Superdelegates told to wait until May 20th?

I have been one of those Kossacks that have been very frustrated over the timidity of the superdelegates not coming out for our presumptive nominee, Barack Obama.  I have commented to death about this, and fretted at work and in my solitude.  What the hell are they waiting for?  And then, it occurred to me. If they committed now in a huge tidal wave, Hillary would have her revenge.  Here's my premise.

Yesterday, Obama went up to the Hill and made a huge commotion.  It was assumed he was up there nudging supers for an endorsement.  I believe now he was urgently telling them to wait until May 20th.  If Obama would go over the 2025 before he reached the majority of pledged delegates, Hillary could scream that the superdelegates were thwarting the will of the voters.  Once the number is reached (2025), it can't be put back into the bottle.

I believe Obama is contacting supers, and especially the 'undecided' supers, and telling them to wait until May 20th.  If they don't and the supers decide the outcome before Obama has the majority, Hillary sets herself up as the ultimate victim and positions herself to dictate terms or pivot for 2012.

•  Given her behavior...

  ...regarding FL and MI, your premise may indeed hold water.

  by turnover on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:18:49 AM PDT

  •  When Obama reaches 2025 ...

    Clinton will insist the number is 2209.  So what difference does it make?

    It will be great when Obama is the undisputed nominee but there is no sense agitating for quick action at this point.  He has it sewed up, no matter what desperation moves the Clintons make.  He can afford to stay above the fray, turn his attention to the general election, and let her be eased out of the game.

    Obama has shown us time and time again that it is best to stay cool when things are upsetting or not going exactly the way we'd like.  He's right and we should follow his advise and lead.

    by SamCDC on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:54:28 AM PDT

•  tips

  by realwischeese on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:18:52 AM PDT

  •  Sorry I jumped your tip-jar, cheese. eom

    by turnover on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:22:48 AM PDT

    •  Naw, I had to get the door.

      Friday's is work at home day

      by realwischeese on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:27:34 AM PDT

•  Could be.

  It's important that Hill not be alienated - one speech from her will mean a WHOLE lot of votes for Obama in Nov.

  by haremoor on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:19:51 AM PDT

•  BREAKING NEWS

  One more Californian super for Obama. The Page hinting it could be a decent sized name. Surely not one of the senators, probably a House Member.

  by blue2win on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:20:00 AM PDT

  •  Hmm... is Maria Shriver a super?

    Because THAT would be a biggie. And it would make sense - her Uncle Teddy and cousin Caroline already support Obama.

    Her position as first lady of CA would carry a hell of a lot of weight with people there.

    by mmacdDE on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:27:50 AM PDT

    •  She already endorsed

      And no she isn't a super.

      I'm saying Christine Pelosi.

      by marcvstraianvs on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:37:19 AM PDT

  •  We need a constantly updated

    superdee thread today.  I have a feeling that by day's end, ABC won't be the only ones announcing Obama's lead.  It would be nice if someone (more informed and not sick in bed like me) could start today's superdee tally thread.

    And, this is just such good news.  Isn't it?

    by angel d on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:28:19 AM PDT

  •  Uncommitted CA Supers

    Howard Berman CA Representative Uncommitted
    Jim Costa CA Representative Uncommitted
    Susan Davis CA Representative Uncommitted
    Edward Espinoza CA DNC Uncommitted
    Sam Farr CA Representative Uncommitted
    Bob Filner CA Representative Uncommitted
    Mike Honda CA Representative DNC Vice Chair - officially DNC Member Uncommitted
    Jerry McNerney CA Representative Uncommitted
    Carole Migden CA DNC Uncommitted
    Bob Mulholland CA DNC Uncommitted
    Christine Pelosi CA DNC Uncommitted
    Nancy Pelosi CA Representative officially DNC Member Uncommitted
    John Pérez CA DNC Uncommitted
    Robert Rankin CA DNC Uncommitted
    Pete Stark CA Representative Uncommitted
    Crystal Strait CA DNC Young Dems of America Uncommitted
    Art Torres CA DNC State Chair Uncommitted
    Keith Umemoto CA DNC Uncommitted
    Henry Waxman CA Representative Uncommitted
    Steve Ybarra CA DNC Uncommitted

    by Scarce on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:34:06 AM PDT

    •  Steve Ybarra

      It won't be him unless Obama has ponied up $20 million for Hispanic voter outreach. Christine Pelosi sounds like a good call.

      by blue2win on Fri May 09, 2008 at 10:02:42 AM PDT

•  I see several good reasons to wait

  1.  The reason you have stated quite well - it wouldn't sit any better with HRC supporters if it was won with SD, than it would with Obama supporters

  2.  HRC needs to stay in the race for WV and KY.  It would be embarrassing for Obama to lose those states if she dropped out (good chance he would).

  3.  Oregon is a fast growing state and will make a difference to the Dems in the future.  Although the urban areas are D, the majority of the state is rural and could flop with the right candidate.

  by SnowItch on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:21:02 AM PDT

  •  2. is a very interesting point

    Wow, if Obama got smoked by a non-candidate, or even worse by sympathy voters pissed at Obama for forcing her out, you can write those states off.

    by realwischeese on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:24:28 AM PDT

  •  The other good reason for them to wait

    Is that if she still doesn't get the message after the results on 5/20, then having a large group of supers announce the next day should emphasize that it is just plain over.  I don't think voters (other than political junkies) are much paying attention to what SDs say, so endorsements before those primaries won't do much to sway the contest.  SDs message is most important to the candidates and the media - so post-Oregon is the best way to go.

    It would also help reinforce the message that the party is uniting behind the candidate.

    by lineatus on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:32:15 AM PDT

  •  Yep.

    I made the exact same comments on a different thread.
    Also, by holding them back they keep a little ammo on their side to hopefully influence her behavior during the next couple of weeks.  If keeps going negative, they can put a few more out and let her get the message without "embarrassing" her.

    by choochmac on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:43:42 AM PDT

•  The Super D's must come forward now!

  She is ruthless and must be crushed before West Virginia.

  by Jack Dublin on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:21:12 AM PDT

  •  No one will remember what she said in May.

    Everyone will remember what Obama did.  Best to let the air out of her campaign with some grace, her lack of it notwithstanding.

    by venatrix on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:24:25 AM PDT

  •  She'll probably win WV. Since her refrain

    is "he can't close the deal", better to let it play out to 5/20.  "Crushing" won't work - unless she drops and explicitly tells voters to cast their ballots for Barack, it will look bad.  Since she's not showing any signs of exiting graciously, we can wait ten more days and let the math do the job for us.

    by lineatus on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:27:01 AM PDT

    •  Definitely

      It's not going to hurt Obama, he's got enough money to handle the last few states. It will build up goodwill for the general, and get him visible in some states that he might not get a chance to visit before November.

      It's like a world series game that started close, but the home team is now up 5 runs and it's the top of the 9th. You still have to get those 3 outs before you can break out the champagne.

      by mmacdDE on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:36:42 AM PDT

•  Interesting theory

  but they better be there on May 21st then to put the exclamation on the Obama wins Oregon/crosses the 50+1 mark news cycle.

  by Wisper on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:21:51 AM PDT

•  I'm not sure that Obama would go as far as

  telling the supers explicitly that they should wait.  That seems a bit too far fetched to me.

  by WaitingForGodot on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:23:17 AM PDT

  •  You question the ability of people waiting?

    WaitingForGodot?

    LOL

    peace

    by realwischeese on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:26:41 AM PDT

    •  Not giving credit to the Supers

      as the remaining ones are mostly the most entrenched establishment types.  Some of them, I think, are still debating whether they would have a better future with the Clintons' mind set of "I'll reward you if...."  

      by WaitingForGodot on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:33:56 AM PDT

      •  not now, maybe before PA or even last Tuesday

        There's no chance spiffs such as Cabinet or Ambassador or whatever would tempt them.  She's too dead in the water for that.  It's been fear of retribution from Clinton backers.

        by realwischeese on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:42:23 AM PDT

        •  That, too -- fear of the residual

          Clinton mafiaesque remaining power base.  I doubt that that's dead in the water -- not yet, anyway, and still there to be quite scary for some.

          by WaitingForGodot on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:45:19 AM PDT

          •  I wonder what exactly that is?

            It seems to be real, more than just constituents.  maybe it was a mystique that was based in myth, and now the curtain is being drawn back. Look toto, it's just an angry rich couple settling a personal debt made to each other in the 90's.  woof.

            by realwischeese on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:49:27 AM PDT

            •  Yeah, but some of them need her fundraisers.

              Not everyone can raise money on the internet like Obama.  It's a small group of bundlers that everyone relies on.  I am sure that they are waiting until they all can go over after the "people have spoken".  I think at this point its about the money more than anything else (and the ability to minimize the anger of the their pro-Hillary constituents.)

              by choochmac on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:58:58 AM PDT

•  your premise would hold water if

  Hillary behaved herself and didn't continue to go negative.  Right now her comments serve to continue dividing the party and hurting our chances in the fall.  Since Hillary was the one who has admitted that she needed to rely on the superdelegates to win the nomination, it would be quite hypocritical for her to complain about Obama winning over more superdelegates than her.  Everyone knows that either candidate cannot reach the magic number without superdelegate support.  Hillary will whine no matter what happens, but I think her whining will increasingly fall on deaf ears.  Given the nastiness, divisiveness and underhandedness of Hillary's campaign, we need to end this sooner rather than later.

  by davidkc on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:23:36 AM PDT

  •  She's reinforcing her negatives and Obama's case.

    by venatrix on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:25:28 AM PDT

  •  Yea, Davidkc, I agree. If she goes negative

    she could 'force' supers hands.  But, would she make the 'thwarting' claim anyway?  Yes, of course she would.  She is so like Rove this way.  

    by realwischeese on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:35:04 AM PDT

•  You are 100% correct.

  this needs to look like it's the will of the voters and Oregon should push Obama over the top.

  Super Delegates votes - while necessary to get him over the top - are now largely irrelevant as individuals. The nomination has been decided.

  Watching them fawning over Obama yesterday shows they know who will be buttering their bread this fall. They're politicians. They may be stupid, but they have a survival instinct that overules everything.

  by Chrispy67 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:23:46 AM PDT

•  You NAILED it.

  I've basically been responding in like fashion all morning to a # of posts fretting over this thing. Insiders all know the real count & know that Hillary is @ checkmate. What ever trump card she may have held has been rendered null & void due to supers decisions & Obama will provide cover with his May 20th victory in Oregon (pledged delegate majority). Then these people can simply ratify the People's choice keeping it all legit... Peace.

  by Chapman on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:23:57 AM PDT

•  Or they're waiting til next Wed. to blunt

  Hillary's expected large win in WV.

  by jeepdad on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:23:58 AM PDT

  •  That would be smart

    WV is the last swing state that will vote for Clinton.  Obama could lose by 46 points, easily.

    by nieman on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:26:20 AM PDT

•  I imagine ...

  ... Obama wants to save some for the day after the West Virginia primary, where Hillary Clinton is poised to humiliate Barack Obama with a 40+ point victory.

  by jim bow on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:24:00 AM PDT

•  It would be ironic

  if she protested the supers coming out for Obama and therefore subverting the will of the people, given that that's what she's been advocating (on her behalf) all along.

  Of course, it wouldn't surprise me if she did that, given her double standards and general approach.

  by ItsJessMe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:24:49 AM PDT

•  Your logic is flawed though your point

  is appreciated.  There is no reason to wait.  Hillary started the competition with 100 or so supers, and this was before a single vote was cast.  The people have spoken; Obama is the nominee.

  by PittsburghPete on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:25:56 AM PDT

•  Supers obviously aren't worried about Unity...

  How is letting her continue to slander and belittle every demographic of democratic voters promoting party unity...I was all for the holding off the supers until the 20th UNTIL Hillary continued the, "Barack can't win white voters" talk...She is actively trying to divide the party down racial lines and obviously has no plans to stop...THATS WHAT THE DAMN SUPERS ARE FOR...Get some guts superdelegates stop being bullied and dictated by the freaking Clinton's, and stupid Nancy "Gutless" Pelosi...this shit has got to stop.

  by NoCryingInPoltics on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:26:08 AM PDT

•  All politics are local

  Like Tip O' Neil said the elected reps are looking at their local conditions. I am afraid BO's camapign is not controlling this at all.

  by chuckk on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:32:24 AM PDT

•  I'm for some supers coming out for Obama now

  but not so many that the 2025 is reached before May 20.  I like the idea of having a cluster of them available to endorse on May 14 to blunt the Hillary victory WV news and I also like having some come out during the next few days to keep the positive stories going.  

  by rccats3 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:32:44 AM PDT

•  Isn't her whole campaign now based

  On having the supers "thwart" the voters?Isn't her only argument left that the supers can vote for anyone they want and it doesn't matter who's ahead in delegates, states, or popular vote?

  That said, I think you may be onto something, not because of Hillary, but as a way to ease her supporters into the idea that she has lost fair and square.

  by atlliberal on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:33:27 AM PDT

  •  So naturally it's perfect for Hillary to use it.

    Say anything one day, chop and change for the next.  I can just hear her crying 'the voters were denied their rights thanks to the elitist supers'.  I cringe when she went to the Hill and said 'Are you for or against' the gast tax holiday.  Total Bushian-rove redux. She has no honesty.

    by realwischeese on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:39:09 AM PDT

•  While Clinton's campaign has become pathetic

  I agree with this diary totally. Obama is going to get smoked next Tuesday in WV. Heck, it's only four days away. This supposed flood of superdelegates does nothing but allow her to yell about being "pushed" out. He can declare victory on May 20th.

  by turneresq on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:34:21 AM PDT

•  So funny!

  If Hillary ever said:

  "the superdelegates were thwarting the will of the voters"

  that would be the most outraegous case of Goebbels/Orwellian NewSpeak that she has yet done, seeing that for months and months she has consistently & prominently maintained that the SD's could and should override the will of the voters.

  I don't think that Hillary would ever say that the superdelegates were thwarting the will of the voters,

  But of course, this is Hillary that we are dealing with here, and in her alternate parallel universe, what she said yesterday has no bearing on what she may say today or tomorrow.

  by BonzoDogBand on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:34:58 AM PDT

•  I think Obama's campaign has a bunch...

  Of superdelegates in waiting and there will be two major floods: one before the Oregon primary so that once the pledged delegates are counted there, he will be at or very close to 2025.  Then, a few days later, but before the end of May there will be a second flood of superdelegates to negate Clinton's last chance at the nomination -- a flood with enough supers to bring Obama over the "new" Clinton threshold of 2209 or whatever the hell they pulled out of their asses once the final primaries in June are complete.

  At this point, with all the bile she's spewed the last couple of days, it's not even worth it for her to get out of the contest now.  She's done as much damage as she possibly can, short of exhorting her supporters to vote for McCain.  She might as well just go down with the ship.

  And all those leadership positions in the Senate that were possible for her after her candidacy -- she can kiss those goodbye.

  by BasharH on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:52:02 AM PDT

•  Bring them all on as fast as possible

  Trying to out think the Clinton's is a waste of time. No matter what strategy is deployed they will twist and turn like a serpent and come out with some kind of hair brained thought process.

  KISS - "Keep it simple stupid" just go for the maximum number as fast as possible

  by aboutmri on Fri May 09, 2008 at 09:57:14 AM PDT

  •  I know its tempting, but

    realize that almost half the Democratic electorate has voted for her.  Now revenge against her is counterproductive.  It's all about the GE now.  We need to keep as many of her voters as possible.  A gracious but decisive win is what we need most.  Gracious enough not to further alienate her supporters and decisive (both SD and pledged delegates) enough to make the win uncontestable.  That is our goal now.  All the rest is moot.

    by choochmac on Fri May 09, 2008 at 10:04:03 AM PDT