Top Clinton Fundraisers Told Hillary Can Only Get Nod Through Superdelegates

[AtomicKitten]

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Top Clinton fundraisers told Hillary can only get nomination through super-delegates
http://www.americablog.com/

Greg Sargent has a report on a meeting of top Hillary fundraisers:

Fundraisers were given a presentation on Florida by Senator Bill Nelson, and one on Michigan by Senator Debbie Stabenow, and senior Hillary adviser Harold Ickes walked listeners through the challenges ahead. The presentations had a tone of optimism tempered by realism, the fundraiser said, adding that Ickes didn't try to persuade his listeners that she would be able to catch up with Obama in pledged delegates.

Rather, the clear message emerging from the presentations was that Hillary's success depends on the campaign's ability to persuade the super-delegates that they should be considering three "data points," as this fundraiser puts it, in considering whom to back: The pledged delegate count, the popular vote, and the specific states won by each candidate.

Okay, let's review:
1) Clinton can't and won't win the pledged delegate count;
2) Hillary can't and won't win the popular vote; and
3) Hillary has lost an overwhelming majority of the states.

By her campaign's own "data points," it's over. She can't win the nomination and shouldn't.

On NPR this morning, Hillary did add another firewall -- Puerto Rico:

"We'll wait and see where the voters go," Clinton says, when asked if she thinks the superdelegates should follow the lead of the popular vote. "I want to see what happens in Pennsylvania and Puerto Rico, Michigan and Florida."

Yes, Puerto Rico (not Missouri, Virginia, Maryland, Connecticut, Maine, Washington, Wisconsin... ) is now a big part of her super-delegate strategy --even if that undermines her other argument that only a winning a few primaries in some big states matters.

The Clinton campaign is always re-setting the bar, cherry-picking what "counts." And, the punditry, loving the game and the ratings, plays along. But, this game is dangerous. The longer it goes on -- the more "kitchen sink" the Clinton campaign throws -- the worse it gets for Democrats.

The Clintons can't win this fair and square. She can't win if she has to play by the rules. That's why Harry Reid had to remind "everyone" that we can't change the rules in the middle of the game. The Clintons want the White House again. They think it is theirs. And, that's all that matters.

[papau]

1. the same is true for Obama - he can not get nod without super delegates also

[Fresh_Start]

4. facts, who needs them

the merely distract from making the point that the OP wants to make.
Not singling out this one...just bemoaning the general trend in GD:P

[AtomicKitten]

The MATHEMATICAL FACT is that she can't move ahead of him without superdelegates.

That's the point.

[Fresh_Start]

13. neither can get enough delegates for the nomination without the supers

so both need the superdelegates to get the nod

[AtomicKitten]

17. Again, the point is she cannot overtake him without the SDs and Obama remains in the lead.

Ergo the candidate in the lead is the heir to the nomination, not the person stuck in second place.

And if that simple concept is a revelation to some of you, the Democratic Party is in deeper shit than we thought.

[onenote]

25. The candidate with the lead in pledged delegates is not the "heir" to the nomination

Assuming that what you mean is that the leader in pledged delegates has a presumptive claim on the nomination, that simply isn't true. If it was, why bother with superdelegates at all? Why not just have a rule that whichever candidate has a plurality of the pledged delegates gets the nomination?

The superdelegates will make their decision based on a variety of factors, including personal relationships, their perception of who will do best in the GE, their perception of who will do best in particular regions, states, districts, and any number of other factors.

Where that will leave things is unclear at this point.

For the record, I'm backing Obama.

[AtomicKitten]

28. The superdelegates would be exercising the nuclear option if they overturned the will of the people.

Obama may not be the physical heir but most certainly by any measure of fairness and democracy is and should be the presumptive heir if he continues to remain in the lead, and it is mathematically very unlikely that will change.

What the SDs "can" do is the nuclear option.

My point is that ClintonCo knows this now. There is no mistake, no misinterpretation, no misunderstanding.

[onenote]

33. that depends on a couple of things

1. Will the results at the end of the process reflect a clear "will of the people"? Maybe, but maybe not. Ultimately, I suppose, it depends on how one defines "the will of the people." Superdelegates are political pros and they will view the process on a much more granular level than you or I would.

2. The very reason for the existence of the superdelegates is to give the party the option of exercising a "nuclear option." I hope it doesn't come down to that, but that result is something that the current arrangement is designed to allow.

Again, if I was a superdelegate, I'd support Obama. But I'm not. And I understand why some superdelegates may decide, for a variety of factors, to support Clinton. I hope that enough Superdelegates view it the way I do to give the nomination to Obama, but there is no such thing as a presumptive nominee -- again, that's why the rules don't simply give the nomination to the candidate with a plurality.

[AtomicKitten]

35. I hope somebody pulls the plug before it comes to that.

I think that would be catastrophic for the Democratic Party and the Democrats will almost certainly lose in the fall as an aftershock.

A potential silver lining is that that just may be the catalyst for the rise of a viable third party.

We shall see.

[wileedog]

11. Right

But if the Superdelegates want to keep a party intact to remain Super in, they are going to select the candidate with the most pledged delegates.

[Drachasor]

12. Yeah, but with the most delagates, States, and the popular vote he will get that nod

It's basically impossible for Hillary to win now.

[my3boyz]

42. But he is in the lead. They would not be taking the person that is behind in delegates

and topping them off so that they could win. They would be taking the person in first place and topping them off.

[Hugabear]

2. Hillary won the states that count - California, New York, Ohio, Texas, Florida

The other states don't matter to her.

[xultar]

3. I want a fucking do over, over. I want Clinton and Obama out and Edwards and Biden in.

Even Edwards, Clark, and Biden.

[John Q. Citizen]

15. Have you abandoned Clinton?

[xultar]

23. how many times do I have to post that I am not supporting anyone

I liked Biden. He's out. I'm done. I've posted it hundreds of times.

Do a search on my posts please.

[Debi]

43. Okay, I don't know that Clark should jump in here

he didn't run in 2008.

[IDemo]

5. "Super" may sound superficially like "Stupid", but that's not the case

My take-> http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5058228&mesg_id=5058228

[AtomicKitten]

40. *

:thumbsup:

[C_U_L8R]

6. Forget the superdelegates

The fundraisers will pull the plug way before it gets to that point.
The honest realization of a bad investment will put a kibosh on this whole conundrum.
The fundraisers aren't stupid.

[AtomicKitten]

21. The problem is that the Clintons seem tone-deaf and

not particularly concerned about the wellbeing of the party. I'm afraid it's going to take a blow dart, animal tranquilizer, and a net to cause her to withdraw.

[C_U_L8R]

34. There's nothing as awakening as an empty treasure chest

but if that doesn't work, you may be right, break out the tranquilizer darts : - )))

[ericgtr]

7. It's a money pit for these contributors

It will be interesting to see how many of them bite, the logic and math are both clearly not in her favor.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

8. Wow, they need to be told that? Are they that stupid?

[AtomicKitten]

22. apparently

:(

[Diane R]

9. I am sincerely starting to wonder if Hillary Clinton is in touch with reality.

[Botany]

10. Bottom Line Hillary is getting beat

Obama is 4 and 2 in March

Texas, Vermont, Wyoming, and Mississippi

vs

Ohio & Rhode Island (BTW Ohio had a massive cross over vote
for Clinton)

Obama has been picking up 1-3 super delegates per day.
(In Feb. Clinton had about a 100 person lead in super delegates
she is now down to about 35)

So now team Clinton wants to throw out the popular vote
and delegate wins for Obama so Hillary can get the nomination.

Time for Hillary to get out .... she can not win by plying fair.

[AtomicKitten]

24. I think fair was left behind in the snow after Iowa and has accelerated to scorched earth.

[Botany]

29. Why are you sexist?

Just because team Clinton has brought up
drugs, race, religion, charges of plagiarism,
phony NAFTA story from Canada, compared
Obama to W, Rove, and Ken Starr, told millions of
voters that "they don't count," claimed to have helped
out in the peace treaty in N. Ireland, and now wants
to get the victory even though she will get less votes ....

And now you say she is going scorched earth ....
why do you hate women?

[AtomicKitten]

31. I was told it was the "ism" de jour.

Shit; I thought it was Friday. :(

Turns out it's hate America day. My apologies.

[Botany]

36. did I ever tell you that you are my Fav?

I have been called sexist too. Not only on DU but
by Hill-bots in OH.

I pointed out to them that I had worked for free
about 200 to 250 hours for a women running
for congress & I had given her $ too. I was told
that was just a cover.


My 2 cents on team Hillary

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5056614

[AtomicKitten]

38. The only thing that matters in life is that you know who you are.

All the rest is extraneous noise that often is a disservice to the real isms of the world. I work on processing grants for actual ism causes and have learned to discern the real isms from the feigned-outrage-as-a-political-tool isms. TeamClinton has lost all credibility for resorting to the latter.

Cheers. :hi:

[Scurrilous]

14. K & R

:thumbsup:

[otohara]

16. In Other Words, Turn Over The Will of The People

that will go over nicely don't you think?

[backscatter712]

18. I'll boil it down to one word: stealing.

That's what she will be doing if she games the superdelegates - stealing the nomination from the people.

Speaking as a resident of the Denver metro area, I will be there, at the Pepsi center, with a bucket of tar and a bag of feathers, if this happens.

I imagine thousands of others will join me...

[AtomicKitten]

32. yep,

as you can see I'm a big fan :(

[hogwyld]

19. You might need to reconsider

your signature cartoon. The longer she continues to trash the democratic party, the less likely that illustrated cartoon will happen.

[AtomicKitten]

20. a sad truth indeed

:(

[thereismore]

26. "I want to see what happens in MI and FL" - HRC admits MI and FL have not hapened yet. nt

[thereismore]

27. They want it real bad. I feel almost sorry for them. nt

[thoughtcrime1984]

30. And sticking with their electoral vote theme....

How many EV's does Puerto Rico have?

[arikara]

37. Pelosi's daughter was just interviewed on CBC TV

she's an undeclared superdelegate and she says she will vote for whoever wins the popular vote. She's lobbying other superdelegates to do the same. Seems fair to me.

I should think that if the second place candidate should win only by superdelegate votes it could destroy the morale of the people, and the party itself. The fallout would rival the election frauds of 2000 and 2004.

Your process is endlessly fascinating to this Canadian... our leadership races take place over the course of a weekend and we don't have superdelegates either.

[Zhade]

39. Yep, and SHE WON'T GET THEM. Which is awesome.

I never used to root for her to lose, but her repugnant campaign tactics and sense of entitlement make it great to watch her fail.

[AtomicKitten]

41. It's a hideous car wreck in slow motion.