A group of Clinton large donors are now chastising and threatening the Speaker for her reasonable comments concerning the obligations of superdelegates.
You can read their open letter here
But enough already, Speaker Pelosi also needs hear from the millions of small donors that are busy trying to take this party back from such large donor dinosaurs and return it to the Democratic rank and file.
Follow me over the fold for a small donor's letter to Pelosi (with a little help from the Clinton original.....
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the US House of Representatives
Office of the Speaker
H-232, US Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Madame Speaker,
As Democrats, we have been heartened by the overwhelming response that our fellow Democrats have shown for our Party’s candidates during this primary season. Each caucus and each primary has seen a record turnout of voters. But this dynamic primary season is not at an end. Several states and millions of Democratic voters have not yet had a chance to cast their votes. But what precisely will those votes mean if they are simply overturned by the will of Democratic super-delegates?
We respect those voters and believe that they, like the voters in the states that have already participated, have a right to be heard. Indeed, given that millions of Americans have voted for the candidate of their choice, volunteered untold hours of their time, and donated hitherto unimaginable amounts of small donor contributions, we agree wholeheartedly that the eventual Democratic nominee for President needs to secure at least a simple majority of the pledged delegates. To designate a nominee with a minority of such votes - a nomination where super-delegates overturn the manifest will of primary voters - would make a mockery of the values upon which the Democratic Party claims to rest.
During your appearance, you suggested super-delegates have an obligation to support the candidate who leads in the pledged delegate count as of June 3rd , whether that lead be by 500 delegates or 2. And we too believe that super-delegates have such an obligation. However, as you and we know, this obligation is not a legal one, not one spelled out in our rules or charters, but one that is moral and ethical in character. We recognize and we stipulate that super-delegates can and do exercise their own judgment in regard to the nomination process, but as they make these difficult decisions, we feel that we would be remiss if we didn't remind them what was at stake. We do not seek to compel them to vote in a particular way, but we will appeal to their reason and their good sense, and we will hope they make a choice that is consistent with the results of of the pledged delegate process.
Thus we welcome your statement that you also believe that "super-delegates have to use their own judgment and there will be many equities that they have to weigh when they make the decision. Their own belief and who they think will be the best president, who they think can win, how their own region voted, and their own responsibility.’" We can say this because we trust them not to make a disastrous choice that would be both undemocratic and un-Democratic, a choice that would resound in the most damaging ways among the masses of new voters and enthusiastic supporters that our Party has recently attracted. We trust them to cast their votes in a way that strengthens the Democratic brand, and not in a direction that could result only in Party fracture and Party self -destruction
Super-delegates, like all delegates, have an obligation to make an informed, individual decision about whom to support and who would be the Party’s strongest nominee. But above all else, we are convinced that this very individual decision must be informed by the values, ideals and beliefs that make our Party great. Among these, and perhaps above all others, is a never forgotten respect for the stated will of Democratic voters and individual members as expressed in the agreed-upon processes of the primary system. So as super-delegates make their individual choices, and hopefully soon, we pray that they will simultaneously remember (and respect) the choices already made by millions of the their fellow citizens – and fellow Democrats.
We have been strong supporters of the DCCC, and we will continue to be so. But we also hope that you will remain unswayed by the bluster (and barely concealed financial threats) made by a group of once very powerful Party donors. Their words may once have carried well warranted weight for a Party utterly dependent on a system large donors. Such people may sincerely feel they are acting in the interest of the Party, and may believe that they still have the power to bring the Party leadership to heel. In other words, they may still think they own the Democratic Party – Our Democratic Party. But speaking for over one million small donors for Obama that have helped raise over $140,000,000 for his campaign, I say this party belongs once again to all of us. And if you've got our back, we've damn well got yours.
Sincerely,
Millions of Very Important Small Donors for Obama