Clinton’s Camp Says Super Delegates Will Decide
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, Hillary, Super Delegates!!!
They’re really going to go through with it…
A top Hillary Clinton adviser on Saturday boldly predicted his candidate would lock down the nomination before the August convention by definitively winning over party insiders and officials known as superdelegates, claiming the number of state elections won by rival Barack Obama would be “irrelevant” to their decision. [...]Harold Ickes, a 40-year party operative charged with winning over superdelegates for the Clinton campaign, made no apologies on Saturday for the campaign’s convention strategy.
“We’re going to win this nomination,” Ickes said, adding that they would do so soon after the last contest on June 7 in Puerto Rico. “You’re not going to see this go to the convention floor.”
Let me remind everybody that the only reason the super delegates were created in the first place is because party insiders didn’t like how the voters were choosing the nominee. So they were literally created to overrule the will of the people. And that’s exactly what would happen if Hillary doesn’t win more pledged delegates and wins with the super delegates instead.
Again, Hillary does this at her own peril…
This entry was posted on Saturday, February 16th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, Hillary, Super Delegates!!!. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 16th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
I’d like to believe they won’t actually pursue this tactic to the nomination. If Camp Clinton does, it will show a hubris in-line with that of GW Bush.
February 16th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
It’s worth noting that Ickes admitted he was on the “DNC rules committee member last year. he had voted for stripping the state’s delegates.” in Florida according to TNR’s the Stump.
This is looking really ugly and bad.
February 16th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
What do you think would actually happen at the convention if Barack wins the people but the “super delegates” give it to HRC? Do you think there would be violence? Would Barack run as an independent? These are questions that I think should be discussed but I haven’t seen it mentioned. ANy thoughts?
February 17th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Violence? Not a chance. And even if it were to happen, Barack Obama would certainly denounce it as he rightly should.
An independent run? Not sure. I’d certainly vote for him as an independent, but I don’t think he’d do that. I don’t think it would be a wise move on his part at all. It would split the democratic vote far more than any other independent run ever has, and might even guarantee a win for John McCain. Obama would become the enemy, and he’s too smart for that.
Personally, I’d probably just mount an independent letter-writing campaign to this effect:
Violence is never the appropriate response to shenanigans within democratic elections. But a backlash? I’ve got no qualms about making sure that elected officials do their job and actually represent the electorate.
All that said, I actually have a lot of faith that the super-delegates are smart enough to see this kind of firestorm coming. I’m quite confident that they will do the right thing and vote with the electorate. Perhaps not for the right reasons, but it’s easy to justify doing the right thing because motives are invisible.
February 17th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
We have to remember that the one thing the Dems are really good at is loosing a “can’t loose” election. THe super-delegate disaster is the very thing that could make it happen. In my opinion, based on the groundswell of support Barack is getting, he MUST be on the ballot in November in some form. (and VP won’t cut it).