Patterico's Pontifications


Analyzing the Democratic Superdelegates

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 1:43 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Jay Cost at RealClearPolitics asks a good question:

“[W]e’ve read a bunch of stories suggesting that Clinton has a “super delegate problem.” But by and large the super delegates haven’t budged. Most of those who were undecided in early March are undecided as of today. According to Dem Convention Watch, Clinton had a 97-delegate lead on February 10th. By March 9th, Obama had cut that lead to 39. But since then, despite all of these stories about Clinton having no real chance, Obama has netted just 13 super delegates. As a group, the super delegates have not moved. More than 40% remain uncommitted.

I think this is curious. They surely do not want a bitter convention battle, so why haven’t they brought an end to this?”

Cost thinks the reason Democratic superdelegates haven’t announced for Obama could be because Ohio showed Obama is weak with rural white independent and weak partisan voters. Read Cost’s article to see why he thinks this, and why “Bittergate” couldn’t have come at a worse time for Obama.


23 Responses to “Analyzing the Democratic Superdelegates”

  1. I think they are waiting to see what happens in Pennsylvania. If she wins by 20%, as some polls post “bittergate” have suggested is possible, watch the steam rise. McCain has poked a stick in their cage by saying he’d prefer her as an opponent. That is reverse English if I have ever seen it.

    Mike K (f89cb3)

  2. Simpler answer: they’re posers who blanch at making real decisions where they might expose themselves to criticism, so they’re waiting and hoping the problem resolves itself and lets them off the hook.

    ras (fc54bb)

  3. they have the same problem ordinary democrats like me do, they’re like “omg, these candidates suck, maybe i’ll just stay home.”

    assistant devil's advocate (0be901)

  4. Simpler answer: they’re posers who blanch at making real decisions where they might expose themselves to criticism, so they’re waiting and hoping the problem resolves itself and lets them off the hook.

    I couldn’t agree more.

    Russell (093e64)

  5. Don’t get your hopes up too high. Obama can do no wrong in the eyes of leftist liberals. The rest of the sheep will follow. We’re in for a real battle between McCain and Obama.

    dianne (e5d154)

  6. i hope the struggle continues all the way to the convention, and that it is a long and bloody fight there on the floor & in the back rooms. with any luck, one of the two won’t like the outcome and take it into the courtroom afterward…..

    /pass the popcorn

    redc1c4 (21981b)

  7. It would be funny if there was low voter turnout among the delegates. At least the thought brings a chuckle.

    The dems actually are doing this right. Obama appeared to be a great “uniter”, but it was obvious he had never been vetted. Now, he’s being vetted and there’s a growing (still minorish) chance he’s going to get rejected.

    The Democrats aren’t stupid. They know just how poor an idea it is to nominate someone like Hillary. Obama is only popular because their frontrunner was such a terrible idea that was foisted on the party by its elites.

    They are screwed a bit, but taking their time to see if Obama can weather the storm is not a bad idea.

    Jem (4cdfb7)

  8. DRJ, always good story selection and analysis. I enjoy your posts and choices.

    Vermont Neighbor (629f2e)

  9. Hillary was inevitable until she couldn’t sweep the board. Now Obama cannot seem to get rid of Hillary, so he’s not inevitable either.

    Obviously the strongest Dem ticket is those two, in some order THEY CHOOSE. If Obama said, OK, I’ll give it to Hillary as long as I’m VP (and any number of blood oaths regarding 2012 or 2016 whichever), they’d sweep in November. The other way around might work, although Hillary would be unlikely to get the Presidency ever should Obama win.

    The worst Democrat ticket (for the Dems, anyway) is Hillary/someone-else over Obama’s still-bleeding body. That’s the one African_americans and “progressives” sit out, which means McCain wins in a landslide.

    Kevin Murphy (805c5b)

  10. I second that statement.

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  11. I think polls in this case are really of dubious quality. PA is such a diverse state even for the Democrats that one needs to be real careful of how many of where are responding. Plus, as LieGate and BitterGate show, events are fluid and no one knows who will be making the last major gaffe.

    If Hillary does win by over 20%, every pundit will agree it is a victory. But what if she ‘only’ wins by 15%? I can already feel the spin . And a win by 10% will be considered a loss.

    The Democratic Party wanted topsy-turvy and they got it.

    seaPea (12d5bc)

  12. Given the general shortage of corn, can this nation stand a popcorn-gap? At this rate, with all the popcorn consumption caused by the Dems, we’ll be paying more for popcorn than we will for bottled water!

    Please, for those who have depended upon a cheap and reliable source for popcorn, I beseech HRC and BHO to resolve their parochial interests and think of the greater needs of the voters.

    Ed (f28e9a)

  13. Makes sense, given how little was known about him and how much was known about her. Who could know which one of them would stumble when something from their past popped up?

    MamaAJ (788539)

  14. “…Bittergate” couldn’t have come at a worse time for Obama.”

    Wrong – you say that as if the superdelegates couldn’t wait another week or so for the PA primary. You take your shots any way you can get them don’t you DRJ?

    Psyberian (d18acc)

  15. Psyberian,

    That was Jay Cost’s conclusion. I try not to take shots here, and my focus in the posts is largely to stimulate discussion. If I have a personal opinion, I typically express it in the comments.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  16. I don’t think this is surprising at all. Like any politician, they want to make sure they support the one who comes out on top. Until that’s clear, no one will be brave enough to lead the way. No Nachshon here.*

    *Nachshon being the guy who first stepped foot into the Red Sea when it was being parted, according to Rabbinic legend.

    kishnevi (1ab50b)

  17. Re #12: I don’t think the corn used for popcorn is suitable for fuel, so pop away while you can before the Mr Reddenbacher’s fields are gone :)

    seaPea (12d5bc)

  18. pop away while you can before Mr Reddenbacher’s fields are gone

    I knew there was a rich white man was behind all this!

    Vermont Neighbor (629f2e)

  19. interesting article. lets face it, the super delegates have a problem, even though obama leads its still a very close contest. add in the clintons never surrender attitude (even if it destroys their party) in politics and the problem just grows with each passing day. i love it

    james conrad (7cd809)

  20. Psyberian,

    That was Jay Cost’s conclusion.

    Well then, DRJ, how dare you Swiftboat Psyberian! You take your shots any way you can get them don’t you DRJ?

    J. Peden (cbfc6a)

  21. Now the NY Post is reporting that Obama referred to the troops as “cannon fodder” at one of those fund raisers where he lets his guard down.

    At a fancy ’05 Manhattan fundraiser, Obama told the approving crowd that the Bush administration was using soldiers in Iraq as “cannon fodder.” It was something I expected to hear from an anti-war activist, not a US senator.

    But he supports them.

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  22. If the superdelegates are watching this debate between Obama and Clinton, they will be phoning each other to propose drafting Manbearpig for the nomination.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  23. Oooooo, Stephanopoulos lands a solid punch to Obama’s jaw.

    That’s gotta sting. Might want to put some ice on that.

    SPQR (26be8b)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2963 secs.