Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
ELECTORAL ARITHMETIC: SUPERDELEGATE ENDORSEMENT EDITION.
The Wall St. Journal has an informative article today (with a chart!) about Obama being poised to surpass Hillary Clinton in superdelegate endorsements sooner than later:
When the year began, about 200 of the superdelegates had taken sides, most for Sen. Clinton. Her campaign, including Mr. Clinton, had quickly signed up Clinton-administration veterans, others on the DNC and elected officials in Arkansas and New York, so that she initially led Sen. Obama by more than 100.
But the Obama campaign correctly figured that she had gotten the easy pickings and that the rest were up for grabs. Once he began winning more states than she did, her endorsements slowed to a trickle, and her lead eroded to less than two dozen now.
Clinton or Obama partisans are quick to point out that a superdelegate endorsement is non-binding, and they can change their mind at the convention. About 200 endorsed Hillary right away, but after that she picked up new superdelegates only slowly. Obama, meanwhile, has picked up endorsement after endorsement and now is only 20 behind Clinton. If superdelegates are going to suddenly jump ship, they're not likely to do so en masse unless there actually is a "superdelegate convention" that compels them to.
Since Clinton was only able to increase her super count by about 25 percent since January, I find it unlikely that the remaining undeclared supers are suddenly going to endorse her as a group. And since being in the lead doesn't seem to have much of an effect, I find it just as unlikely that supers will go over to Obama as a group. In short, there's no compelling reason to see superdelegates ending the contest decisively before the convention because they appear structurally incapable of making a mass decision unless there actually is concerted effort on their behalf to choose. Until then it's just a slow bleed until Denver.
--Mori Dinauer
COMMENTS (8)
"There's no compelling reason to see superdelegates ending the contest decisively before the convention because they appear structurally incapable of making a mass decision unless there actually is concerted effort on their behalf to choose."
That and the obvious: Even if the SuperDs got together and en masse decided to 'support' Obama it wouldn't mean a damn thing. Nothing's official until the tally at the convention. What makes anyone think that Hill would drop out just because a bunch of SuperDs got together at Dean's house for a BBQ and informal vote?
She has an obligation to her supporters, and she has an obligation to history. History will not look kindly back on a Democratic party that forced the first viable female candidate to concede without even a vote.
Let's have a vote at the convention and see who wins. It won't be the end of the world. The candidates deserve it, and the supporters of each campaign deserve it.
Posted by: sbj | April 29, 2008 5:04 PM
Is there a chart showing the composition of the undecided super delegates? Would it tend
to favor either?
Posted by: catclub | April 29, 2008 5:36 PM
Er, sbj, there's been a vote. Lots and lots of votes, actually. They're called primaries and caucuses. Obama won most of them. He won most of the elected delegates, and enough supers will vote for him in Denver to make him the nominee.
It's true that nothing's official till the convention, but then that's always true.
Where history would really look unkindly is on a candidate who continued attacking her party's nominee all summer long, gang-smearing him along with the Republican rival, and forcing him to respond to two sets of attackers, so that he'd only have 2 months of actual campaigning.
Further, taking it to the convention would only ensure that Hillary's supporters continued to hold on to the imaginary possibility of her winning right up to the end, leaving little time for reconciliation and rallying behind the winner. History wouldn't look too kindly on that either.
Oh BTW, history also wouldn't look to kindly on a Democratic party that overturned a fairly-won victory by an african-american candidate and handed it to an establishment, legacy white candidate.
Posted by: ResumeMan | April 29, 2008 7:28 PM
ResumeMan:
er, um, gee guy, thanks for the patronizing tone - I'll use small words for your benefit ...
History WILL look back favorably on a fair fight with a fair vote in the end. "We've had lots of votes" - so why not just stop now, eh ResumeMan? I mean, Obama's already won, right? That's what you're saying, isn't it? So why bother with these last few million voters? Why bother with a convention? Why even bother with the rules? You seem to want to change them and crown Obama king yesterday.
If the delegates decide to vote for Clinton then no one will have stolen the nomination from anyone. There's no rule that says if you have the most delegates then you win. There is a rule that says you need to reach a certain threshold - neither candidate can meet that threshold without superDs - they are the official tie breaker. Those are the rules and that's not stealing anything. Stop being a pansy.
And you think, for unfathomable reasons, that history won't look kindly back on Hillary because she fought a tough campaign?
See my earlier pansy remark ...
Posted by: sbj | April 30, 2008 11:56 AM
No need for the "bitterness". The math just doesn't add up for her. She needs more superdelegates to back her than he does. This means, more people voted for him than her. She has fuzzy math on the popular vote because she just wants those "irrelevant" caucus states to go away. The reality is that caucuses don't typically count popular vote and he won lots of caucus states. So her fuzzy math about having a chance to win the popular vote doesn't hold water. Which is why the pledged delegates will matter most and she can't overtake him in pledged delegates. He has far less baggage than she even with Rev. Wright. She is due in court to testify on fraud charges related to her 2000 senate campaign soon. The trial has been postponed several times. Likely because they are hoping that she will get the nom before the media decides to pick up the story. As with Huckabee, the math doesn't work for her. But I think it's great that she's staying in. She will give him an opportunity to travel to the remaining states and introduce himself to the people. He needs to do that. So thanks for that Hillary. Are you secretly helping Obama to build the base so that we can win in November? Hmmm.
Posted by: kat1park | April 30, 2008 4:08 PM
BTW, if that's the case, thanks to all you Republicans who are part of operation chaos. Your votes have allowed Hillary to stay in the race and keeping it going through all of the contests. Thanks to you, Obama will have a stronger coalition and a much larger database of supporters to work from in the fall. You guys are great! What you fear, you have helped to make better. Isn't God great?:-)
Posted by: kat1park | April 30, 2008 4:12 PM
It isn't over until its over. And, let me tell you I cannot understand why no one is talking about the Hamas endorsement for Obama. So it is now acceptable that a terrorist organization give an endorsement and that is perfectly okay. I can see that the Republicans will take the White House if the SD give the nomination to Obama. I for one will not vote for someone who was endorsed by a terrorist organization. Yeah! Super Delegates watch out, many of us will go over to the Republicans in November. We will not fall in line behine someone with such questionnable character.
Posted by: Liz Marquez | April 30, 2008 5:05 PM
It isn't over until its over. And, let me tell you I cannot understand why no one is talking about the Hamas endorsement for Obama. So it is now acceptable that a terrorist organization give an endorsement and that is perfectly okay. I can see that the Republicans will take the White House if the SD give the nomination to Obama. I for one will not vote for someone who was endorsed by a terrorist organization. Yeah! Super Delegates watch out, many of us will go over to the Republicans in November. We will not fall in line behine someone with such questionnable character.
Posted by: oyunlar | October 25, 2008 3:52 PM