jdanton

If this democratic primary comes down to the super delegates, what do they do?

I was pleased to see someone on tv ask this question last night. Would they have any obligation to go along with the popular vote of their state? the country wide popular vote?

More importantly, can they all agree to a set of rules that both campaigns will agree to?

While we're still selecting a nominee, with the DNC be running any ads aimed at the general?

Will McCain be running against either or both of our possibles?

Would you agree with this statement: the more effort Hillary and Obama make to avoid splitting the party, the more even the votes will continue to be, and the more likely the super delegates will decide.

Conversely, the more the candidates try to show differences, the more likely they are to split the party and help the republicans.

If you were in Howard Dean's shoes, what might you suggest?

__________________
Author: Memoirs of a Sleepless Mind, a book you CAN judge by its cover.

Veronica

This is a complex situation. I don't think either party is going to step down. Obama has 200k more popular votes than she does. Should we go with the popular vote, what the people want? I don't think anyone wants the Superdelegates to decide.

Sean

The real question is, will Ron Paul run as an Independent? I'd vote for McCain is he had Paul as his VP. Otherwise...

Go Bama!

Veronica

How many independents are allowed to run? Ron Paul, Bloomberg? Nadar runs on the Green Party?

Sean

I have no idea.

Maybe he could run under the Whig Party?

Kanadesaga

superdelagates are under no obligation to vote anyway but the way they want.

__________________
"..., because hope don't park the motherfucking car."

Rollerball

I believe that they both learned that getting along makes everyone happy. A few weeks ago when the media was reporting that Clinton and Obama were going at each other the response was negative. Once Edwards dropped out Obama and Clinton started making nice. I think the negative stuff hurt Clinton more, the way I saw it Obama tried to stay above that stuff, but cutting it out will help them both.

I hope it doesn't get handed to the Super delegates to decide.
I picture them as the same brilliant "Old School" Dems that gave us Kerry as a choice last time. The group that made "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory" a Democratic Party slogan.

jdanton

Yes, it is complex. I'd not complain if they used all of the popular vote to determine this, but I think I'd insist then that Florida and Michigan count. Are those votes counted in his lead?

Can you imagine if he wins the popular vote by less than her margin of victory in those two states?

Incidentally, he had campaign ads running in Florida, though it's not his fault.

I'm in New Jersey, but near Philadelphia. I'm sure when ads are run in Pa, I'm going to see them here.

I'm also sure Hillary had some of the same problem. Tv and radio ads cross borders.

The question here is: can anyone come up with a set of rules at this stage in the game that everyone can agree on?

__________________
Author: Memoirs of a Sleepless Mind, a book you CAN judge by its cover.

Jonesy

Perhaps inspiration can be drawn from the seeds of the Universe? If gravity from two objects is nearly equal, when one of the two is removed, everything will gravitate to the other. Or, they could function like the dual-seed: Obama as Pres., Hillz as Veepz. Be an even bigger step forward for the country.

itsmeeeeeee

i find it fascinating that now, with hillary tanking, that some people are prematurely focusing on and predicting a disaster that may never materialize, yet alone, even be an issue a week or two, maybe a month, from now.

if the country continues to swing so dramatically toward one candidate, those super delegates would indeed be suicidal if they even attempted to throw the nomination to the candidate who so obviously LOST the popular vote in the primary process.

lest we forget that for years and years, everyone, all over the country has been bitching about the unfairness of a process in which a couple of early, extremely privileged, states were consistently allowed to severely limit the choices in candidate the rest of america had - resulting repeatedly in the coronation of extremely weak candidates.

thanks to super tuesday, the new system - for the first time in anyone's memory - the rest of the county is FINALLY being allowed to weigh in on what is arguably the most important part of the election process... who they want to be the nominee.

before this NEW primary process began, the old school's process of the coronation was still in place - and the establishment's candidate of choice was clearly hillary clinton. she was way ahead in every poll, and the pundants all predicted it was, indeed, hers to lose.

but then something remarkable happened.

the primaries began and the PEOPLE started to VOTE!

almost IMMEDIATELY in the primary process the presumptive queen's front runner status became challenged. and as the first super tuesday drew closer, even the polls revealed that the coronation of hillary clinton was extremely premature.

so - what the hell happened?

was hillary EVER that popular, or were those polls and coronation predictions simply made soooo early that they were basically flawed, because the average american hadn't yet taken the time to start thinking about, let alone research their options?

while the political pundants we love to hate (justifiably) do everything in their power to whip up this super delegate / dead heat drama and controversy... obama is clearly vexing the presumptive queen's followers and shocking the pundants by taking the country by storm by overwhelmingly emphatic margins. clinton is struggling now to even take states she was favored in just two weeks ago.


REALITY PILL:

THE LAST TIME I LOOKED AT THE CALENDAR IT WAS STILL JUST EARLY FEBRUARY!

with obama now quickly catching up to and obviously overtaking clinton in both delegates and a momentum that only appears to be accelerating exponentially, isn't the truth, in fact, looking more and more every day that it's less and less likely these candidates will remain locked in a dead heat much longer? and isn't it more and more likely that this nightmare scenario of the race remaining tied in a dead heat a month from now, let alone at the time of the convention, is in reality - just unnecessary hysterics?

as of last night, among PLEDGED (determined with votes) delegates, obama has taken a 30 point lead - 918 to 885, with 40 some delegates left to be assigned from counties with split districts in yesterday's caucuses. it's conceivable that by tomorrow, this lead very well could expand to 60 or 70 delegates.

so LET'S look ahead. but let's do it realistically. the clinton campaign has already conceded that they may very well not see another primary victory till march third. if that's the case - this dead heat looks to be short lived..

for the first time voters are getting the opportunity to say "nuh uh! not so fast!" and maybe all this panic over a dead heat going all the way to the convention, and super delegates is only shared by the media pundunts desperately attempting to MAKE a story - and the supporters of a candidate who's suddenly getting tromped!

i doubt like hell that this discussion will even be a issue a month from now if, in fact, obama continues to his impressive march to the convention to make another speech. this time, the acceptance speech for his parties nomination to be the next president of the united states!

__________________