For once I agree with Nancy Pelosi!

I rarely agree with the Democratic leadership including Pelosi and Reid. They are spineless!

But, this is by far the most courageous thing I've heard this year!

Thank you

Pelosi is right, not because of the reason she gave but because of the fact that "super" delegates are undemocratic (as a process) and unDemocratic (do not belong in the party). Now, let's get on with the primaries and caucuses--and we can all have fun betting on when Hillary will, finally, throw in the towel.

Nancy Pelosi can't even run the congress so what makes her a reliable voice in this election. She needs to be fired from after all the blunders in the congress. Let's just say her judgement isn't that good. She's not so popular in California anyway.

But the delegates in my state do not have to vote with the poular vote winner.

No, she is wrong. Whom ever is leading in the popular vote is the person who should get the nomination. What the heck is wrong with you people. We are a representative government. If more people vote for one candidate then they deserve the nomination.

Which is also why Al Gore should have been the President in 2000...

God, how quickly we forget.

LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE!

Thank you, Ms. Pelosi!

I just enjoy watching all of this!

Exactly MS Pelosi, the delegates chose the nominee. ALL the delegates chosen though all the processes that designate delegates, including ex officio delegates.

All the delegates get to vote at convention and choose the nominee they think would make the best Presidential candidate, regarless of the vote.

Those are the rules!

Exactly Ms Pelosi.

Normally, I would agree with Ms. Pelosi insofar that the will of the people should be respected.
However, the Democrats have Super-delegates for a reason; to make sure the wackos in their party don't nominate a candidate who is unelectable in the general election.
As much joy as it would give me to watch the Dem's shoot themselves in the foot this election cycle and nominate Obama, the reasoned strategist in me says that the Super-delegates should do their job and protect their party, and back Hillary all the way.

Pelosi's right. Must have galled Clintonite Stephanopoulos to hear it in so straightforward way: In other words, she didn't talk in circles like Howard Dean.
Good job by Pelosi.

Pelosi is completely correct and I'm glad she has the spine to say it. If we buy into a bunch of alternate universe approaches, we end up debating what the meaning of "is" is....

Besides, the popular vote does not take into account states the use caucuses. So the only fair way to determine who got the "popular" vote is by delegates. Is Stephanopolous that dumb.

Just a hunch, but I don't think Nancy will be getting a Christmas card from the Clintons this year.

Exactly MS Pelosi, the delegates choose the nominee. ALL the delegates chosen though all the processes that designate delegates, including ex-officio delegates.

All the delegates get to vote at convention and choose the nominee they think would make the best Presidential candidate at that time, regardless of the vote.

Those are the rules!

Exactly Ms Pelosi.

aren't the democrats the ones who said a similar situation wasn't fair in 2000?

I hear that Bill Clinton just offered Spitzer's hooker a job at his Clinton Library in Arkansas.. Since her saw her photo. He was just dying to get her on his staff..

Its a good thing Nancy doesn't get to vote for everyone and decie who gets to be Vp for the nominee and well decide everything for everyone, which is obviously what she wants.

Honestly it's none of her business how superdelegates vote, or how any other delegates vote for that matter.

They get to vote for who thay want no matter what aunt Nancy says.

Maybe she could try doing her job. I hear it hasnt been going that well.

I agree with Pelosi.It's the delegates that count, not who has won the popular vote. Otherwise, why even have delegates? That's the way the system is set up as of now. Maybe someday the delegates (and electoral college) will be done away with and only the popular vote will matter. But that's not the case today. Sorry, Hitlery....

PELOSI: KEEP YOUR YAPPER SHUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then she disagrees with her parties rules.

If you read Pelosi's words carefully, she just like to spin again: "But it's a delegate race," Pelosi replied. "The way the system works is that the delegates choose the nominee."

She is correct: it is delegates to decide who the nominee is, she does not mention only "pledged delegates".. she said "delegates", which includes......

She is "politically correct"... let convention decide...

Hillary, Barrack and the DNC will get this whole delegate debacle settled(including all the lawsuits that are getting ready to be filed)about 2 months after John McCain is sworn in..

Methinks Pelosi, like Oprah, would be intimidated by a stronger woman like Hillary, thusly, seek to squeeze her out of the picture. Kudos to Hillary for rising above betrayal after betrayal. Something to think about.

It's strange how we can change our minds. In the last election we were all for the popular vote not the delegates. Shouldn't the people's vote count.

Why have any rules or guidelines at all? They are quickly and conveniently disposed of whenever they don't suit the plans.

Rush is right...the queen beee *bzzzzbzzzzbzzz* syndrome...there can be only one queen bee in a domain!

In a rare moment on honesty, Pelosi just sank Hil's battleship. Too bad. I was looking forward to watching McCain demolish her. But now I can watch him demolish the empty suit that is Mr. Obama.

There is a lot of Democrats on both sides that are going to be hurt. Nancy has not done a good job in the House. 29% rating is not very good. Her p[opularity is not a good rating either. (Polling report.com)
Superdelagates are part of the proicess. A process everyone agreed to when this election took place. Obama's words himself. Obama camp and supporter Nancy Pelosi Popular vote is as important as delagets. Sorry your wrong. If Obama wins the nomination I and alot of other true Democrats are voting for McCain. Either way we loose. Thanks to people like Pelosi

S.B. Yup, I can imagine Hillary saying something like that to Nancers. At which point Nancers should come back with a witty reply like "...I hear Vince was almost as hard as Bill was with Monica when they found him...

Well, Kenrda Woods, seems like a contadition in terms -- electable in November and Hillabeans Clinton in the same sentence!

Again, Pelosi said: "delegates", Not "pledged delegates"...

She is a fox...can go either way...

Just a comment to all democrats.

Your primary system weakens you in the general election statistically. Since the General Election is winner take all, and the Democratic Primary is Proportional, it creates a distortional result when compared to the rules they will run under for the big one.

Also, note, that Hilary is winning more of the "swing states" (Florida, Texas, New York, etc.) than Obama. No offense to Obama, but proving you can win California means nothing in the General Election.

All reason Dem's will lose in November.

If you listen really hard you can hear the ObamaBubble bursting? Can you hear it now?

Democrats are no longer scared of the Clintons, they see the opening to be rid of them once and for all.

Obama is the only hope for the country. Hillary is a horribly flawed person who would farther divide a country teetering on the brink of collapse due to the Clinton and Bush years. We cannot survive Hillary and most of the country knows it. Where are the Clinton 06 and 07 tax and library records? What are they hiding and why are they delaying except to hide what we all suspect is a list of corrupt donors.

Nan's right...it is a delegate race.
The Clinton's want it to be popular vote so they can cry for Fl/MI...BUT what about all the states with CAUCUSES...they chose delegates, and did not add to the popular total...who wants to tell those folks their votes don't count ??

It's true those superdelegates can vote any way they want. Heck, I'm sure that 20,000,000 devoted Obama supporters wouldn't mind in the least bit if it was 800 superdelegates who ultimately gave the nomination to Hillary. I'm sure there would be no hard feelings at all if Obama went into the convention with more pledged delegates and the party leadership (which as I understand it includes at least one 21 year old guy in Wisconsin) made the difference. I've heard he's for Obama, but in any case that means one superdelegate has the same weight as about 50,000 voters who spent time listening to speeches, commercials, and waiting in line to vote. Yup, no hard feelings at all.

If they want to be fair to the people, then what counts is the popular vote. The supers should follow whoever wins the popular vote. Either that or the supers vote for whoever they want to, as the rules allow them to. Pelosi's statement makes no sense, because she's choosing one set of rules (most delegates) over another (supers are independent), while disregarding what really matters, the popular vote.

Hey Barack, if your pastor's words ain't legit, you must stop peddlin' your b.s...

This ABC article is blatantly biais. It writes here "Political prognosticators give Clinton more of a chance of catching, or even surpassing, Obama in the national popular vote" really !!!

Well this reader writes some other "Political prognosticators" says the exact contrary. Aside from the fact that Obama leads Clinton in he POPULAR VOTE by more than 700,000 right now , aside from the fact hat he has won twice as many more states than she has, aside from the fact that he has and will keep his more than 150 pledged delegate lead (which the rule everyone agreed by) aside from all these FACTS, Mr Stephanopopulos somehow finds some "Political prognosticators" that see some CHANCE of HRC to win the popular vote. What is not said is by what margin she would have to win the all the remaining 13 contests. AND THE ANSWER IS by these same "Political prognosticators" 67% !!!!!

And I thought only Huckabee was in the mirace business. NOUGH SAID !! I SEE RIGHT THROUGH YOU PEOPLE AND I SEE A JOKE> JOURNALISTS HUH!

Knowing Nancy, she took the most practical, common-sense approach. This is the way the rules were set up -- follow them.

I'm a happy independent.

From the outside, it's very clear that regardless of polls...the Democrats are not very happy with their choices. If so, one or the other would have run away with it.

Possibly another poll that was wrong this year.

Batman,

Sounds like you've gotten a little too friendly with Robin. Beware! There are commies everywhere and they're coming to get you. Be very afraid.

One thing Nancy Pelosi doesn't want - competition in the form of another strong-willed woman. Nancy's on top, and I doubt that she wants to share the view...

What don't the Clinton supporters understand about these FACTS: Clinton is behind in the delegate count by such a margin that it is statistically impossible for her to catch up. She'd need 80% of the vote in ALL remaining states, and she's lucky if she gets even 50% given Obama's support level. He will finish with the most delegates by a stable margin, and he will be the nominee. Clinton needs to drop out so that the party can unite behind Obama. Period.

So, does this mean Nancy now agrees with the Electoral College process vs. the popular vote? Amazing analogy, right??

It is such a sad spectacle to see (and read) so many Clinton supporters (like the "leaders" they are advocating) appearing, speaking, and behaving more and more like the Southern racist Democrats of 1888. With absolutely no shame in so far as their obvious racist political tricks is concerned. Wise up, folks. The enemy is not a man named Obama, it is your own unfounded fears of a (any) ethnic minority individual (in this case a Black man) at the helm of our nation.

And another thing -- when the final Texas caucus results come in on March 29, Obama will be shown to have WON Texas. The current numbers are estimated to be 99-94 in favor of Obama. Clinton won't even win Texas when it's all said and done, and the delegate gap will increase in favor of Obama once again. Clinton needs to drop out of the race and have some respect for the party.

It's quite possible Obama could win the popular vote but lose the electoral college.

I bet Nancy would have some grand statemetns about that!

I've been outside the USA, more then half my life. That is why I love my country. You people need to see what your asking for. Obama and Hillary are not the answer for Americans, if you want thier style of politics move to anywhere else. Then come back and let me know how that worked out. Clueless!!

Is Obama's plan to accuse every McCain supporter of being a racist--just like he's done with Hillary supporters.

Racism also works both ways...so you might wanna check to see that African American's are voting against Hillary by 90 percent. :)

So only delegates that will put Obama over the top are allowed to exercise their judgement. The Super Delegates have to set aside their political experience, Super Delegate description rules and judgement in favor of following the state delegate judgement. This is Democratic? Pelosi, you are showing yourself. I guess the Democrats are completely divided and the Speaker isn't above it.

As usual, send grandmom Pelosi back home!

The delegate were created TO PREVENT VOTERS from having their say! Democrats don't believe in this form of government! It's only because Queen Bee Nancy can't stand the thought of a woman over her!

She hates Hillary! It has nothing to do with fairness....

ya what s.b. said LOL

Over 500+ of the pledged delegates are not even allocated (some from the states that have voted have not completed their conventions to select delegates to the national convention).

Many states do not bind the delegates to the electorate.

Superdelegates are not bound to the electorate and should not be - otherwise they would serve no purpose.

All of the delegates will cast votes in Aug and the outcome will be determined at that time unless someone wimps out and does not let all of the voters to have a voice.

Let it play out and stop trying to pressure the SDs into anything other than what they are supposed to do and that is exercise their best judgement. With all the pressure from people like Obama and Pelosi it is obvious they are scared of allowing the process to play itself out as designed.

Tell Pelosi that I won't support a candidate that says one thing and then does another. Obama, Hillary and HER included!!!

I'm done with the lying democrats and my husband won't vote for Obama.

There is two you've lost!

I will write in Ron Paul at least he hasn't lied to me during this election or on the ecomony!

what happened to "one person, one vote - er delegate"? I guess it's OK to insist in democracy in our state legislatures, but not in the nomination of our presidents? Just puzzled and wondering...

She has no chance to catch him in the popular vote; that is a myth. If you calculate the caucuses, he is currently up 1 million voters. Without the caucuses he is up 600,000. Add in Florida and Michigan and it still wont matter. This thing is done, but the MSM needs a story.

To those bringing up the fact that we're a "Representative Government" . . .

. . . exactly. Delegates are representatives. The voters themselves are not representatives. Bills need a majority of representatives to pass in Congress, not a majority of citizens. Presidents need a majority of electors behind them, not a majority of citizens. And so in primaries, candidates need a majority of delegates behind them, not a majority of voters. That's party rules for the delegates (which could be as undemocratic as they wanted, if they wanted), election rules for the president, and constitutional rules for the Congress.

I think Pelosi doesn't want Hillary Clinton to steal her "First Lady Speaker of the House" history making thunder. Too bad, her uncontrollable urge to hint about where she stands doesn't exactly reflect leadership skills. Pelosi is joining right in with the division. Politicians...

Of course Pelosi is right, however, after hearing Obama's role model and inspiration (his words) Jeriamiah Wright the racist, marxist, ignorant hatemonger. He has no business being in the Senate, let alone President. I can't stand Hillary, but she's clearly better than the manchurian candidate. Obama has been in this church 20 years, he was married by this guy and his kids were baptised by this guy. You can't tell me that he didn't know about his racist views. To disavoy him now is too late! It was fun watching the dems tear each other apart, but now it's serious. Obama must be stopped! The only choice either way is to vote for McCain.

Eric - the TX SOS has already stated officially that Clinton won the popular vote in TX. You cant count the caucus voters again in terms of the popular vote. Now the Obama camp claims the popular vote is the will of the voters so he obviously concedes TX to Clinton. Disproportionate allocation of delegates in TX and the fixed caucuses currently being challenged are the only reason he might win more delegates for TX but even he himself expects it to be a split. The representive disparity caused by caucuses or low turnout are offset by the SDs.

The nomination process is the pregame practice for the election. Democrats have only won 3 elections for President in the past 40 years because they keep nominating candidates who are not the most electable. The SDs will take all of the factors into consideration and make the call they feel is the right one to actually get a dem in the WH again.

Pelosi is not a true democrat (just like Obama) if she does not support a process that the party agreed to from the beginning of the campaign. (I suspect she knows she may be out of office soon and is trying to get an appointment of some sort.)

The MI and FL revotes are within the rules and hopefully will happen as well. Prior to their delegates being taken away, Clinton said she believed they should not be disenfranchised and that whomever the nominee is should ask their delegates to be seated which is within the rules.

Pelosi and Obama are consistently working to pressure SDs to not abide by party rules and that is just wrong and not loyal to the party that claims to be democratic.

After reading and listening to Senator Obama's minister statements the superdelegates would be foolish not to support Senator Clinton.

Come on people - Pelosi is pulling for Obama because SHE wants to be the first female president.

Exactly Irma and Scott - let's suppose the information comes out about the selected nominee that could lead to some sort of indictment (as an example) after all the voting is completed. The SDs would use their best judgement as the rules allow to potentially select a different nominee. Of course this only works if the vote is close enough to allow them to tip the nomination. State delegates who are not bound to the electorate would be free to change their vote as well at the convention. In the event that still did not prevent that originally selected nominee from running in Nov the general electorate would likely cross party lines to prevent that person from being elected. The system should be allowed to work as designed not as dictated by Obama and surrogates including Pelosi.

... unh ... without hearing the full context, admittedly, I do think a faulty headline here has most of the political universe looking bassackwards. Pelosi's delegate stance does not augur for Obama in the slightest - it undermines him, unequivocally. So he wins the popular vote (most likely). YAY!!

But ... "it's the delegates, stupid", says Pelosi. Where's the boost in that?

After reading and listening to Senator Obama's minister statements the superdelegates would be foolish not to support Senator Clinton.

Exactly... most are politicians and they would be taking a major risk with losing their white voters in their next election.

Methinks Pelosi, like Oprah, knows a backstabbing shrew when they see one. Thusly, Hillary needs to go away so the party can unite and win in November...

Welcome abord Nancy!

Why do Democrats always do things tentatively and by half-measures?? Everyone sees the situation. Its stupid and ridiculous. Rather than just throwing out hints, she should come out and declare the race over for the good of her party because Hillary is hell-bent on sabotaging Obama since she can't win. And Gov. Richardson keeping his silence after what he said prior to March 11 is just weak. Someone needs to have the guts to step forward like a Republican would and speak the obvious, unvarnished truth. This is over.

The comment is coming from Rep Pelosi whose idea of crossing party lines to achieve result (just like Sen Obama's change) netted her 19% approval rating because the democratic majority hasn't accomlished anything. Nada

THE ANSWER IS CLEAR!!!! Hillary is just trying to sabotage the Democratic ticket in 2008 so she can run against McCain in four years. Yes the Clinton's are that selfish.

There's only room for one Queen Bee in every hive.

Nancy Pelosi rarely puts common sense ahead of self promotion, but this time she seems to have it right.

Having to state that delegates should actually represent the voters indicates how warped the DNC thinking has become.

It's probably because the superdelegates feel intimidated by the Clintons. Nancy has provided cover for these party leaders to do the right thing and avoid soiling their reputations by getting into bed with the (shudder) Clintons.

Madam Speaker, would you say the same thing if your party's nominee were to win the popular votes and John McCain got to win the electoral college votes in GE? If yes, then why do Democrats still whine about the 2000 GE and keep crying that Al Gore won because of the popular votes? Or maybe the prospect of a madam President would be too much for you personally? Boy, aren't these Democrats such pathetic hypocrites!

Pelosi hurts Hillary in a very big way - after seeing what a poor job a woman has done as Speaker, she's the best argument against putting one in the White House.

Congress has lower ratings than GWB - thank you Nancy. You are an embarrassment to women in power everywhere.

But this is what the people are choosing. So you are saying they are wrong in their beliefs?

LOL I think readers are missing the real meat in what she said. She did not say the pledged delegates determine the winner instead of popular vote. She said it's a delegate system. This means all the delegates including SDs. So her statement is politically safe no matter who is the nominee. We all know she hopes to get an appointment from either camp since she will likely not win re-election.

Former Governor of NY, Mario Cuomo said this today, about a Clinton-Obama, or Obama-Clinton ticket. "``Most people say that's improbable, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be the best solution,'' Cuomo said. ``And it occurs to me that you could make a ticket almost either way, with Hillary on top or Obama on top.''..."

Now just what the heck dos "...almost either way mean..." There are two possibilities. To me that sure sounds like saying there must be only one way this is possible. Man, talk about Orwellian political double-speak!!!

The race as it stands has no clear delegate winner. Therefore the public has decided and they did so by choosing different candidate. Sorry it ###### off people like Pelosi, but that's the way it is. We aren't all students or latte sippers.

The Press might want Obama to win, but why? He certainly is NOT the sharpest knife in the draw.

OK, everyone in the country who thinks that after showing how they run their own primary, that the Democrats have any right to tell the Iraqis how to run their country, please raise your hands.

OK, thank you. Geraldine and Mr. Penn, you may put your hands down now.

OK, everyone else who thinks the Democratic party is clueless about administering anything, please raise your hand.

Why do they have superdelgates if they are now saying they should just follow the crowd? Obama is a creation of the press. He is the Golden boy, the savior in their eyes because he acts and speaks well...that is the only thing he has ever done well.

He isn't even a good Senator. Sure it would be headline news if we had a black..oh excuse me multiracial who calls himself black as President. It would be even better if he were qualified. He gets away with what other races wouldn't....all other races.

stenopolos=a clinton hack in the 90s

Pelosi is right (and she rarely is!). 2 things wrong with the so-called popular vote: 1, the Democratic primary system uses both primaries, caucuses, and hybrids. 2, the 2 million voters in my state of CA would greatly outnumber the 6,000 who voted in the Wyoming election. The delegates allow for fair representation. After all, a democrat is a democrat, whether he or she happens to live in San Francisco or Boise, Idaho.

So in effect what Pelosi is saying to super delegates is that they should be rallying around Obama. I think the party leaders are coming to this realization and shortly, probably after the Pennsylvania primary will call it. Hillary probably wins by about 10 points but still not enough to convince supers to prolong the inevitable.

d c voter

my point is, now that it seems unlikely
that Hillary will win the delegates or the supers race , there are feelers being put out that the popular vote should be given some sort of consideration , maybe to stem Hillary's super delegate defections

Popular Vote Total -
Obama: 13,281,132 49.5%
Hillary: 12,577,409 46.9%
Winner: Obama +703,723 +2.6%

Popular Vote (w/FL) -
Obama: 13,857,346 48.5%
Hillary: 13,448,395 47.1%
Winner: Obama +408,951 +1.4%

Popular Vote (w/FL & MI)* -
Obama: 13,857,346 47.5%
Hillary: 13,776,704 47.3%
Winner: Obama +80,642 +0.2%

So, what's the problem?
________________
(*Obama Not on Michigan Ballot; Iowa, Nevada, Washington & Maine Have Not Released Popular Vote Totals)

superdelegates were instituted to avoid the possible disastrous consequences of 'caucuses' as opposed to direct election primaries. superdelegates are to exercise their independent judgment in the best interests of the party, not just blindly follow the votes in the primaries/caucuses -- otherwise, there would be no reason to have superdelegates. it's like having both a Senator and a member of the House. superdelegates in this case could help the Democrat party avoid the consequences of mischeivous white males who will not vote for Hillary but will vote for McCain, especially if SenObama does not address the 'hate issues' of his minister on a one-on-one basis -- does SenObama agree with his minister that God should damn America, that 9/11 was America's fault, that white Americans 'invented' AIDS, that white Americans rule America, that American has oppressed Lebanon, that Israel does not have a right to exist?

jim d - I think the SDs need to exercise their judgement as the system was designed for them to do. It is a mathematical improbability that either candidate will have the required number of delegates without the SDs. Their purpose is clear.

The final delegate count at the August convention is what will select the nominee. Considerations they have to think about are many (electability, public perception, popular vote, disenfranchised voters, electoral count, voter turnout, potential legal issues forthcoming against a candidate, etc.). Those SDs being pressured based on race or gender should not be pressured. Pelosi made a politically safe statement that includes all delegate votes.