MyDD :: Clinton's superdelegate problem

Clinton's superdelegate problem

by kjblair2, Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 04:13:52 PM EST

I live in the 17th CD in Pennsylvania and Tim Holden is my Congressman. He grew up in St. Clair, PA and has represented the 17th since 1993. He got redistricted into the 17th and was expected to lose to George Gekas but pulled off the upset and hasn't been really challenged since. He's fairly conservative but accurately represents his district. He also hasn't endorsed either Clinton or Obama. Why is this a problem for Clinton?

See the extended entry for the details.

From today's Pottsville Republican Herald:

Holden said last week he planned to see how the 17th district voted before making a decision. The 17th district includes Schuylkill, Dauphin, Lebanon and parts of Berks and Perry counties.
Clinton, who swamped Obama by a 3-1 margin in Schuylkill County, came out on top with 54 percent of the vote in the 17th district. Obama ended up with 46 percent, according to numbers provided by Holden.

Now that the results are in, Holden said he'll consider them when picking a side, but added that probably won't happen until June.

Here is a superdelegate that is almost tailor made to be a Clinton supporter. His home town went for Clinton 80-20, his home county went for her 74-26 and his CD went for her 54-46. There'd be almost no political fallout locally for him to make an anouncement now. But now he's not planning on making a decision until June. If Clinton can't convince people like Tim Holden to endorse her, she doesn't have a chance of getting enough superdelegates to erase Obama's lead in pledged delegates.

Tags: Holden, Clinton, superdelegates (all tags)

Permalink :: 11 Comments :: Post a Comment

Understandable (none / 0)

Superdelegates are, understandably, reluctant to make a choice because they fear they might fall on the wrong side of history. This is an historic contest, and each choice will be remembered. In a race this close, many are not yet sure what to do (not to mention that any can change their minds as often as they like..).

by bobbank on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 04:20:50 PM EST

Re: Understandable (2.00 / 2)

But that's part of the problem for Clinton. If Holden is holding out because he thinks that he'll end up on the losing side if he endorses Clinton, waiting until June doesn't really help her. If Obama keeps rolling out a new superdelegate endorsement every day or so, pretty soon, he'll catch up and pass her in that metric as well. Clinton needs to build off of her win in PA so that she can show that she has a chance of winning the nomination.

by kjblair2 on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 04:31:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Understandable (none / 0)

As I have pointed out elsewhere, they have both been rolling out superdelegates over the past two weeks. The media seems more inclined to cover one over the other, though.

by bobbank on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 06:38:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Understandable (none / 0)

That's still a huge problem for Clinton. If they trade superdelegates one-for one from now on, Clinton is guaranteed to lose. Obama has a lead of 155 pledged delegates according to DCW. Clinton has a lead of 22 superdelegates. You can do the math but Clinton has a pretty big deficit to make up.

Even if you include MI and FL 'as is', she's still behind. She needs to to better than one-for-one.

by kjblair2 on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:15:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Understandable (none / 0)

Actually I think that politics are a lot more political and a lot less numerical than you do.

All of this is heavily driven by narrative, emotions, individual perception, and other muddy concepts. That's part of the problem - our primary system is such a mess that it fails to do the ONE thing that it needs to do - provide clarity.

So, I think that once the Clinton campaign is within striking range of making a reasonable argument - ie, giving superdelegates political cover - then anything is very much possible. Clinton is seasoned and knows how fluid this is. If it were as cut-and-dry as you suggest, then all superdelegates would have voted, Clinton would not be raising any money, and would be forced to withdraw.

But that's the rub: it isn't cut-and-dry. The notion that math trumps hope is a story the Obama campaign did a strong job selling, but recognize that this is only their spin. The reality of what is actually happening suggests otherwise.

by bobbank on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:42:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's superdelegate problem (1992) (2.00 / 1)

Can someone make a diary out of this? I'm not very good at it:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.ht ml?res=9E0CE1DA133FF933A25757C0A96495826 0&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

by NewOaklandDem on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 04:24:39 PM EST

Good catch. (none / 0)

I've always thought it must feel to Hillary like she is running against her husband. Lots of similarities between Bill '92 and Obama '08.

That One is the Right One for 2008.

by GFORD on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 05:59:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good catch. (2.00 / 1)

SG?

by bobbank on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 06:39:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

good point (none / 0)

Considering the margins of victory Hillary had in the congressman's district/hometown etc, I don't think even the Obama campaign would be miffed/surprised if he came out in favor of Hillary.

by highgrade on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 04:38:32 PM EST

Re: Clinton's superdelegate problem (none / 0)

Brady already said he's going to support Obama. Altmire and Doyle said they're going to give Clinton a chance to catch up in the popular vote (newsflash, everyone in the real world knows she's still way behind), otherwise they're for Obama.

Not the movement Clinton wanted after her "landslide" victory.

Most of the rural districts Clinton won are represented by Republicans.

by Skaje on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 06:29:37 PM EST

Re: Clinton's superdelegate problem (none / 0)

This is a good point. What is he worried about? Yesterday John Tanner from West Tennessee endorsed Clinton. His district is filled with white rural Southern Democrats of the old school. It is pure Clinton country - more like Arkansas actually. But he's a lone voice it seems.

by elrod on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 06:35:03 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.