Superdelegate watch: 3 states are key for Hillary Clinton

The hard-working folks at the National Journal's Hotline not only are keeping an overall tally of superdelegate preferences in the Democratic presidential race, they've started providing a state-by-state breakdown. And perusing it shows that Hillary Clinton's lead among these potential nominee-makers is simple to account for.

It rests on three states: New York (which she represents as a U.S. senator), Arkansas (where her husband reigned for so long as the preeminent political figure) and California (where over the years both Clintons cultivated strong bonds among Democratic officials).

The most recent Hotline tabulation found that among 795 superdelegates who are free agents when it comes to casting a convention vote for the nomination, Clinton is backed by 246, Obama by 199.5, with 349.5 still up for grabs.

Clinton's 46.5 superdelegate edge, not surprisingly, is based first and foremost on the institutional support she enjoys in New York. According to Hotline, 41 of the state's superdelegates are in her camp, compared with just one for Obama (eight remain undeclared).

This 40-vote margin for her in New York becomes 50 with Arkansas is factored in. Hotline reported that ...

10 of the state's superdelegates are in corner (Obama has none, 2 are undeclared).

Obama counters the Clinton backing emanating from those two states with his own home-court advantage. Among Illinois' superdelegates, according to Hotline, 19 back Obama, while just one is for Clinton (11 are undeclared).

California comes to Clinton's rescue to boost her lead to roughly its current level. The Hotline tally showed her favored by 28 of the state's superdelegates, with 11 for Obama and 28 undeclared.

Bottom line: Take away their respective home states (Clinton benefits from, in essence, having two) and California, and the two candidates are virtually tied, at the moment, in the chase for superdelegates.

The Hotline figures also underscore the advantage Clinton has in Pennsylvania's April 22 primary -- 13 of that state's superdelegates have opted for her, compared with four for Obama (12 are undeclared).

-- Don Frederick 

Comments

[Connie]

I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS!!!!!!!!!!! THIS RACE HAS DROP WHY DOWN BELOW THE BELT NOW I HAVE TO WONDER WHO IS CONTROLING WHO AND WHO IS CHOOSEN THE NOMENEE NOW THAT REPUBLICAN HAS THEIR NOMONEE THE POWER OF THE LEFT WANTS MACIAN TO RAN AGIANST A WOMAN AND NOT A MAN SO WHY WOULD'NT THIS BE OUT THEIR. OBAMA HAS NO CONTROL WANT A NOTHER MAN SAY OR WHAT HE BELIEVE AND NO ONE HAS THAT POWER UNLESS THAT PERSON GIVE THAT POWER AWAY. JUST LET IT BE AND NOT MAKE THIS ABOUT RACE FOR ONCE THAT HAS BEEN PUT OUT THERE NO ONE WILL WIN AND IT SHOULD BE BASE ON A PERSON AND NOT ANOTHERS

[Alisa]

Connie,

What in the world are you trying to say. Your entire paragraph makes no sense at all.

Get a grip, and write in an intelligible and coherent manner please. sheesh!

[Lynne B]

"The most recent Hotline tabulation found that among 795 superdelegates who are free agents when it comes to casting a convention vote for the nomination, Clinton is backed by 246, Obama by 199.5, with 349.5 still up for grabs"

I don't even know what 'hotline' is, I will check into that, but the most accurate superdelegate tracker I have found http://demconwatch.blogspot.com lists Clinton with 244 and Obama with 209 committed superdelegates, a 35 delegate lead with no new supers for Clinton in quite a while now.

I think that if superdelegates vote in any way that does not support the leader in terms of pledged delegates and give this election to Clinton you will be looking at a huge backlash from DNC supporters such as myself

[BB]

Hillary camp had the nerve and the cheek of accusing Obama of a 'personal attack' because he demanded that she finally disclosed some facts so many people want to know. it is a personal attack if Obama demands of Hillary but it is a justified demand if Hillary does same. Shame on you Hillary! We are so sick and tired of your double dealings and triple standard.

[windrider]

Clinton is the ultimate Party machinery candidate. She has spent the last eight years cultivating party elites to support her eventual candidacy. And now, with Republicans switching to vote for Clinton in Democratic primaries in Ohio, Texas and Mississippi, not because they would vote for her in the fall but because they are more certain that McCain can defeat her, the Democratic Party looks ready to, once again, snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

If the superdelegates ignore the will of voters and elected delegates, then Clinton will GET (but not "win") the nomination and she will go down in flames in November and take the party with her. I began the campaign as a Clinton supporter. The more I see of her, her disingenuous tactics, her repeated use of surrogates in the playing of racial prejudices (however subtlely done), her lying and exaggerations about her REAL experience (she has less ELECTED experience than Obama), and her refusal to release any records, I have finally come to understand why so many Republicans despise her.

So keep playing your games, Hillary, even though you know it will tear our party apart. But don't look to THIS Democrat to help bail you out in November; I'll vote for other Democratic candidates and issues on my ballot, but Clinton won't get my vote, not even for dogcatcher.

[Obama Vet]

Chill out America the numbers are the numbers and no matter how hard she tries kitchen sink and all Clinton cannot swoop in and steal the election. She may be connected to God knows how many that owe Bill for favors in the past no one will allow her to get away with all the shenaningans. Barack Obama will be the democratic nominee and will trounce John McCain who can of course retire to Baghdad where it is so safe if you ask him. Billary have tried to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory but it will not come to pass. Speaking of pass someone please apss me another beer the Final Four is about to start.

Iraq Veteran for Obama

[James_Berkeley]

I agree with you Windrider. I too have left the Hillary camp after initally supporting her. I'm not sure if it's Bill (I have had enough of the middle-of-the-road DLC!) or her seeming desperation to win, but I did not support her in the primary.

I think if it comes down to a battle of super-delegates, and she wins due to her well-cultivated political connections, the party is doomed in November.

If she is in the general, however, I think I'll have to hold my nose and give her my vote. The last thing this country needs is a third Bush term.

[katharine]

I'm glad to see Bill Clinton acting more like a party leader and less like just his wife's supporter-but I don't trust it. I too agree that when the votes are in the winner will be decided. I was surprised to hear Bill admit that he 'might be wrong' about Hillary. I take that to mean that he has seen the writing on the wall, and is distancing himself even from his own wife in his bid to position himself. ... The leader in delegates will most certainly be Obama. The leader in states won will most certainly be Obama. Obama's lead in popular vote will only be challenged if Hillary manages to get the votes in Florida and Michigan counted as is, and it is looking now like that will be impossible. If there is a new vote the popular vote will move in Obama's favour. Most superdelegates are saying they will move toward whoever has the popular support. Look now for the Clinton campaign to fight a ferocious battle inside the party under the limelights, to convince superdelegates to go with Hillary despite Obama's winnings, on the basis that she is 'more electable' or just that she deserves it.

[Matha Davidson]

When Clinton moved to NY and ran for the senate, she said she had no intetion of running for president. Clinton claimed that she just wanted to do a good job for the people of NY. Today she says words mean something . Ahhhh for the good old days, when Bill was saying "I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky!"

[Dave]

Lynne, if there were really some requirement for the superdelegates to vote for the person who had the most pledged delegates, then what would the value add of superdelegates be? Superdelegates are in place to cut through the emotion, exercise sobriety and ensure that the most electable candidate makes it to the GE. Superdelegates only account for 20% of all delegates. All they can do is sway a close contest, there aren't enough of them to nullify "the will of the people". Sober up a little bit.

http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/memo-to-the-superdelegates-no-principles-please/?ref=opinion

[jodi]

The only job of the Super deligates is to nominate the most electable candidate. It does not matter who has the lead in deligates or popular votes for good reason. Look at the deligates and votes as of today...Obama leads at both however it is pretty clear to those that have some experience that Obama has no chance at winiing in November. Why? Just look at the states that Obama has won,most were caucases, like Iowa and most were Republican states......meaning they are never carried by the democrat nominee in a general election. Wonderfull that Obama managed to get all the democrats out to vote in
Mississippi but McCain will carry that state no matter which democrat is nominated...same is true with Idahoe, Louisania, Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Kentucky, Montana, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina and South Carolina......the black vote which is allowing Obama to win in states like Mississippi and South Carolins will not count in the general election because the democrats even including all the new black and young voters will still be a minority to the republicans in these states. Now if Obama can not and has not beat Hillary in states like CA, MA, NY, OH, TX (Primary vote/no caucasuses in general election) then why would any one believe he has a chance against McCain. McCain is a very liberal republican and given the experience compared with Obama's limited experience.........folks we as democrats have no chance at all if Obama is nominated. In fact if our Super deligates nominate Obama then you should know that they are backing McCain.........It is Hillary or we gave the election to McCain.

[jodi]

Matha Davidson : said: "When Clinton moved to NY and ran for the senate, she said she had no intetion of running for president. Clinton claimed that she just wanted to do a good job for the people of NY. Today she says words mean something ."

Are you a very young voter? All candidates for President have at one time said they had no intention of running for Pres. The meaning of that statement is that she was not thinking about running for President on that day eight years ago. Unlike Obama who was running for President before he was elected to the US Senate....with no experience unless you count bouncing ideas off Rev. Wright????Would you have sat through one sermon with statements like we have seen on TV and utube? I walked out of a Catholic Church simply because the Priest said that women should leave the jobs to the men and stay home....picked up my 2 year old daughter and 1 year old son and walked right out the door......when I turned around I found more than a dozen people following me out of the church with their young children......I never heard a sermon like that in my church again. Rev. Wright is from the 60's and has old and bad ideas but he would have no one listening to him if someone started walking out on his sermons 10 years ago.....and if Obama wanted to run for Pres. then he should have led the group out of that church.....He will not win the election so HOPE that our Super deligates do their job and nominate the only one that is electable....
Hillary Clinton.

[BLACKMALE4HILLARY]

WOW. WELL DESPITE THE MULTITUDE OF HATERS, I WAS PLEASED TO FIND A FEW STRATEGIC MINDED DEMOCRATS. I LIKE OBAMA. I THINK HE'S GREAT PERSONALLY. HOWEVER, HE HAS NO - ZERO -ZIP -NIL CHANCE OF WINNING IN NOV. THE GOP WILL MAKE HAROLD FORD IN TENN. AND KERRY IN '04 LOOK LIKE A ROAST COMPARED TO THEIR TREATMENT OF BARACK. HE HAS NO MILITARY EXPERIENCE OR MASTERY WHATSOEVER! HE IS A FRESHMAN SENATOR FROM IND (WHOO-HOO!) THE SMEAR CAMPAIGN ON HIM HAS ALREADY STARTED, AND HE'S NOT READY. HE WOULD MAKE AN EXCELLENT VP. THEN HE COULD GAIN SOME ACTUAL EXPERIENCE AND WIN IN A WALK IN 4 OR 8 YEARS. HILLARY IS READY NOW! SHE'S ON THE ARMED SERVICES CMTE! SHE'S ON SOME PENTAGON CMTE. TO RE-ORGANIZE THE MILITARY FOR FUTURE CONFLICTS! SHE'S WELL KNOWN AND RESPECTED WORLDWIDE! ONLY AMERICANS SEEM TO DISLIKE HER, AND FOR "ETHERIAL" REASONS. THE FACT IS THAT WITH A TEAM, WITH HIL AS PRES. AND BARACK AS VP, IS THE DEMS ONLY CHANCE AT BEATING THE MCCAIN/ROMNEY GOP SUPERTICKET THAT WILL PROMISE VOTERS VICTORY IN IRAQ AND ROMNEY'S PERSONAL TOUCH TO "FIX" THE ECONOMY. DEMS GET SMART OR BET ON ANOTHER EGG-HEADED LOSER LIKE HUMPHREY, MONDALE, CARTER, DUKAKIS, KERRY,ETC. THE CLINTONS ARE THE ONLY WINNERS IN 40 YRS!

[BLACKMALE4HILLARY]

GO 'HEAD JODI!

[zanderohm]

I almost have to laugh at this American system... almost...

We now have our "liberal" party fighting with each other and supporters saying that if one of the two wins then they will switch sides and vote for the "conservative" side... NICE!!!... Let's have another warmonger ruining our already declining country... The endless war will pledge our (great, great etc) grandchildren to fighting these ever elusive "terrorists". Does this make sense to anybody?

I was initially a Ron Paul supporter, he was the only one who truly had an idea of what needs to happen to change course on where this country is headed. I've switched to Obama because he is the only person who will tell the rest of the world that we are willing to change. If that doesn't happen we will be finding ourselves isolated very fast, we are almost there right now. The rest of the world is waiting to see how we respond. We need to show that we want to make the world a better place and not just force our hand everywhere (understatement!!!). A Clinton in a skirt isn't going to make the difference. It's still just old/bad politics.

And PLEASE Hillary supporters, God Bless, but if you cannot see that she is being utterly selfish and destroying the party for personal reasons, WAKE UP!!! She has made promises, gotten backing from people where she needs to win this thing. She should be throwing in the towel and giving support to her comrade not making the job easier for this McClown guy...

[Lynne B]

Dave posted: "Lynne, if there were really some requirement for the superdelegates to vote for the person who had the most pledged delegates, then what would the value add of superdelegates be?"

I never said there was a legitimate purpose for them, to me they have always seemed like the 'reserve force' ready to jump in if the people don't support the candidate that the DNC likes. But if Obama is ahead in delegates and # of states won, and they nominate Clinton...look out. Alot of dems will not stand for having the DLC candidate forced on them. The party will either be torn apart by this, or they will lose so much support from people like myself who have both contributed financially and as a local party volunteer that I doubt it will be able to recover. And I am betting millions of dems will not be in a mood to 'kiss and make up' if the supers go against the will of the people.

In regards to which candidate (Obama or Clinton) is more electable, I suggest folks who consider Clinton 'electable' do some fact checking, she is one of the most polarizing figures in this country. Her campaign, unfortunately, has resorted to the same 'scorched earth' tactics that people have come to expect from the Clintons making her even more 'unelectable'.

[LOL]

I'm sorry, I'm still laughing about the first post from Connie and then the follow up response from Alisa. That is just too funny! ... thanks y'all - I needed that.

[Karl]

Forget pledged delegates - the most important thing is the popular vote (with Florida and Michigan) . Superdelegates must follow the will of the people.

Why you all Obama supporters ignoring this?

[olga]

first off, many of the superdelegates commited to clinton early on before obama got rolling. many have since changed their minds and more probably will.
obama has the superdelegate momentum, he's gained 16 since march 4. clinton's netted 6 and lost one.
contrary to all the news and commentary, the superdelegates aren't going to overturn the pledged delegates.
clinton's only chance is to prove herself to the superdelegates but her sorry behavior isn't going to help.

[weary dem]

I like Obama, but was afraid from the beginning of the skeletons he's yet to show. He's an unknown quantity. I think this last bit about his pastor will cost him his shot to beat mccain. And who knows what OTHER skeletons he has. Another poster is right, the Repugs are going to crucify him. He's going to get swiftboated worse than Kerry.

I was hoping for Hillary-Obama as the shoe-in ticket, but now, I wonder if Obama should even run as VP.

[Leslie Militzok]

Finally the news is being supported about Obama. Just in the last month Obama has to deal with 4 major controversies: Obama's reversal of Nafta, Obama reversalof troop withdrawals from Iraq, The Relationship regarding Rezko and the 2 property deals between Obama and Rezkor, and finally the 20 year relationship between Obama , Right and the United Trinity Church

Obama gave 6 totally different stories about why his Economic Advisor Goolsbee
met withe the Candian Counsel General and told the Candians Obama supports" Nafta and would make very little change to Nafta" (see Canadian Memo March 2008)
Obama failed to reject Sammatha Powers statements in Europe and on the BBC. Powers told the BBC that Obama's explicit plan to withdraw all American Troops of Iraq in 16 months was a best case scenerio and Obama would have to make up commpleteley new plans and it is consivaable that the troops will take far more than 16 months to withdraw the toops and it will take a lot longer than Obama promised to even start withdrawing troops.

Obama asked for Powers resignation not for her comments about Obama's promised 16 month withdrwal period. Instead she had to leave because Powers called Clinton a "Monster" in the Scotsman. Now it is childess to call your oppenet names however, Obama failed to adress the more important issue namely Obama's true stance of withdrawal no one has ever corrected Powers stance.

SEE PT 2

[Leslie Militzok]

OBAMA HAS GIVEN NUMEROUS CONTRADICTORY ACCOUNTS OF HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH ALI ATA REZKO!

In the Democratic debate in South Carolina Senator Clinton asked Obama about his relationship with Tony Rezko. Obama said he barely new Rezko. Obama claimed the total extent of his relationship with Rezko was "5 hours of legal work" he did for Rezko when he worded for a law firm..

It turns out Obama has known Antonin Ali At Reszko for 17 years. (Chicago Tribune 2006) Rezko is a Syrian-born Muslim businessman with close ties to Iraq billionaire Auchi and the Nation of Islam. Rezko was a major power broker in Chicago and has raised millions of dollars for Obama's campaigns.

During the 8 years Obama was a State Senator of Illinois he also worked for a 10 person law firm in Chicago. The law firm did all of Rezko's legal work including procuring funding for ten buildings to be renovated by Mr. Rezko for low income housing in Chicago .Obama's law firm raised 100% of the money for Rezko from the State and Federal Government . After Mr. Rezko renovated the buildings Chicago was forced to close six buildings because they were deemed inhabitable due to poor construction and maintenance. (chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun, New York Times, Washington Post)

REZKO SHUT THE HEAT OFF IN HIS BUILDINGS IN THE MIDDLE OF WINTER!

Rezko shut the heat off in many of his building in the middle of winter for 5 weeks. One of the buildings was in Obama's district Obama did nothing to help the tenants in the building even though they were his
constituents instead he spent his time helping Rezko.(Chicago Tribune)

PT 2