I love Weekday, but every time Sims is on I grind my teeth. He comes off as so arrogant, presumptive, and dismissive that it maddens me that he was ever elected for anything in this city. What a jerk. (this opinion has *nothing* to do with his superdelegate status. just sayin cus it needs to be said.)
With a Top Two Primary that automatically lists the Top Two Dems in King County, I'm surprised nobody's announced they're running against him this year.
Governor Gregoire, for one, told a group of us Saturday that she is actively lobbying the WA superdelegates -- and superdelegates in other states -- on Obama's behalf.
She said the will of the WA caucus attendees was pretty unmistakable, and that she thought the superdelegates should follow it.
Uh, Will, Sims is not on the ballot this year. Try next year.
Here's a simple plan:
If some Superdelegates don't want to make a decision because not all votes have been cast, that's fine. But, there's no reason that Superdelegates in states that have already voted can't get together and decide this thing now; even though some of them are trying to take a national perspective, they're still superdelegates from particular states - and should be interested in representing the best interest of votes in those states. And frankly, if they don't want to lost the election, they're going to have to. Obama has no reason to withdraw, and Clinton simply isn't going to. The party leadership needs to lead.
"and should be interested in representing the best interest of votes in those states"
yeah, like bill richardson... oops my bad.
SeMe -Heads I win - tails you lose
I don't think people realize that we have seven uncommitted superdelegates in Washington, including Jim McDermott. I think the argument in favor of having a quick decision by superdelegates, particularly in states that have already voted is very strong. If you want the Democrats to win in November, having this contest drift right into the convention in August is crazy. People should contact the uncommitted superdelegates and urge them to decide now, whoever they choose.
The Washington delegate list can be found at
Dems seem to be open to defecting to McCain should their chosen candidate not prevail in the primary: http://www.slate.com/id/2175496/. Yikes, are in trouble. And the longer Hillary drags this charade on, the worse it gets. Should the Dems lose in November the blame will be squarely on the shoulders of the "Monster"
the superdelegates were intended to prevent an unacceptable from getting the nom, something where they all working together could overturn a choice were there cause.
at some point in this election, other ideas started surfacing, that they should just vote as they see fit. so in response, some started saying they should vote to respect the choice of the people. this was quickly changed to respecting the will of the people in the state where they reside.
the superdelegates are not supposed to decide this type of election. both candidates are viable. they should respect the winner of the national primary. this idea that they should vote as their state voted seems like one of least defensible positions you can take in regard to how they should vote.
Richardson violates will of voters in his state -- Obama applauds!
Kennedy and Duval violate will of voters in their state -- Obama applauds!!
How many more?
who cares? Obama isn't for following the state based will of the voters, now it's shifted yet again to following the pledged delegates. But for superdelegates, the whole purpose of them is to not follow the national pledged delegate count.
So in this case Obama is against the insider party driven rules.
But when it comes to special rights for NH and IA, he is in favor of them, because he is supported the punishment meted out to voters in FL and MI for violating insider party driven rules giving NH and IA special rights -- and disenfranchising millions of voters in those states.
Insider party driven rules hooray! insider party driven rules -- bah humbug!
follow the voters hooray!! follow the voters -- bah humbug!!
It's certainly and extremely agile set of "positions" -- with all due respect the consistency is: if it helps him, he's for it.
=) im all about obama, and hrc dropping out, but big bill got nailed on cnn the other night. a win is a win governor.
McDermott is uncommitted, really? WTF?!
If SDs like McDermott don't get off the fence soon and support Obama then there is going to be hell to pay.
He is kind of a nothing Rep. We could do a lot better. Him sitting around and doing nothing is just the opening that an aggressive Progressive Democrat from Seattle needs to force him into retirement.
#12: Tell me how acting self-interested is different from any other candidate - or, for that matter, from anyone in the entire fucking world.
He's running for president, not Mother Theresa.
@6 and @11 - I don't have a problem with some of the Washington superdelegates sticking with Hillary; she got 1/3 of the votes in this state. I'd have a problem with all of them going with Hillary...same with Bill Richardson; his state was basically 50/50 and I don't think all superdelegates should be required to vote for someone who won by .1%.
What I have no stomach for is the ongoing pandering...superdelegates hedging their bets because they don't want the political fallout of making a decision, or trying to get something for their vote (like having Michican & Florida seated). Ron Sims was elected in Seattle, and we've already voted; I resent him hedging about what superdelegates should do because he's co concerned about Michigan and Florida. The national party leadership needs to lead so the Democrats don't hand away the Presidency.
There is no national primary. There is no rule that supers must respect the votes cast in the state. There are no rules period.
But what we do have is a problem situation, with increasing bitterness and an intent by activits on both sides to make the other candidate look unelectable, which will not help in November.
The supers have the power to stop this by deciding now, and thus making clear, one way or the other, how this election will play out. They do not have to wait until after last voter in every last state decides. They certainly do not have to wait until August 25.
For the sake of the larger good, they should decide now or explain why not.
Oh and Rick Larsen is also uncommitted, as well as most of the State's DNC (Dwight Pelz, etc.) You can lobby them if you want at http://www.wa-democrats.org/index.php?page=display&id=277
Give me a break. Sups can vote for whomever they want. Meaning HRC. Get used to it.
@4 - it takes more than a year to run against a well-financed incumbent.
This country is being put through this turmoil because Hillary won't quit and the superdelegates won't act. I, for one, will remember which superdelegates acted and which ones hedged their bets. The Hatfields and McCoys have become the Clintons and Bushes...it is time for new leadership.
Bohica is right. Take a stand! Stop playing around if you want this thing settled. You have to hand it to Gregoire, she took a stand early.
The supes can vote for whomever they want. Meaning Obama. Get used to it.
If the superdelegates vote for Hils, I hope you enjoy the new-look Democratic party, minus its youth and black voters. Yay for uneducated, racist blue-collar union laborers!
Clinton has as many delegates as Obama has as many delegates as me: zero. The only vote that matters takes place at the convention. Sure, indications are that the un-super-delegate vote will favor Obama but that COULD change. Stop worrying about the Dem's big loss in November - there is plenty of time after the convention to bore all of the people that don't care or haven't been paying attention.
By September, "most people" have already made up their mind, based on the rumors, labels, half digested news items, and political ads they have seen till then. In 2004, by September most people had already taken a dislike to Kerry.
Giving up five months of campaigning against McCain to indulge in five months of campaigning against each other is, simply, stupid.
@19 - Will, "well-fincanced incumbant?" Check Ron's PDC filings.
In the meantime, Newly Released Video Footage Shows Hillary Clinton Wasn't Lying....
unPC | March 26, 2008 3:48 PM
First off I apologize in advance for a long post, but I think it necessary to put some facts on the table.
unPC, you made a number of odd or shall I say false statements in your post above/below. It is clear you don't like Obama which is fine, it's your own opinion that he's not the candidate for you, but it should not make you misjudge, misconstrue or stretch the truth when it comes to some basic "FACTS" about the issues you discuss.
1. Obama accepted Super Delegates who decided that he was the best candidate as is both of their option to do...nothing shady or illegal there as you somewhat suggest. Thus far the degbate for the Presidency doesn't say a Super CAN'T support one candidate over another, but it does suggest that the same Super's shouldn't OVERTURN the will of the people thus far. Meaning that the Super Delegates should not CHANGE the votes of the majority of the citizens for the candidate of their choice. This, in case you were wondering, means OBAMA since he has the majority of pledged delegates in all fo the states, a number that can NOT be beaten by Senator Clinton. So what is suggested is that BOTH candidates can accept Super Delegate support but those same Supers should not overturn the voice of the majority of people who have voted in this Primary. I am sorry your candidate didn't win more votes in the states, but that IS the way it stands.
2. Next you speak of SpecialRights for NH and IA??? None of this makes any sense so it is difficult to comment about your upset here. There were NO SPECIAL RIGHTS given to these states and the reasons that both Flordia and Michigan were not given their delegate votes (a mistake in my opinion as NOONE should ever discredit votes, but those were thr rules of the game and were ACCEPTED BY ALL CANIDATES! That means that both Hillary and Obama were on board with the DNC that those same delegates were not to be counted. By the way, Hillary even stated this very thing in a couple of Press Conferences. This was NOT Obama's fault, but the fault of both the DNC along with the state representitives involved, so please stop these FALSE accusations that Obama is the one responsible. That remains a lie, plain and simple.
3. There are NO "Insider Party Driven Rules" when it pertains to Super Delegates. There have been discussions in the press and elsewhere, but Super Delegates follow no rules. Personally, I think the idea that we have such a thing as Super Delegates makes the Democratic Party a sham, but I am sure we will have more discussions about this once this election is over.
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).