California's House Democrats: And then there were 6

Among the 34 Democrats in California's House delegation, the number undeclared in their party's presidential race was reduced to 6 Friday when Rep. Jim Costa announced his support for Barack Obama.

The working number actually should be considered 5 since Nancy Pelosi, as House speaker, can be expected to remain on the sidelines -- publicly, at least -- until an unambiguous choice finally emerges.

Also Friday, the once large margin Hillary Clinton enjoyed over Obama within the delegation narrowed even further when Rep. Dennis Cardoza switched his allegiance from him to her her to him. In a statement, Cardoza said, "While I continue to greatly respect and admire Senator Clinton and feel she has made history with her campaign, I believe that Senator Obama will inevitably be our party's nominee for president."

That's the attitude the Obama campaign has been seeking to exude -- and hoping superdelegates would bow to. While the candidate and his aide no doubt are pleased by Cardoza's decision, what would really thrill them at this moment is if some of the women in the delegation still standing by Clinton would cross over.

Here's the latest breakdown among the Californians:

UNDECLARED (6)

Pelosi (District 8, San Francisco); Jerry McNerney (District 11, Pleasanton); Mike Honda, (District 15, San Jose); Sam Farr (District 17, Carmel); Bob Filner (District 51, Chula Vista); Susan Davis (District 53, San Diego).

CLINTON BACKERS (15)

Mike Thompson (District 1, St. Helena); Doris Matsui (District 5, Sacramento); Lynn Woolsey (District 6, Petaluma); Ellen Tausher (District 10, Alamo); Jackie Speier (District 12, Burlingame); Brad Sherman (District 27, Sherman Oaks); Hilda Solis (District 32, El Monte); Diane Watson (District 33, Los Angeles); Lucille Roybal-Allard (District 34, East Los Angeles); Maxine Waters (District 35, Los Angeles); Jane Harman (District 36, Venice); Laura Richardson (District 37, Long Beach); Grace Napolitano (District 38, Norwalk); Joe Baca (District 43, Rialto); Loretta Sanchez (District 47, Garden Grove).

OBAMA BACKERS (13)

George Miller (District 7, Martinez); Barbara Lee (District 9, Oakland); Stark (District 13, Fremont); Anna Eshoo (District 14, Menlo Park); Zoe Lofgren (District 16, San Jose); Cardoza (District 18, Atwater); Costa (District 20, Fresno); Lois Capps (District  23, Santa Barbara); Howard Berman (District 28, Valley Village); Adam Schiff (District 29, Burbank); Henry Waxman (District 30, Los Angeles); Xavier Becerra (District 31, Los Angeles); Linda Sanchez (District 39, Lakewood).

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[john]

If Clinton's name is not on the ballot, my vote goes to McCain.

[sam sam]

Proof read: "from him to her" - You mean her to him

[Thanks, we fixed -- and nice catch. Obviously we're pronoun-impaired.]

[JOHN LONGENECKER]

May 25, 2008

Obama is interested in Change You Can Believe in American politics and in improving our nation.

Clinton typically talks about her election.

Clinton reminds me of a hall monitor or school teacher telling the kids what they sought to do.

[Bob]

It would appear that female California delegates are more likely to support Hillary. Now is this because they feel she is the most qualified candidate or are they just obsessed with breaking the "glass ceiling?"

Hillary, the Queen of Spin and a Legion in Her Own Mind!

http://klintons.com

[duh]

GO HILLARY!

If she loses, I'm backing McCain. So what if he appoints 2, possibly 3 more SCOTUS judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade at the first opportunity? Obama called a reporter "sweetie"!

[shirlin]

Senator Obama is a classy gentleman who is treating Senator Clinton the way his (white) mother raised him to treat everyone--positively. BUT Senator Clinton had SLAMMED him for his bitter remarks for weeks, twisted the knife in further with the Wright affair, and so on. She runs a vindictive, malicious, win-at-any-cost, scorched-earth, divisive, smear, fear-mongering, lying, morally and fudiciary corrupt campaign. She does NOT deserve our support. The Democratic Party elders and super-delegates should understand why they MUST step in now to end the race. The Clintons have successfully incited their supporters and divided the party and nation into hate-Obama and hate-Clinton factions. Hillary's negative polls must be somewhere close to Bush's--she is clearly not electable. But she is rapidly making Obama perhaps not electable either--what with all the s**t she is throwing at him--the race and gender accusations, the fear-mongering, the assassination threat (to be read as not-so-hidden appeal to someone's evil side), etc. Lady Hillary Macbeth must be lead out of the stage before blood runs on her hands. It may even now be too late.

[Lee in Minneapolis]

John wrote:

>If Clinton's name is not on the ballot, my vote goes to
>McCain.

John, you just affirm that the Clintons are Republicans in Democratic costume. You don't care about the Supreme Court!

If I chose to not vote for Hillary or Obama, I would NOT vote for a Republican, I would vote 3rd party. I am a progressive first. When Democratic values mirror Republican ones, I do not vote with them.

We should be promoting Hillary as the next Supreme Court Justice. She could match Scalia for meanness, while protecting the Bill Of Rights and Roe V. Wade.

Hillary is like a kid playing football in YOUR yard. She is loosing and wants to take YOUR football home!

Reality Check!

Lee in Minneapoils

[Dennis Garcia]

There is something I don´t understand. In Gallup Poll Daily, Mr. Obama is leading Mrs. Clinton, as of today, by 8 points from 1,232 interviews, yet Mr. Obama compare to Mr. McCain is loosing by 1 point and has carried a pattern of crisscrossing up and down his position over a few months in comparison with Mr. McCain.
On the other hand,Mrs. Clinton has won over Mr. McCain steadily by a margin of 4 to 5 points consistently for months, with 4,460 interviews, which is almost 4 times the amount of people interviewed, than in the Obama vs. Clinton analysis. Dose it not this show clearly that Mrs. Clinton is favorite to win over Mr. McCain and therefore she is the better and stronger candidate?

[S. A.]

Barack Obama is very shallow and unsure of what he would do as president. You can know this by listening to how often he changes his position on important issues and his willingness to meet right away with our dangerous foreign enemies. He lies and make promises to people everywhere that he know he can't keep. For me, this election is not about the party you belong to, It's about voting into office as president, the most trusted and qualified candidate. If Obama is nominated, I will vote for John McCain. Yours Truly, A long time democrat.

[Justice]

That would be quite a "tea party" Obama is having!

Obama and all his supporters, the new supers, plus Rev. Wright, Ayers, Rezko et al, having "tea" with the leaders of Hamas, Iran, Cuba, etc.

Makes for a very interesting administration. Change? You bet it will be... but for worse, it seems.

[SJCA]

If OBAMA strategists are wondering how democrats are going to vote?

We just received our mail-in ballots for the democratic candidates for the local June election in San Jose. Zoe Lofgren is the only candidate for Congress. My friends & I withheld our votes for Lofgren, because she endorsed Obama.

Let's see if this affects her election. IF it does, then you can assume that when Hillary voters withhold their votes for Barack in November, it will have the same effect.

[mary CA]

I do not get why people think a woman that lies constantly would be a good president. She comes with a two term impeached president and people still want them back in DC.

Los Angeles Times at the very least should be covering the fraud trial. I heard the judge said Hillary can not be called to testify until after November. Maybe some undercover investigative reporting on bought judges and corruption is in order.

That is if any media truly cared about ending corruption in DC. Her voters swallow her lies and do not even know what they are, yet sing her praises. Perhaps they approve of liars and crooks in the White House. I do not.

[alice]

Thanks for sharing. Guilt by association, I will remember the names who endorsed the Clintons, to know who the corrupt people are. I am especially disgusted with Maxine Waters; she should be a whole lot wiser than to back Hillary.

[BJ]

WHAT would be more interesting to note is, after Obama's commencement speech at Wesleyan College...

Will Obama's "kool-aid" drinking followers really come through for him in his call to SERVE!

Will they be willing to give up their beemers, spa outings, shopping sprees, and their "me me me" attitudes?

THIS will be the true measure of HOW EFFECTIVE this man really is. Do Obamabots just "talk the talk", OR can they also "walk the walk"?

[TEL]

I've read as much as I can find on the "changes" Senator Obama wants to make. I can't find anything in depth. And if I try to make some assumptions about the cost to insure 47 million Americans who, up until now, haven't insured themselves, I find the the costs to be staggering. If those 47 million don't pay for themselves, then the other 260 million of us will be paying for them. That will mean a dilution of services for most, while our politicians and govt workers (who have some of the best health plans in the world) continue to get their services. The "rich" will continue to do whatever they do, as well.

I also have to ask everyone some questions regarding this change. If you can believe and understand that "the rich" (including any presidential candidate in this election cycle) can and will do what it takes to protect their families and well-being first AND you can also accept that the poor (however you classify "poor") will do all they can to elect the one who will give them the most, who do you think will end up having to pay for increases in government programs?

Finally, if you are employed by any government, wouldn't it seem logical you would vote for those people you thought would fight the most to continue to pay for your salary, benefits, and early retirements? Maybe it isn't your top of mind concern, but it has to be lurking somewhere in your mind. The middle private sector middle class is being eroded by both by an over-zealous growth of government & taxes, and by profit taking of corporations that "off-shore" more and more jobs to avoid the high costs of U.S. employees. So there's plenty of blame to go around.

In the end, Senator Obama will win the election, because more people want something for nothing. But, in all honesty, none of the three candidates left standing have any plan to reduce the size of government or to make more people responsible for the own well being.

[Miri NY]

Hey BJ, I'm one of those Obama Kool Aid Drinkers.
My BMW is a Chevy & my idea of a spa visit is getting my hair cut & colored @ the Lemon Tree. I do engage in the occasional shopping spree @ Filene's basement or Target. (Never Hillary's old company Wal-Mart. I won't save money by contributing to other people's poverty.)
See I have to do this bcs when I finished law school I did what Obama did. I went into public interest law.
(Don't like beemers any way & a spa would probalbly be boring.)