr. Rene, USAF Retired, Recently | Mar 25, 2008 7:22:07 PM

Desperate times call for desperate measures.
The fat lady is warming up

Posted by: Thinking | Mar 25, 2008 6:34:50 PM

Samantha Power's "she's a monster" still is most accurate characterization with have of this woman, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Posted by: Harko | Mar 25, 2008 4:44:41 PM


If we had Florida and Michigan re voting or having their delegates seated- we would have a clear winner- needing only a few superdelegates to put them over- by July. But the Obama campaign is blocking this.

Shame on the Media for not giving full and repeat coverage of what is going on behind the scenes with the Florida and Michigan re vote.
It is the voters who are being disenfranchised by the state legislatures (in Florida dominated by Republicans) and Howard Dean and the DNC. This is their fight over schedule and it is the voters who are paying the price.
If there is no re vote for Florida and Michigan- then John McCain will probably win the election because there will be a very negative cloud over the Democratic Nominee...

Posted by: Evelyn | Mar 25, 2008 4:21:23 PM

"Hillary is a serial liar who has zero chance of winning the nomination."

I disagree, she is a serial liar who DOES have a chance of winning, that is the big problem. The only way we can be sure she doesn't steal this nomination is to make the delegates and superdelegates aware of how short their political careers will be should they not vote according to the will of the people.

If she wins the nomination as a result of blowing out Obama in the final rounds of primaries, that would be a different story, but even SHE doesn't believe that will happen.

Posted by: Nick in Virginia | Mar 25, 2008 4:12:07 PM

HRC will not win a general election against McCain. It's as simple as that. When die-hard middle-aged, white, male, Democrats, like me, recoil in disgust from her and her selfish campaign she can kiss it goodbye. I have voted for Democrats in every election since 1976; if she is the nominee, I will sit home or write in Obama.

Let's get real here; Hillary cares only about herself and her ambitions. She cares not one bit for the Party from who she seeks the nomination. If she did, she would quit this media fanned charade of hers. But no, she will tear the Democratic Party apart to fulfill her ambition without regard to the damage she is doing. If you want the GOP to consolidate and win the election, nominate Hillary. She's the only thing that makes a McCain victory possible.

"It's all about me". Hillary Clinton

Posted by: kc | Mar 25, 2008 3:46:49 PM

Latinos are voting in historic Masses and they seem to with La Clinton,I think she has more appeal these days..

Posted by: Marta | Mar 25, 2008 3:42:23 PM

Wowzer, It's sad how clueless and ignorant most Americans are. Clearly, they need to go back to high school and take a Civics 101 class and learn about how our presidents are elected. It's not a matter of popular vote, it's a matter of the "electoral college," who determines who our president will be. Despite long standing calls to do away with the electoral college, it will not happen. Both parties are too invested in the process to allow it to end, it's the reason why they model the primary election with a similar process which uses "super delegates." The current system we use works. People may not like it when their candidate is not elected, but our system works better than any other.


Steve, are you prepared to say that our system indeed works better than any other? The system works, yes, but could it be improved?

One specific feature of the electoral college system is how it keeps small, fringe groups from gaining a significant voice in American politics. This is a double-edged blade, however, as most policies are. While it keeps small, radical factions from building up their power, such as Neo-Nazi groups, it also seeks to preserve the status-quo, by not allowing groups to introduce change until a majority supports the cause.

As for whether or not the system is the best, that I would love to debate with you. However, I do not believe that to be possible at this moment.

May we meet again.

Posted by: Fred | Mar 25, 2008 3:41:52 PM

OBAMA has waaaay 2 many shady issues to win the presidency..if elected MCCain will CRUSH HIM....

Posted by: Angel | Mar 25, 2008 3:40:56 PM

Bonnie,
You seem angry that people are insinuating that Obama is a racist.
You then tell us to "shut the hell up and admit that we are racists" if we wonder about Obama or his pastor........
Most of us learned long ago that, whether rightly or wrongly, we are often judged by the company we keep. That goes double for politicians and preachers!
It's true that Jesus walked with sinners, but most of us are mere mortals and we have a lot to learn. We need discussion, not accusation.

Posted by: akph | Mar 25, 2008 3:39:11 PM

Too bad all you Democrats are fighting among each other. When the Democrats elect Hilliary as their candiadate no matter what Obama has....McCain Wins.

Keep fighting. And you all want to run the US.

Posted by: Mike | Mar 25, 2008 3:37:19 PM

Obama is the new Britney it seems lol

Posted by: Sarina | Mar 25, 2008 3:32:54 PM

I agree drop the race issue. It's nothing new to society. The world need a CHANGE... something new and refreshing. We all need to come together and rebuild the United States of America.

YES WE CAN....Obama 08

Posted by: Grace | Mar 25, 2008 3:32:48 PM

It was two months ago that I stood in line, waiting to cast my primary vote in the Republican primary. My state, you see, decided to move its primary past the date the Democratic National Committee set as the earliest a state could be allowed to hold its vote, barring cases such as Iowa and New Hampshire. As a first time voter, I was well aware of this, and knew that my vote, should it be for the Democrats, would play a minimal role in the entire election process, serving only to be a gauge of where Florida voters stood, lacking the campaigning received by the other states.

And so I cast my Republican vote, under the impression that, at the very least, my vote would help determine who was nominated as the Republican candidate; after all, at least some of Florida's delegates would be seated with the Republicans.

Now, however, I am told of a do-over for the Democratic primary, one which will count and allow Florida's delegates to be seated at the convention. Yet, if the primary is redone, I will not be allowed to take part in it, for I chose to cast a vote in one of the primaries that mattered. Nor, if the Democratic primary results from Florida are accepted, I will have not cast a vote where I truly desired to, for I, as well as twenty-six million other voters, were told that my Democratic vote would be meaningless.

If the delegates from Florida and Michigan are seated, I want my vote back, so that I can vote for who I truly wish to.

Posted by: Lloyd | Mar 25, 2008 3:32:01 PM

DAMN so much controversy Around Obama...I smell trouble

Posted by: sanie | Mar 25, 2008 3:31:28 PM

Obama is an American Hater! Look At his SPIRITUAL ADVISOR DAMNing America! the prophecies were right..the Anti-Christ was gonna speak and seemingly unite others.. but the truth is uncovered OBAMA IS THE DEVIL!!!!

Posted by: Miss Jackie | Mar 25, 2008 3:30:08 PM

Wowzer, It's sad how clueless and ignorant most Americans are. Clearly, they need to go back to high school and take a Civics 101 class and learn about how our presidents are elected. It's not a matter of popular vote, it's a matter of the "electoral college," who determines who our president will be. Despite long standing calls to do away with the electoral college, it will not happen. Both parties are too invested in the process to allow it to end, it's the reason why they model the primary election with a similar process which uses "super delegates." The current system we use works. People may not like it when their candidate is not elected, but our system works better than any other.

Posted by: Steve | Mar 25, 2008 3:29:29 PM

DIdn't realize how much Hillary Clinton hated Democracy until she campaigned for President. Now she's acting more like Slick Hillary with all her mischaracterizations and lies about her experience. Let's not forget she endorsed Bush's War even though better experts on foreign policy such as former National Security Advisor to the HW Bush administration Lt. Col. Brent Scowcroft and long-time personal friend of HW Bush wrote in 2002 against invading Iraq and that it would detract from the War on Terror efforts.

George F. Kennan, architect of the successful Soviet Union containment policy spoke against invading Iraq as well.

But what did Hillary do? Trusted the inexperienced and biased foreign policy advisors from the Bush administration. No, I have no interest in voting for Hillary and if she wins the nomination, I'm voting for Ralph Nader.

Posted by: JL | Mar 25, 2008 3:29:04 PM

I was just thinking, I am not sure if the Republicans think they are actually more likely to win against Hillary, they just know that they will get a lot of support from the Christian right if she is the candidate. At the end of the day the parties don't really care who has the most representatives, senators or president, what they care about is campaign contributions. A fired up conservative base will send in checks and vote for McCain or anyone else they are asked to vote for by their pastor.

I believe that the conservative news has been extrememly successful in elevating the emotional rantings of Obama's pastor, into an issue that will help determine our next president. The conservatives have been much better than the liberals at manipulating mews stories for decades now, even to the extent that they still have many Americans convinced that the news is biased twords liberals.

Everyone in politics has some skeletons in their closit. It's the nature of politics that you make deals with the devil to get ahead. What we as voters have to determine is what a particular candidate for president is actually going to do as president. I believe that McCain has made it clear he intends to stick it out in Iraq (a very bad idea in my opinion), he is likely to show the signs of his age, perhaps even die in office, so we better pay attention to his vice presidential selection. Hillary is as much of a political insider as there can be. She will do things the way they have always been done in Washington, but I believe she has good intentions. Obama appears to be the only candidate we have had in decades who actually may try to make some changes in how things get done. I don't think the powers that be in Washington will allow him to make many substantial changes, but he will try. I don't believe for an instant that Obama is going to make any deals with terrorists, or have muslims take over America. I don't believe for an instant that Obama will favor blacks over whites in his policies. I do believe that Obama will help Ameirca rebuild it's reputation around the world, but then again anyone will be so much better than Bush.

Posted by: captbilly | Mar 25, 2008 3:27:41 PM

I am gay I know what is like to be discriminated OBAMA..I don't need to be BLACK to know what it feels like...

Posted by: Jason | Mar 25, 2008 3:23:33 PM

Obama, racist? He's half white. Ever consider that?

Futhermore, intelligent people have the facts before they make statements that make them look stupid. Try listening to Wright's full sermon. Even the most radical of you can agree with a few of his points.

Posted by: Tina | Mar 25, 2008 3:23:32 PM

"Obama and his pastor need to leave America if they hate so much our loving countru...GOD BLESS AMERICA D"

Good grief...

I say, that if everyone with an IQ of less than 80 would leave America, several post (like the above) would vanish, FOX news would go bankrupt from lack of viewers, and we could get on with the election by looking at the facts, not the "spin emotions" that seem to be so easy to use on people.

Posted by: neveragain | Mar 25, 2008 3:23:27 PM

Hey, Reverend Wright was a Marine! That makes him more patriotic and of more moral character than either of the Clintons. He did not lie about dodging sniper fire.

Posted by: mark | Mar 25, 2008 3:21:41 PM

i love our country just as much as you. i just think we need to step back and pick a new direction for a country. one that doesn't include killing 4000 of our own citizens for a pointless war that is only destablizing the middle east further and definitely not protecting our country read the news. there's rioting in iraq and al qaeda is strong as ever.

Posted by: Drew Clark | Mar 25, 2008 3:21:19 PM

I agree with that comment about Obama saying us "non-blacks" don't have a clue...HOW DARE YOU OBAMA...

Posted by: maid | Mar 25, 2008 3:20:24 PM

Wowzer, It's sad how clueless and ignorant most Americans are. Clearly, they need to go back to high school and take a Civics 101 class and learn about how our presidents are elected. It's not a matter of popular vote, it's a matter of the "electoral college," who determines who our president will be. Despite long standing calls to do away with the electoral college, it will not happen. Both parties are too invested in the process to allow it to end, it's the reason why they model the primary election with a similar process which uses "super delegates." The current system we use works. People may not like it when their candidate is not elected, but our system works better than any other.

Posted by: Steve | Mar 25, 2008 3:19:44 PM

UM he didn't say his pastor was wrong..he said "you non-black people don't know the black reality..what is like to be Black" if that's not double-standard racism then I don't what to tell you

Posted by: 1wq | Mar 25, 2008 3:19:07 PM

UM he didn't say his pastor was wrong..he said "you non-black people don't know the black reality..what is like to be Black" if that's not double-standard racism then I don't what to tell you

Posted by: 1wq | Mar 25, 2008 3:18:56 PM

Does anyone remember Hillary's response when the media were asking her to take action to release her first lady records? She said that there are rules and a system they follow.

This is the opposite of what she is saying in regard to Florida and Michigan. She was perfectly fine with those states not counting BEFORE SHE FELL SO FAR BEHIND IN THE RACE. Now she is suddenly concerned about "disenfranchising" the voters in those states. The fact is that those states need to identify who was responsible for knowingly violating the rules of the DNC and with full awareness of the consequences to the voters. Those individuals need to be reprimanded.

Obama has followed the DNC rules from the start. Hillary now wants to change them because she cant win due to how far behind she has fallen.
Obama needs to do whatever he can to win, while following the rules. I would expect nothing less from a great leader.

Hillary's only hope at this point is that she (and her cohortes) can convince the superdelegates to overturn the choice of the voters based on the system that is currently in place. She knows full well that this would destroy the Democratic Party and cause massive disengagement of future voters.

It takes an awfly self-centered person to do what Hillary is trying to do.

Posted by: Mike Denhof | Mar 25, 2008 3:18:31 PM

oh god the reverend's anti-americans are here...god help us from these terrorist!

Posted by: Jess | Mar 25, 2008 3:17:29 PM

ummm. just cuz his pastor bashed white people doesn't mean that obama supports those ideals. If your rev. says things against gay people doesn't necessarily mean that you think that because you go to his services. listen to the persons personal beliefs. not the beliefs of their pastor. No two people hold the same belief on everything. Wright is considered a bit out their even within his own community.

Posted by: Drew Clark | Mar 25, 2008 3:17:09 PM

You think that delegates from MICH will be seated when no one was supposed to even be on the ballot in MICH?

What delusion.

This is really great stuff. The Clintons are doing their horror show for all to see. I was in a hail of gun-fire.
No, you were given flowers by a child.
"I mis-spoke". No, you lied. Liar, liar, no experience.
No security clearance.

Posted by: bruce becker | Mar 25, 2008 3:16:11 PM

Obama and his pastor need to leave America if they hate so much our loving countru...GOD BLESS AMERICA D

Posted by: PROUDAMERICAN | Mar 25, 2008 3:16:03 PM

Nisha, I take it you only get your news from television. You obviously did not research Wright or view the sermons in question in their entirety. Because if you had, you'd know that he was not a racist and NOT anti-American. Seriously, how many of you idiots are out there???

Posted by: kim | Mar 25, 2008 3:15:39 PM

Obama remains 2 controversial I think the superdelegates will end up going to hillary because he's in deep nasty dirty waters right now

Posted by: AW | Mar 25, 2008 3:13:54 PM

“I think what Mrs. Clinton was trying to make clear was that no delegate is required by party rules to vote for the candidate for which they're pledged,” said Ickes. “I mean obviously circumstances can change, and people's minds can change about the viability of a particular candidate and that's permitted now under our rules ever since the 1980 convention.” Harold Ickes

Apparently they think people's minds are going to change about Obama, she is wrong, but she will still try or she would not have mentioned this.

Posted by: mark | Mar 25, 2008 3:13:32 PM

Wake Up!

Rev. Wright is neither racist nor anti-American; for God's sake - he was a Marine! Did Hillary Clinton join any armed service - we know for sure that Bill Clinton ran to another country when the call came forth to him. I defy anyone on this comments section to stand forward and say that they have never - in their entire life - and one or two sentences that when taken out of context of a 30-minute speech could be made to look un-American.

Either read or listen to all of Rev. Wright's sermons or just admit you do not have enough information to make an informed decision.

Posted by: jericho4119 | Mar 25, 2008 3:12:27 PM

to the person who said that if Obama had chipped away at her lead in Texas he would be more supportive.

Obama did more than 'chip away' at the 20% lead she started with in Texas. He ended up winning more delegates.

Posted by: bruce becker | Mar 25, 2008 3:11:19 PM

GEEZ Obama is pretty racist if he did that...

Posted by: SJaM | Mar 25, 2008 3:10:32 PM

All Obama supporters where are your values? Will you go to a church with your wife and children where you are taught hate instead of love, war instead of harmony, lies instead of truth? Barack Obama has proven himself to be without values by going to a church of that kind for 20 yaers. A president of the United States of America would stand up and defend America against the anti-American rantings of Rev. Wright, rather than sit in a pew and listen to it. Barack Obama, for 20 years, has supported the beliefs of a racist, Anti-American pastor and is not even willing to distance himself from this man or this church now. I am sure there are many Americans who now feel that they would have made a different choice regarding his candidacy.

Posted by: Nisha | Mar 25, 2008 3:09:26 PM

Democrats are between a rock and a hard place in this election. The best thing either of these candidates has going is that they are not Bush.
Not all, but most Americans have progressed to the point where they can accept a woman or any ethnicity in their choice for president, provided they can identify with their morality and judgement.

Obama's ties to his hate-spewing pastor will haunt him in the general election, possibly making him unelectable.
He has a long way to go to show that he can accept and love white Americans who harbor low veiws of the trash talking, rap-crap, gangsta-drug dealing, dangerous black culture that is prevalent in our society. He must show his love for these angry white people in the same way he loves his white-bashing pastor and fellow members of his congregation if he has any hope of being elected.

Hillary is unelectable because of her baggage with Bill and her feeling of entitlement that shines through her campaign. People really do want change. Real change.
Face it, the idiot Bush is only president because his daddy was VP for the most beloved president in US history; Ronald Reagan.
Hillary would not be where she is without having served as First Lady in my humble opinion.
So maybe Mcain gets very lucky and wins as the best of three poor choices.......I may not bother to vote. Until now I would have predicted that a republican could not have gooten elected as dog- catcher! Maybe garbage commissioner!

Posted by: akph | Mar 25, 2008 3:08:44 PM

The Fog Of The Clintons


In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy.

Posted by: Jim | Mar 25, 2008 3:06:58 PM

Read between the lines, Hillary said we do not want to commit delegates that may "disadvantage us in November." HRC and her campaign obviously have information they think will undermine Obama and they are saving it for the convention. That is why they are still so smug when the door is all but shut for them. Any REASONABLE candidate would have conceeded by now.
I will vote for McCain before Hillary.

Posted by: mark | Mar 25, 2008 3:06:24 PM

Ross,
You sound like a scratched cd, saying the same thing over and over again. The thing is that you were probably educated in a government public school and you never learned that the USA is not a true democracy--never has been. We are a republic and therefore the popular vote does not decide who wins. Get over it-this is the way it is.

Posted by: Chris | Mar 25, 2008 3:06:23 PM

She got the idea to flip pledged delegates from Bill.
Bill sez "it depends on what you mean by the word pledge".
Remember Texas, where Bill said she had to "win" or drop out. Next week the results from Texas will be published and all will see that Clintons lost in Texas, by 99-95 in delegates. In Texas "to win" means who got the most points, Bill.

Posted by: bruce becker | Mar 25, 2008 3:06:10 PM

Let's face it...OBAMA is not liked by whites and Latinos..against Mccain that's going to hurt him...sorry but the black dream of a black president is very much gone. next time pick a candidate without so many dirty liassons

Posted by: Ama | Mar 25, 2008 3:05:28 PM

YOU WROTE: Clinton senior adviser Harold Ickes said, "No delegate is required by party rule to vote for the candidate for which they're pledged.

Would you expect anything less from a MONSTER, and her surrogates.

Posted by: doc1400 | Mar 25, 2008 3:04:22 PM

YOU WROTE: Clinton senior adviser Harold Ickes said, "No delegate is required by party rule to vote for the candidate for which they're pledged.

Would you expect anything less from a MONSTER, and her surrogates.

Posted by: doc1400 | Mar 25, 2008 3:04:17 PM

First of all, many are getting off the subject. Second how can someone be anti white when they are half white? Everyone could not wait to fine some minute thing to judge Obama on maybe the ones expresing contempt are the real anti black racists

Posted by: tiffany | Mar 25, 2008 3:03:56 PM

Ethical lesson #1 for Hillary and Bill:

Just because you can do something does not mean you should.

What you are casually broaching here is subversion of the democratic process of our party.

Quit now. You can blame your failure on the imaginary sniper fire coming from the other side.

Posted by: Paul T. | Mar 25, 2008 3:03:37 PM

Obama won more states and deligates but his deligate lead comes down to caucases and Republican states. In Novemeber there are no caucases. Look at Texas where there was a primary and caucas on the same day. Hillary won the primary and Obama won the caucas (despite much rumor that he cheated with illegals voting). In Novemeber that would have meant Hillary won the state and Obama lost. Obama has about a 120 deligate lead but that is also the difference....number of deligates he won in caucases above Hillary. From Texas we know that this year one can win in caucases but not in the Primary voting on the same day.

Now look at most of the other staes Obama has won like MS. He won 90% of the black vote. Almost makes you think he could win the state in November untill you realize that MS is a strong Republican state with a population of about 3 million but the racial divide is 2 whites to every 1 black...MS will vote McCain. So even in states that appear to be behind Obama with their black votes in the primary they are states that no democrat is going to win. And yes in MS it could be a racial divide but it is what it is and Obama will not win it in November. Obama will also not have a chance in some democrat states like MA....I'd bet on this one because MA is a color blind state and has elected Obama's friend Gov. Patrick....the one Obama lifted speach lines from......but despite his support for Obama, and Kennedy and Kerry support for Obama, MA voted overwehelmingly for Hillary and in November if we can't vote Hillary....we will in very large numbers of women vote for McCain. CA can't be won by a democrat without the Hispanic vote and Obama will not get it. They voted against Obama and for Hillary...even with Oprah backing Obama.

Posted by: jodi | Mar 25, 2008 3:02:18 PM

since when just cause you didn't vote in tme means your vote doesn't count? and why instead of having a re-vote? Obama keeps blocking that possibility? what is OBAMA AFRAID OF?....he's being a HYPOCRITE by not allowing The Florida and Michigan state vote....WE WANT ANOTHER CROOK ON THE WHITE HOUSE? NO THANX...

Posted by: ja | Mar 25, 2008 3:00:09 PM

Senator Clinton has no chance of winning, but she's absolutely not above attemting to steal the nomination! Should the DNC coronate Senator Clinton we as voters must converge on Denver, rise up and protest! Remember 1968.

Posted by: J. Taylor | Mar 25, 2008 2:59:38 PM

Gonzodex, glad to see some get it.
i suspect some of these people in here are for clinton only because it will help the repubicans...
i know life long republicans that voted for hillary and trust me it wont matter who the democrats run when november comes they will vote republican
funny, when progressives do something like this (game the system) were are talked about as if we were the scum of the earth when republicans/bad people do it "were just being smart"

hillary is just more proof of how little the differences are between the people in the 2 parties
the parties may be different but the folks in them are not

Posted by: conobs | Mar 25, 2008 2:57:22 PM

The Democratic organizations in Florida and Michigan thought they were pretty smart to move their primaries forward in the process to get additional influence. But what seemed like smart thinking at the time turns out to be pretty stupid in hindsight. If they had left their primaries where they were originally, these states would be pivotal in the nominating process. Instead, they are now irrelevant.

I'm for Obama.

Posted by: Tom in California | Mar 25, 2008 2:56:48 PM

It doesn't matter which Democratic wins the nomination. Both Hillary and Obama will lose to John McCain in the end.

Posted by: Joshs | Mar 25, 2008 2:53:32 PM

Michigan and Florida voted too early, KNOWING that it was not going to count. This was always known right from the beginning, it's no surprise. This is a problem created by the Democratic leadership in those states, who felt they could influence the nomination more with publicity than they could with delegates. So they had the primary early.. they got the publicity they wanted. Now they also want the delegates, but that's not going to happen. If Democrats in Florida and Michigan are unhappy they should take it up with the leadership in their own state who chose to break the rules, knowing what would happen. All the other states played by the rules and their votes count.

Posted by: Little Birdie | Mar 25, 2008 2:46:27 PM

If pledged delegates vote how they want to vote, why the hell even have primaries! You can see we have some really stupid people out there...the pledged delegates will vote as pledged, period. Hillary just thinks she can stir up some drama and prolong this fight just because Bill has made many deals and promises to foreign nations when they assumed she was the front runner and would win.

Posted by: rp | Mar 25, 2008 2:46:11 PM

Unbelievable.

Clinton has been accusing Obama of trying to disenfranchise voters in Florida and Michigan, even though she knows full well he was not responsible for the invalid January primaries in those states, and now she says, "remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged. You know, there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They're just like superdelegates." What?

Her statement reminds me of a couple of similar statements. One is the infamous meaning of "is." In this case "pledged" doesn't really mean pledged. The other is Cheney's "so?"

Interviewer: The pledged delegates are based on the votes of the people. If the pledged delegates changed their votes, they would be ignoring the people's votes.

Clinton: So?

Posted by: DoTheMath | Mar 25, 2008 2:46:03 PM

Wake up people! The GOP wants Hillary to win. They stand a far better chance of beating Hillary then Obama. The Dem party told FL and MI not to move their primaries, they did and it cost them their vote. The Dem party told ALL of the candidates that FL and MI votes would not count and to not campaign there. Everyone except HILLARY did this, and now SHE wants those votes to count.

Rush went on the air to tell people to vote for HILLARY, wake up people! She will not win, drop this nonsense and move on so we can save more of our soldiers!!

Posted by: rob | Mar 25, 2008 2:45:12 PM

This whole Democratic nominating process is great political theatre, especially to us Libertarians. Sheesh. If I had vote for one of the three finalists, it would be Obama because he's the candidate that offers the biggest chance of actual change from the status quo, and even that won't be that much. But McCain and Clinton are old school politicians and will keep the corporate-centric, military-industrial complex a hummin', making money for their billionaire buddies.

Posted by: Gonzodex | Mar 25, 2008 2:44:28 PM

This dogged insistence on self-vindication, claiming an advantage where there is none, and asserting opinion as fact has me mentally exhausted.

Maybe that's their plan; to mentally exhaust voters into succumbing.

It reminds me of the scene from "Cool Hand Luke", where during a pre-arranged brawl, Luke, clearly outclassed, refuses to concede victory--utterly incapable of imagining himself as the object of defeat.

Only he had class.

Posted by: Emlyn | Mar 25, 2008 2:42:41 PM

Too late Hillary.

Obama has regained his lead in the national polls and also in North Carolina (21 point lead)

Yes We Can

Extremely good news

Posted by: Vanessa | Mar 25, 2008 2:41:47 PM

Simply Folks:

State in short 3 reasons why you would vote for any of the three candidates, keep it short Dale.