« Previous | Main | Next »

Senators to Hold Off on Endorsing

Share

June 03, 2008 3:38 PM

ABC's Z. Byron Wolf reports: While many of the Democrats in the Senate remain uncommitted superdelegates, it is unlikely there will be a wave of endorsement announcements by those Senators for Sen. Barack Obama -- at least not tonight.

After meeting with Democratic Senators at a weekly strategy meeting, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-NV, said that he is ready for the primary to be over and will, in the next week or so, "set an example for the rest of the Senate." 

Presumably, that means he will make a public announcement about the candidate he will endorse as a superdelegate.   

Reid and other party leaders have said for several days that they will encourage uncommitted superdelegates to make their endorsements known and avoid a battle at the convention in August in Denver.

However, today Reid asked Senators to "keep their decisions in their pocket" until the primaries in South Dakota and Montana are done this evening.

Watch the VIDEO HERE.

"I want the primary over. I want everyone, until the elections are over, to keep their decisions in their pocket.

Reid said that Senator Hillary Clinton should not be pressured by her Democratic Senate colleagues to get out of the race today.

"Senator Clinton needs to be left alone to get through the primary process and let it run it’s course."

Reid also said he has already spoken with  Democratic Party  Rules Committee Chair Dianne Feinstein about fundamental changes to the primary process. He said he hopes such reform will be one of the first things Democrats tackle next year.

There are 16 uncommitted superdelegates left in the Senate, Reid included. Only four of those showed up to a meeting called yesterday by uncommitted Senators Tom Harkin, D-IA, and Ken Salazar, D-Colo, on how to move forward endorsing a candidate. Not much came of it yesterday, but maybe it was just a bit early.

Harkin and Salazar will call another meeting for Wednesday after the final primaries in South Dakota and Montana are over, and again invite all the undeclared Senators to determine how to go about endorsing. Harkin told reporters today that a number of things are on the table for that meeting, including discussions of a mass announcement by many of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates in the Senate. But he said nothing is set in stone yet.

"There is a genuine feeling that people want to bring this to a close very soon," Harkin told reporters before going into the weekly policy strategy lunch for all Democratic Senators this afternoon.

"The purpose of the meeting is because there are a lot of us, about 15 or 17 of us who are… not undecided or uncommitted, but undeclared and we wanted to see is there something we might want to do as a group or do we want to do it individually," Harkin said.

Harkin said he is not concerned that the nomination fight will jeopardize party unity in November or even in August at the Democratic National Convention.

"Passions will cool down. Things will cool down. We'll have a nominee and we'll all be focused as a party long before the convention," Harkin said.

June 3, 2008 in Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (47)

User Comments

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

They must be scared of the Clinton's political retribution.

They should endorse anyway and stand up to the bullies.

Posted by: Lynne | Jun 3, 2008 3:47:13 PM

Harry Reid should be thinking about the new nominee and making sure John McCain and the republicans don't have another day to campaign unchallenged. Everyone is a adult and should be take a lose like a leader and move on.

Posted by: leslie | Jun 3, 2008 3:50:37 PM

A good sign for Hillary.....wheeeeee....

Or not. She'll have to take her campaign into exhile tomorrow.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Jun 3, 2008 3:53:01 PM

thats why nothing gets done in the senate, listening to spineless Harry Reid

Posted by: really | Jun 3, 2008 3:54:49 PM

Thank you Harry Reid. Hillary needs to wind down. I can't stand the spin and the pressure the press and Obama supporters are putting on Hillary. Question for Obama supporters: Are you going to vote for your man if Hillary is on the ticket? Let's just see how loyal you are to your man because I have a feeling he may just do that. Now choke on that.

Posted by: Louise | Jun 3, 2008 3:57:34 PM

Hillary has indicated that she is willing to take the VP position. So why waist time! The primaries are over and the next step must start immediately.

Posted by: Peace | Jun 3, 2008 4:04:04 PM

Louise-The only way Obama can win is with Hillary; the reason they want her to take her time is because the dem party knows whithout Hillary, Obama loses!

Posted by: Cindy | Jun 3, 2008 4:05:43 PM

Reid and Pelosi are terribly weak leaders. That is why nothing has gottwen done in Congress. Just endorse for gosh sakes. Lets get this thing over with and start focusing on McCain. It is this type of weak response that hurts the democratics. Get a backbone!

Posted by: mike | Jun 3, 2008 4:07:05 PM

If they wnat to win the white house they should endorse Clinton.

If they want to continue this ridiculous juvenile farce of pretending that a fringe, extreme left candidate can win without Michigan, Florida, Ohio, any southern state, Kentucky or West Virginia, nominate Obama.

Then get ready to lose in Nov.

Their job is to nominate the candidate who can best win. That candidate is clearly Hillary Clinton.

But if Nancy and Howard are determined to lose, let them. Then kick their behinds so hard out the door, it can't hit them on the way out.

This process has been a discrace.

Posted by: s.b. | Jun 3, 2008 4:12:41 PM

My how they NEED Hillary....well too bad McCain is the next president.
It is their own dam fault!
I will never vote Obama, never.

Posted by: HP Boston | Jun 3, 2008 4:15:34 PM

Cindy said:

"Louise-The only way Obama can win is with Hillary; the reason they want her to take her time is because the dem party knows whithout Hillary, Obama loses!"

I totally agree with you on this point.

Posted by: david from texas | Jun 3, 2008 4:21:11 PM

Harry Reid is leader of the do nothing Senate that still wants to do nothing. He is a spineless dweeb, whose lack of backbone is only prolonging the division between Democrats.

Posted by: robby10001 | Jun 3, 2008 4:21:32 PM

I must say I may be satisfied with Hillary on the ticket. I said this before. If Obama supporters won't vote for a Obama/Clinton ticket then I know they are fake. If Hillary supporters, such as the women voters, won't vote for Hillary on the ticket, then you never wanted her to be in the WH. I'm a realist. Hillary will not be nominated. But I will vote for a Obama/Clinton ticket. If there are folks that won't vote for that ticket, then their fake and you're part of the Rush's "Chaos" inititive. I won't promise to know how this will turn out but I will wait to see.

Posted by: Lois, California | Jun 3, 2008 4:23:42 PM

The only way the Democrats can unite at this stage in the game is if Hillary will accept the VP spot, and I'm not so sure that most of her supporters will vote for this ticket. Many of them have become upset and dismayed, not necessarily at Obama, but at the DNC and the SuperDelegates and the chaos they have created to split the party this year.

Posted by: david from texas | Jun 3, 2008 4:23:50 PM

Di-

Rules are not made to be broken but followed. If HRC had objected to them in the first place, then penalities might have been different. However, all agreed to them and thus they should be followed - personally I would have kept both FL and MI unseated, but I guess I come from a generation that actually followed the rules that were laid out.
HRC has never been ahead in pop votes (unless you used Clinton math - and besides pop votes do not matter), she is behind in delegates (which matter). If you don't like the system - get up off your bottom and get you congree-person to change it. I am tired of hearing all of this crap about how "we don't like the way this works" but nobody is willing to fight to change it. so unless you are - do not complain about it.

Posted by: jozy | Jun 3, 2008 4:24:57 PM

John25, you definitely have a point there. It may be too late to try to bring Hillary supporters over to vote for an Obama/Clinton ticket. Her supporters are sick and tired of the pro-Obama media, StuperDelegates, and everyone else that have tried to shove him down our throats. I don know he is the weaker candidate and if he has any inkling of winning in the GE, it will be because of Hillary, not of his own merit!

Posted by: david from texas | Jun 3, 2008 4:28:02 PM

I don't know if it is out of consideration for Hillary or not, but I think it wise to not have the flood gates of spineless superdelegates rush out tonight before the end of the primaries. If they do, it will just tick her supporters off more because it will show total disrespect. I don't see what the big hurry is anyway,except that Obama just wants to have a movie ending at his rally tonight. I can't say it enough, the appalling treatment Sen. Clinton has gotten throughout this primary season not only from the press, but from her supposed friends and colleagues, is going to be hard to get over.

Posted by: dwc | Jun 3, 2008 4:28:59 PM

If Hillary agrees to take the VP, I will vote for the ticket. I think she will reinvent the VP description and will be the real leader running this country. Obama will be there for show-see we have a BLACK PRESIDENT-now the world can love us again!

Posted by: Cindy | Jun 3, 2008 4:29:09 PM

How many votes did the media COST HILLARY CLINTON TODAY?? With reports that she is conceding tonight? How many other things can the media do to help the weakest of the two candidates win?? This is horrible. If you're in SD or MT and you wanted to vote for Clinton, the message sent by AP was "why bother?" If the media had done this to Mr. Obama, America would have been accused for doing it for racist reasons, so that he would lose. Whether it's Time magazine with her tied to train tracks or this from AP, the media is playing an active role in choosing the presidential nominee.

Posted by: LonghornMama | Jun 3, 2008 4:30:09 PM

If you remember in the debates, Obama's usual response was as follows:

"uhhh....mmmm.....uhhhh......mmmmm...uhhh...I agree with what Mrs. Clinton said."

She literally ripped him to shreds in the debates, even though the Obama supporters don't like to admit it, she definitely is stronger on the issues. Added to this, her tenacity, endurance, perserverance, and above all, stamina would make Obama's life easier in the White House. I'm still concerned that this VP position will not be enough to beat McCain in the GE, though.

Posted by: david from texas | Jun 3, 2008 4:32:46 PM

Post a comment