Madame Speaker Supports Obama's argument

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seemed to come down on the side of the Obama campaign in two recent process arguments. When discussing the role of super delegates she suggested that they ought to ratify the will of the people. She specifically said,

It would be a problem for the party if the verdict would be something different than the public has decided.

In addition she weighed in on seating the delegations from Michigan and Florida saying,

Well, I don't think that any states that operated outside the rules of the party can be dispositive of who the nominee is. That is to say they can't make the difference because then we would have no rules.

http://www.sfgate.com/...

She added that she would prefer that the nomination were decided before the convention so that Michigan and Florida could be seated. While I don't think she said this because she is an Obama partisan, I think that this clearly supports the argument of the Obama campaign. With many of the party stalwarts suggesting that the super delegates should not overturn the results of the primaries this could be over sooner than we expect.

•  Tips for tipping the scale.

  by Obama2008 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:51:49 PM PDT

  •  Maybe,

    because she doesn't want to deal with the Clintons. Or, she just wants to remain the only powerful woman in USA.

    by christine20 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:56:48 PM PDT

    •  Until HRC become Senate Leader

      by christomento on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:20:23 PM PDT

•  I think...

  ... she just doesn't want to see the will of the voters subverted, either way.

  by droogie6655321 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:52:32 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, I'm not seeing the mention

    of Obama anywhere...I think she just wants the party to come out of all of this united.

    by grannyhelen on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:57:17 PM PDT

    •  Exactly...

      ... regardless of who the candidate is.

      But I don't personally fear division. The Clinton vs. Obama contest isn't a conflict that exposes any serious, fundamental divides within the party.

      The McCain vs. Huckabee contest, however...

      by droogie6655321 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:58:29 PM PDT

•  Speculation is not a diary

  Where's the links???  Why wouldn't Pelosi vote the way her district (SF) did?

  *

  by SallyCat on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:53:30 PM PDT

  •  I don't see why not.

    If there's a question mark.
    No harm, no foul.

    by bugscuffle on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:55:02 PM PDT

    •  There was no ??? in the original title

      and downthread I posted why the speculation is idle...from the rest of the article.

      by SallyCat on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:56:14 PM PDT

  •  Isn't all of this superdelegate hullabaloo

    Just constant speculation?

    by BoiseBlue on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:55:17 PM PDT

    •  The last paragraph in the article

      says she will not endorse and she is going to be a "referee" at the convention fight if there is one.

      Selective editing of the story for the diary was inappropriate.

      by SallyCat on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:57:16 PM PDT

      •  The story wasn't selectively edited.

        I made clear in the diary that she is just supporting his argument re: delegates, Michigan, and Florida.

        by Obama2008 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:59:14 PM PDT

        •  She is supporting equity in the system

          and your title is now on it's 3rd iteration.

          Need to try for consistency and less inflammatory...

          by SallyCat on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:05:38 PM PDT

        •  Lets be realistic here

          how could you not have tried to spin that story- have you looked at your own id lately?

          by linc on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:06:46 PM PDT

  •  Half the California endorsements were opposite

    their constituents (among Representatives).

    by DemocraticLuntz on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:56:39 PM PDT

    •  Yeah and there will be hell to pay in CA about

      those if they vote differently than the electorate at the convention. CA voters will vote the bums out.

      by SallyCat on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:59:11 PM PDT

•  Pelosi supports Obama's superdelegate argument

  would be a more accurate title.

  by Trix on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:53:35 PM PDT

•  Her constituents voted for him.

  by DemocraticLuntz on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:53:47 PM PDT

•  She is on the side of fairness ...

  ... and common sense.  Both happen to line up in support of Obama and his position.

  by OCS89 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:54:41 PM PDT

•  You forgot to highlight this part

  For a play-it-safe speaker who's pledged to stay neutral, these are sharp words. And she will be one of key referees if this fight isn't settled before Denver

  .

  by SallyCat on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:54:50 PM PDT

•  These are opinions on process...

  ... not of Obama.

  Her opinions of how things can go could possibly favor Obama, but to call this "support for Obama" is silly.

  No need to reach for straws like that... it makes you look silly too... and this is from a fellow Obama supporter, BTW.

  by highacidity on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:55:21 PM PDT

  •  Re: Looking Silly

    It was just supposed to be an attention grabbing headline. Chill. Read the whole thing?

    While I don't think she said this because she is an Obama partisan, I think that this clearly supports the argument of the Obama campaign.

    by Obama2008 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:57:52 PM PDT

    •  I see you changed the title from what it was...

      ... when I commented... that helps a little bit.

      by highacidity on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:59:25 PM PDT

      •  Oh, and now it's back to the old version...

        ... whatever.

        by highacidity on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 04:43:39 PM PDT

    •  You keep forgetting this part

      For a play-it-safe speaker who's pledged to stay neutral

      by SallyCat on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:00:09 PM PDT

      •  How exactly does that negate what I said?

        I said she is not an Obama partisan. I said that her argument supports his. Could you try to read?

        by Obama2008 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:01:36 PM PDT

    •  You can have an eye catching headline

      Without being misleading.

      by droogie6655321 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:00:48 PM PDT

•  She's too busy thinking of new ways...

  ...to capitulate to Bush to have any time to endorse Obama.

  She's tireless, that woman...

  by Minerva on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:56:52 PM PDT

•  This isn't about scales

  It's about common sense and about what's right. It's wrong to move the goalposts in the middle of the game, weakening the Democratic Party's organizational structure (e.g., preventing it from determining primary dates in advance in the future) to score a few delegates -- delegates won in a high-road deliberate attempt to not contest those bastard elections.

  So Pelosi is on the ethical side of the argument: letting the voters decide. If it means that Clinton wins the delegate count, it's still the right argument.

  And it just so happens that Obama's on the ethical side of the argument as well.

  by the good reverend on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 02:56:56 PM PDT

•  so one DNC rule we should stick by (MI/FL)

  but the other(S.D) we shouldnt. Wow, Pelosi's leadership sucks once again!

  by rigso on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:00:04 PM PDT

  •  Opinion vs. Rule

    She has an opinion on what superdelegates should do, hence her using the word "ought."  There is no rule on how superdelegates should vote other than they will have a vote at the Convention.  Her philosophy is that it should ratify the constituent's vote.  No where in her comments does she speak of stripping them of their vote or making their votes "automatic" in one way or another.  

    There are clear cut DNC rules on the matter of MI/FL.  Like it or not, rules have been broken and consequences are being payed.  

    by kilgore2345 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:11:00 PM PDT

    •  makes sense. but how come Iowa/NH are being

      punished? They were supposed to have half their delegates taken away like GOP did, that was also DNC rule, and didn't happen.

      by rigso on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:22:05 PM PDT

•  Pelosi is on the side of

  not allowing the D's in Congress to face utter destruction in a general election year and tarnish the image of the party for a decade to come.  

  Pelosi knows the price that will be paid if Florida and Michigan delegates are used to help install Clinton and Obama wins the most pledged delegates.

  Look a hard, but entirely reasonable assesment:

  90% of the GOP hates the Clintons and Hillary in particular, 50% of independents seem to despise the Clintons, and if tricks are used to get Hillary the nomination, about 50% of Democrats would hate the Clintons. African Americans would sit out how many election cycles before they would vote Democrat again? Millions of younger voters, same story.

  You do not want that kind of bad karma at the top of the ticket if you are running for Congress.  

  by Dont Just Stand There on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:03:32 PM PDT

•  I do think Pelosi leans Obama though

  George Miller, her right-hand man, (I think that's his name, the guy who's chair of the Education Cmte in the House) endorsed Obama and he was viewed at the time as having her tacit support to do that. And I just read somewhere else (man, can't remember the source now, was it The Page) that said Pelosi is weighing whether it would be appropriate to publicly endorse Obama and whether she should stay neutral.

  But if she's throwing her support his way behind the scenes, that's still good.

  by orchid314 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:04:50 PM PDT

  •  By leaking that, Pelosi

    is intentionally letting it be known who she supports, and the subtext of the message is that she's not going to allow this election to be stolen.

    by mama hearts obama on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 04:05:57 PM PDT

•  Support Dean's Argument

  Would have been a better title.

  by sunshineonthebay on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:10:56 PM PDT

•  She didn't come down on anybody's side...

  She simply stated that she will not support the subversion of the pledged delegate count.  It works for Clinton if she can catch up.  It just happens to favor Barack ATM.

  by RichM on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 03:41:14 PM PDT

•  Does Anyone Believe Nancy Pelosi Has Any

  credibility?  

  by kerplunk on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 04:13:17 PM PDT