Just what would a Clinton nomination won through so-called "Coup by Super Delegates" look like? Ask President John McCain.
http://www.usatoday.com/...
The findings in the survey, taken Friday through Sunday, underscore some of the perils ahead for Democrats as the closely fought nomination battle between Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama continues.
By 55%-37%, Democrats and independents who "lean" Democratic say an outcome in which Clinton lost among pledged delegates but prevailed with the help of super delegates would be "flawed" and unfair" — including 77% of Obama supporters and 28% of Clinton supporters.
Super delegates are party leaders and elected officials who can vote at the national convention and aren't bound by the results of their state's primary or caucus.
Most at risk is Democratic support from independents. Nearly two-thirds of those voters call that result unfair, and one-third say they would then vote for the Republican or stay home in November.
This echoes what I have always felt about it. It just goes against basic fairness to suggest that even if the majority of Democrats choose Obama over Clinton, she should get the nod from party insiders who would ostensibly "know better"
But I think this also shows that it's a strategy that not only will piss off Obama supporters, but also a large portion of Democrats and even "28% of Clinton supporters." What you're left with is a very weak candidate in a year where we should be pounding McCain for being wrong about, well, everything.
I'd love to see a resolution to this, but I don't see how, until the "SuperD's" stand up and voice their choice.