« Previous | Main | Next »

Self-Hating Superdelegates and 'Unity in November'

Share

June 04, 2008 2:51 PM

ABC News' Z. Byron Wolf reports: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., may have clinched the Democratic nomination by delegates last night, but Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, has not officially conceded and there are still uncommitted superdelegates lurking among the columns in the marbled hallways on Capitol Hill.

Although that number is shrinking by the hour.

Citing a need to "coalesce around our candidate," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said this morning he would join some colleagues in endorsing Obama later this afternoon.

"The nominee of our party is obviously Barack Obama," Harkin told reporters after leaving a meeting with other uncommitted senators. "He has obviously picked up the requisite number of delegates."

At the same time, as Colorado Democrat Ken Salazar noted, everyone in the Senate has worked with Clinton and respects her.

Harkin said it is important that Democrats be "sensitive to how Sen. Clinton and her supporters feel today, but we have to coalesce around Senator Obama, who is our nominee."

Several hours later, eight senators, including Harkin and Salazar, issued a joint statement this afternoon pledging to work for Barack Obama in a campaign they are calling "Unity in November."

"Our focus is on victory in November and on giving Barack Obama every ounce of our support, every bit of our energy, and our total commitment to do everything in our power to win the Presidency," the senators' statement read in part.

"We want to say, to the Clinton supporters who worked their hearts out and whom we know are very disappointed, that their extraordinary effort on her behalf has strengthened our nation. They should be proud of her groundbreaking candidacy and her tireless fight for America's families," it said.

Also signing the statement were Senators Barbara Boxer of California, Tom Carper of Delaware, Ken Salazar of Colorado, Ben Cardin of Maryland and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana.

Harkin said the superdelegate system should be scrapped and that is largely why he stayed on the sidelines, to see who Democrats choose rather than make the choice for them.

Wyden probably agrees. Before hopping on the "Unity in November" movement, Wyden put out his own statement, in which he said, "When voters in Oregon and around the country hear the word "superdelegate," people start hissing. I never asked to be a superdelegate, and always thought it preposterous that my vote would be accorded greater weight than the vote of the very people who make my public service possible."

He went on: “I would gladly have worked hard to elect either Sen. Obama or Sen. Clinton, but fortunately, the nation's choice has been made, as it should have been, not by the superdelegates, but by the grassroots voters. The voters of Oregon certainly spoke clearly on the subject, and my vote will enthusiastically reflect their decision to nominate Senator Obama."

June 4, 2008 in Bush, George W., Kucinich, Dennis, Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (48)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yes it should be done away with it is the main reason I will never vote for a democrat again.

Posted by: Bishop | Jun 4, 2008 2:57:42 PM

Last night, Senator Clinton stated that she wants respect for her nearly 18 million supporters. Those words were particularly salient, and heartfelt. She also said she wants to know what they think. Speaking for my friends, my family, and myself I hope Senator Clinton considers fighting on to Denver. Winning the popular vote is not insignificant, and it is a clear statement of the people's will. However, the delegate math and growing pressure for her to concede is not insignificant either.

Nevertheless, I'm convinced many of her supporters would not be amenable to her accepting second chair as VP on an Obama ticket. I know I don't want her to accept the VP slot. My reasoning is simple, and it's not sour grapes. Obama is not only experientially unqualified, but he has demonstrated extremely poor judgment, revealed disingenuous sentiments, and advanced politically expedient policy positions. In short, he is the very last person I would support for president.

The pundits and DNC perpetual peddling of the idea that Hillary's supporters will swing their votes to Obama in November is unfounded and patently untrue. There are no circumstances under which I will ever cast my vote for Obama. Virtually everyone I know feels exactly the same way. We are life long, loyal Democrats, but we value patriotism and love of country more than the Democratic Party's Obama-based agenda.

I will continue to support Senator Clinton vis a vis letter writing, e-mailing, and blogging campaigns, because I know she is the strongest and smartest choice. Still, if the worst case scenario is realized with BO on the top of the ticket, I will cast my vote for McCain without compunction.

Posted by: Emily | Jun 4, 2008 3:11:53 PM

Unity for November!!!

Posted by: Dan | Jun 4, 2008 3:13:47 PM

Emily: Look into the eyes of someone who has lost a friend or family member in Iraq and tell them you are voting for McCain.

Posted by: dano | Jun 4, 2008 3:17:25 PM

Unity ain't gonna happen.

Posted by: Emily | Jun 4, 2008 3:17:35 PM


Anyone know what the final delegate count was without superdelegates?

Posted by: Belle | Jun 4, 2008 3:17:46 PM

country before party. obama is a risk: a radical leftist and this lifelong dem is voting mccain-a man hillary respects and who respects women and a man of honor

Posted by: ron | Jun 4, 2008 3:17:57 PM

Emily

I'm with you 100%. Hillary need to say NO to a joint-ticket.

Posted by: marcus | Jun 4, 2008 3:18:52 PM

dano: It would be infinitely harder for me to look any of my countrymen in the eyes after voting for Obama.

Posted by: Emily | Jun 4, 2008 3:19:38 PM

Superdelegates aka ex-officio delegates are not the problem, they are duely elected. Caucuses that have no resemblance to democracy and would not pass any international standard for fair elections are the problem.

Caucuses need to be scrapped.

Posted by: s.b. | Jun 4, 2008 3:20:03 PM

Easy - let the Dems have obama - who cares?
Clinton will go Independent and all of her supporters will go Independent as well and vote for her. Without the 18 million Clinton supporters, where will the DNC be? Where will the Democrats be and how will obama ever win the election - without them???????

Posted by: Lou | Jun 4, 2008 3:20:16 PM

According to Democratic Convention Watch Obama now has 410.5 Super Delegates and Clinton is down to 281.5 because some Supers or Automatic Delegates in Clinton Speak switched to Obama. The totals now are 2176 for Obama and 1921 from Clinton, with 4.5 Edwards delegates (including 3 who haven't been picked from Iowa who may not be picked if the convention realigns) and 3 from Florida who have half votes. There are only about 130.5 total Supers Left but about 30 or so of these are add ons to be picked by State Conventions and Executive Committees. Hillary should get out officially for the interest of party unity and move on.

Posted by: bhciapol | Jun 4, 2008 3:20:30 PM

I love Hillary and am a diehard supporter but if she accepts the VP slot I'm sorry but I just cannot and will not vote for barack hussien obama.

Posted by: brigitte | Jun 4, 2008 3:20:45 PM

How about the delegate count without caucuses.

Posted by: s.b. | Jun 4, 2008 3:20:47 PM

One last wingnut style wail going on today I see.

Found it interesting this morning to See that with the Montana results in the Books, Mr. O had secured a victory in the popular vote.

Oh well. Facts can be troubling.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Jun 4, 2008 3:24:29 PM

Emily, I agree with you. If the choice is between Obama or McCain for President, it does not matter who the vice president choices are, I will be voting for McCain. He has the experience needed. I will also be working to get the Democrats veto-proof control of Congress, which will assure that the Supreme Court is safe.

Posted by: vicki | Jun 4, 2008 3:24:51 PM

Who cares what Clinton wants? She lost. That's it. So what. Do we call the cops now, to drag her off the field? I think the media and perhaps Obama are giving her more credence than she should have, than what's really there. She is no different than any other candidate that has run a race, and lost, no different than any other 'team' that has run and lost, so we need to stop treating her as if she has the golden baton or something as she holds what she says 'her 18 million voters' hostage for her bargaining tool when there is only emptiness behind the glitter. Just like when she was campaigning, she made the American people believe she had all this power when in reality she really had none. All she had was the 'brand', the Clinton name. And if it weren't for that name I truly believe had she been running the same she would have only received about 25% of all that she did receive. So if she received 18 million votes, her real votes with her own stead would've only garnered about 5 million votes, or less. I believe Obama would've still been ahead of her. And so now she puts 'the fear of Clinton' out there and Obama and the rest are eating the bait when there really is nothing 'Clinton' to fear about and there really is no 'Clinton power' to unleash. I truly think that Obama can match her so-called 18 million votes with her being totally out of his picture and gain even more, so he should not allow her to manuever him with 'her' so-called 'supporters bait'. Because where he may get her so called 18 million voters should he put her on his ticket, he would also lose 18 million voters, his voters because they then would not vote for 'them' together. Obama can get his own, without her, and without all the headache game-playing and disrespect from Mrs. Clinton, and her husband. Finally, she (again) distinctly announced throughout that none of them had reached 'that magic number' yet and if Obama reached that number she would drop out. So...? Go Obama!!!

Posted by: RuthieM | Jun 4, 2008 3:29:05 PM

hey vicki i guess you dont mind if we lose more men and woman in iraq and maybe lose our homes not to mention pay 10 dollars a gallon of gas well all i can say is you go democrat its your right!!!!

Posted by: angie | Jun 4, 2008 3:30:07 PM

Hell will freeze over and the devil will be giving sleigh rides before "unity" will see the light of day.

They can take their little "media god" and worship him til the cows come home. They will NEVER get millions of our votes no matter how many pretty talking lies they come up with.

Posted by: Vickie | Jun 4, 2008 3:33:19 PM

how can a democrat vote for a republican because there candidate did not win? the democratic issues are what is important--compare the two democrats issues with bush/mccain and it is obvious who to vote for!!! this who sour grapes is very immature--do you want abortion legal or not-do you want the war to end or not--do you want american to rejoin the world or be the enemy of the world--do you want progressive economic policies or the same old low taxes for the rich and screw everyone else--voting is about the issues and getting as many democrats in office-state-federal-and president--the more democrats the better--obama won the most delegates--that was the rules--we must have rules and play by the rules-if the situation was reversed i am sure clinton supporters would feel differently--lets keep the pride out of it and come together as a party!!

Posted by: william | Jun 4, 2008 3:33:41 PM

Post a comment