.
March 20th, 2008
05:13 PM ET

Superdelegate: No special votes

Editor's note:Jason Rae is a Democratic superdelegate from Wisconsin and has pledged his support to Sen. Barack Obama.  He agreed to blog for 360° about his experiences. 

ALT TEXT

A special convention of just the superdelegates? That is an idea being proposed in a New York Times op-ed by Tennessee governor, and fellow superdelegate, Phil Bredesen.

In his op-ed he suggests that should the Democratic party not have a nominee when the primary process is done on June 3, the superdelegates gather together and help decide the nominee. I remain optimistic that we will see a nominee coming out of the primary system.

Now, should I be wrong on this prediction, I don't think a special convention of superdelegates is a good idea. This solution that is being proposed only intensifies the arguments over this nominating contest and the role of superdelegates.

I have been an outspoken supporter of the superdelegates, stating time and again that we are regular party activists. We are not a bunch of party insiders sitting in a back smoke- filled room. We come from all backgrounds, all walks of life, and share a deep interested in the love of the party.

But I think the idea of bringing us all together without all of the other pledged delegates is a bad idea. This makes it look more and more like backroom deals are going on and that this small group of convention delegates is deciding the party's nominee, without the involvement of other delegates and interested individuals. In the very rare chance that we will not have a nominee after June 3, I think it is important to decide the race at the convention, with everyone present and participating.

The decision to select a nominee should not be the decision of superdelegates alone, but should include all 4,049 delegates. Thank you, Governor Bredesen for your idea, but I just don't agree.

– Jason Rae, Democratic Superdelegate


Filed under: Jason Rae • Raw Politics
soundoff (47 Responses)
  1. Wes Mantooth

    Very simply, I believe that Barack Obama is a more intelligent individual than the other two candidates. If you watch them each speak–with that question in mind–I don't see how anyone could say otherwise. Just IQ.

    That being said, why is it not a requirement of our candidates to disclose their IQ score? Is it fair to say that our President should be of the utmost intelligence? Who knows? Maybe the 2000 election and the last 8 years would have had different results...

    March 21, 2008 at 10:05 am |
  2. Kit

    Absolutely not! Our Governor in Michigan is not listening to the people of Our Great State and putting her own opinion on Hillary to support her. Hillary DID NOT win the State of Michigan primary. Another deception by Hillary. Many Democrats voted Republican for 3 reasons l. they do not support Hillary, 2.other Democratic candidates adhered to the National Democrat Party and removed their names from our Ballot. 3. Since they decided that all Democrats would not be able to vote in a redo, in which HILLARY WOULD LOSE, it is only right that we not have a revote in our State. This action was intentional by the Clinton campaign and her actions are a disgrace to the Democrat party

    March 21, 2008 at 8:04 am |
  3. Scott-Arlington, VA

    You know it's AMAZING at how the liberals want to win by their own rules and not rules set up by the Democratic Party. First you think it unfair that Michigan and Florida NOT get a redo in the primary so that their votes count......but on the OTHER HAND you don't want to follow the rules set up, again by the party, for situations just like this where neither candidate gets the votes need by pledged delegates and have the superdelegates choice who has the best chance in November. After all it is all about who has the best chance.... WHICH brings me to the next issue. In light of this weeks events with Mr. Obama I, ALONG WITH A GROWING NUMBER, here in Virginia (a pivotal state for him to have to take to win) ... are withdrawing from our FORMER support of him in the general election. If he wins I can tell you there will be a wave of Democrats here who are now turned off by him that will take Mr. McCain in November. This is not just hot air and by no means a joke! He's going to find out that many "typical white men" will refuse to follow his BS anymore!

    March 21, 2008 at 5:13 am |
  4. Jean Boyd

    I don't believe that a superdelegate should be a kid. I don't think Jason Rae has any business being the boy hasn't even voted for a president yet. He probably just left mama and daddy and does even know what it's like in the real world. I think you should be at the very least 35 years old. That way you would at least have been thru life some. But the boy is just getting started in life. Who ever gave him that was totally dumb. The law should be changed before you get more kids in there that has no idea what life is really about. Jean

    March 21, 2008 at 4:32 am |
  5. bond

    You break the rules you pay the penalty. Everyone agreed to the rules and everyone agreed to abide by the penalties... that is except Billary, who in her own words said, "The Michigan primary will not mean anything." Then saying, "The vote in Michigan was fair and should be counted." Huh? Fair for whom? Give me a break!

    Vote out the party leaders who caused the mess. Those are the ones who "disenfranchised" the voters not Dean, not Obama. This issue is now for political advantage period, nothing more.

    Scoreboard Obama

    March 21, 2008 at 2:45 am |
  6. J

    I agree with Rev. Wright... god d@!# america. Look at you people, you all suck.

    -Non-religious Independent White Guy for Colorado looking for an Obama / Ron Paul ticket or Obama / Bloomberg ticket!

    March 21, 2008 at 2:12 am |
  7. Sri

    I don't think Hillary is the choice for the president.

    Hillary is acting so desperate, so that she is going to the extent of playing racial card, personal blame against Obama. Overall she is totally ignoring the democratic rules and values.

    She is double tounged, oppurtinistic ( changes her voice depending on the situation and need).

    Look at how strtegically her campaign played the race and religion card before every big primary.

    Look at how she talked about dream ticket and how she offered a second position to Obama, when he is leading. It was so unfair.

    Now when obama is saying, he will abide whatever the DNC will decide about FL and MI, Why would she need to blame Obama. Is it just because se want the power so bad. Why are the Clintons so thirst for the power. sn't it enough the two term presidency for a family. Not to mention their popularity with Levensky back then.

    Hillary, Please shut your mouth and let Obama lead it. He is much better candidate than you and Mccain. I know it, you know it and the country knows that.

    Good Luck Obama. I will be deeply dissappointed if you don't become the President of this country in this election.

    March 21, 2008 at 2:01 am |
  8. R. Potter

    Barack is a helluva nice guy,,,it's hard to not want to hear what has to say.
    here's the thing, and i think it speaks volumes......IF Hillary was such a political monster, hell-bent on winning at ANY cost....why wasn't her campaign blamed for this in Iowa?......as savy as the Clinton's are, don't you think they knew?
    This is the imprint of a man that sat willingly in a church of a man that foments hatred for whites.......that considers Lois Farrakhan man of year material, that has traveled Libya........and Farrakhan invited a sattelite link to his church in the '80's where Quadafi encouraged blacks in the military to rise up in a coup to overtake our government.
    If Mr.Obama is well informed, and this is news to him?........i think his judgment might be questionable.

    March 21, 2008 at 1:35 am |
  9. Karen

    How many people have listened to Rev. Wright's whole sermon? If people would they would realize he is not spouting anti-American sentiment at all. One of his points is how the killing of innocents is condemned in the Bible. I think most people would agree the killing of innocents is wrong. All most people saw were a few soundbites shown in order to smear Obama. Anyone with ANY intelligence would realize this and research the whole thing for themselves. The clips were taken out of context. So, I challenge everyone to research and find out for themselves about the situation instead of relying on Fox News. Yes, Fox is good for a laugh now and then but they are the most unreliable news source I have ever seen. And yes, I am a typical white person and yes, I have clutched my purse when I have seen a big black man walking down the street. We all have our built in prejudices and fears. What Obama is doing is challenging us to face up to them and get past themand some people do not want to do that. But until we do we will never heal the wounds that run so deep in this country. I am an Obama supporter and I think he would make the best President for our country.

    As for Michigan and Florida. Didn't they break some rules?

    March 21, 2008 at 1:11 am |
  10. Mickey in Massachusetts

    I'm glad that the tide is finally turning in favor of Hillary. She is a true, qualified candidate. Obama is all image and fancy words, without a whole lot of substance. Talk is cheap. Having great public speaking skills and a handsome face is not enough to make him qualified to be president.

    Now should be Hillary's chance. She is 60 and may be too old to run in 8 years. Obama is still young and has plenty of time to ripen into a great statesmen. We should not be in a rush to put in a man who is not ready, when there is a woman who is ready. And we women have been waiting for OUR chance for a few hundred years now! NOW IS THE TIME FOR HILLARY!!

    March 21, 2008 at 12:36 am |
  11. Lisa

    Hi Jason,
    Since you are a super delegate I just wanted you to know that I as a democrat would be very angry with the party if the super delegates from my state, Minnesota, voted for Clinton when Obama won our state by 30%. It would tell me that what I think as a voter/American citizen doesn't count. It would give me a good reason to vote for Nader or McCain.

    March 21, 2008 at 12:09 am |
  12. Carol from Toronto

    IIt is my understanding that Hillary wants all Democrats to vote in Michigan but Obama is saying that he wants people who aren't registered Republicans but voted Republican (???) to be able to revote.

    Obama says Hillary wants to change the rules but he wants the superdelegates to have to vote a certain way even though that is not what the rules say.

    Also ... I enjoyed the speech but I think the problem is about poor judgement and the hate Wright espews.

    Altogether a very good discussion here .....

    March 20, 2008 at 11:47 pm |
  13. Jen

    As a resident of Illinois, I find it odd that my state's original vote was scheduled for March 18th – yet my state moved it up to Feb 5th AND allowed for early voting during the month of January. Can someone please explain why the DNC found this acceptable and Florida was punished? I absolutely believe ALL votes should be counted, everyone should be heard. If Dean is going to be a stickler on rules, then apply those rules to all states not just the ones Obama won. As far as Michigan,(since all names weren't on ballot)both candidates should split the cost of revote 50/50. Why can't they donate equally from their millions of campaign dollars?

    March 20, 2008 at 11:26 pm |
  14. Mike in Wisconsin

    I like Jason, live in Wisconsin. I voted for Barack Obama during the primary system. Since the Rev, Jeremiah Wright issue came to surface, I cannot understand how the DNC could now support Barack Obama as a presidential candidate for it's party. No matter what kind of spin is done to this issue, Rev. Wright was spewing anti -American rhetoric. Obama conveniently did not address that issue during his well delivered speech on Tuesday.

    I and my family, "reject and denounce" our primary vote for Barack Obama. If Clinton does not get the nomination, I and my family, good number of my friends will be voting for John McCain in the general election. Barack Obama is well suited to be a great civil rights leader, but not the President of The United States.

    I have stopped all funding to the DNC. If the Democratic Party wants to win in November, the super delegates better wise up fast, support Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama has disqualified himself by twenty years of supporting a radical, racist, divisive anti-American church

    March 20, 2008 at 11:18 pm |
  15. JIM

    Believe it or not, I agree with Hillary. They should have another primary election. With Barack Obama shooting himself in the foot with his relationship with his bigot pastor and calling his grandmother a TYPICAL white person. Sounds racist to me. He needs all the votes he can get and would lose in Michigan and Florida. That is why he is against having another primary. Fortunately. he doesn't have a chance to win anyway.

    March 20, 2008 at 11:12 pm |
  16. Wisconsin

    First I hope that Hillary supporters realize that HILLARY AGREED to NOT count FL and MI in the first place!

    Second: Do Hillary supporters realize how many past Presidents didn't have a lot of experience? According to Hillary they all sucked.

    Third: You want change in America? Obama is the right person! ANY OTHER candidate would of cut and run. Obama stood up, said I don't agree with what the Rev. said, but didn't just through the guy under the bus. What other candidate would of done that!

    March 20, 2008 at 10:57 pm |
  17. Scared Person

    The more people learn about Obama the less he will be liked. Period.

    March 20, 2008 at 10:46 pm |
  18. Scared Person

    The reason that the Obama camp will not allow the delegates to be seated is because he will not win.

    Michigan and Florida have to be seated.

    Obama is afraid to loose. it's rediculous. Let them vote and be seated.

    March 20, 2008 at 10:32 pm |
  19. Scared Person

    Hello........
    Obama is running for president and we heard his MENTOR his PASTOR his friend talk about our urging Damnation to the United States.

    That is UNAMERICAN...........Hello

    This is not about race, this is about our country and a President of the United States.

    March 20, 2008 at 10:30 pm |
  20. Scared Person

    Obama has lied to the American people and has really divided our country with his continued relationship with his pastor.

    This is not about black and white. This is about America. I have black friends, I am white. Non of them have pastors like this.

    Hillary Clinton wouldn't remain with a KKK leader. This is for president of the United States.

    Tell your talk show to get a grip and wake up!!!

    March 20, 2008 at 10:27 pm |
  21. Democrat#1

    Delegates! It time to step up to the plate..You need to reject Obama!

    Take a look at the disturbing films of Obama's mentor , and inspirational leader! and then tell us that he has a chance of becoming the next president and if he may be do us all Americans that care for our Country a favor!

    March 20, 2008 at 10:22 pm |
  22. Shuster

    People !!! Please take the time to watch some of Obama's Mentor of Twenty Years sermon! and you will get shills of how much hatred this man has. Obama has rejected the words, out of desperation for his journey to the White House. But really stood and still stands for the jumping screeming Wright..
    I am sorry we can not tollerate such hate and racism. This man will only bring us dispair and we as whole hearted American that love America can not for an instance consider Obama for our next President. I think that if you love America after you hear Wright and you know that Obama made this hater of America his mentor for TWENTY YEARS you will instantly reject Obama. Its chilling and it angers one to see and hear Obamas mentor! Its scarry!! Its agrevating, its sickening!

    March 20, 2008 at 10:16 pm |
  23. Igbo Made Texas

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    First, only a fool will believe that lumping Geraldine Ferraro and Obama's Grandma would take attention to the larger issue Barrack Obama is facing. Obama lied to MSNBC, FOX NEWS, and PBS. Only Fox News has shown real leadership in reporting the Obama/Wright Ticket. Obama cannot be trusted and has lost my vote.

    Second, I am disappointed that Obama and surrogates are suggesting that every black church is as racist as Obama's church. I am an African American but it is silly for blacks to tolerate Obama at the expense of the entire black race for cheap political gains. I understood the unintelligent speech to mean that all blacks hate whites. Simply stated, Obama has further created deaper racial tension in America by exploiting the African American community. His 20 year experiences and apprenticeship with Rev? Wright shows no leadership…Go McCain/Rice VS Clinton/Harold Ford Ticket.

    Third, Obama is hypocritical. He can call himself Husseini but shouts racism when others call him the H-word (see Tavis Smiley Interview last Fall where he introduced himself as Husseini Obama).

    March 20, 2008 at 10:07 pm |
  24. VoteResponsibly8

    I think this nice gentleman should change his vote..Sorry I don't think we should help put a man that defends a antiAmerican who has shown vulgar anti American comments, hateful comments against America! Obama has tried to make this a racial issue, that is his hope to distract from the real issue here, which is his mentor hating America..Obama showed very bad judgement and continues to do so.
    I will not condone an American Hater nor the person that condones the man. Obama has rejected the words, but its not only the words, it the man that dares to live here in American and hates America so much that he has said we deserved the tragedy of 9/11, he has told his followers (While Obama and his family sits in the pews) that his followers should not say God Bless America, but say God Damn America. He has accused American of infecting Africa with the HIV virus, and so many many hate comments against Americans. I guess he hs forgotten where some of our hard earn money has gone like just recently millions given to Africa because of HIV.. He has said many racial remarks against Hillary because she is white. This man has been made by Obama his inspirational leader, uncle, mentor.
    As far as I am concern I do not want a president that has a stron connection to an American Hater. I love my country and think that we should all send a strong message that making an anti-American Hater you mentor and part of your family its NO OK IF YOU ARE want TO BE THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA. Obma has even thrown his own grandmother under the bus and has called her she is a typical white woman when refering to her. This is not about race like Obama would want you to think it is, but no! it not..its about Hatred towards America, its about hatred towards all the American People that love their country.,,,,Send the message No on Obama

    March 20, 2008 at 9:58 pm |
  25. Lance Gayhart

    How does one become a superdelegate?

    March 20, 2008 at 9:57 pm |
  26. Carol Myers

    to Brian in Ohio
    By taking off his name in Michigan Obama made a mistake in judgement.He says he did it because it was the rules. Didn't the same rules apply to Florida? Sounds to me that he can't make up his mind. But he's done that a lot.
    He doesn"t want all voices heard, only voices voting for him. He will not get my vote. I will vote for every Democrat on my ballet but the box for President. I will leave that box empty. Obama is an empty suit McCain is too old and getting senile and never Nader.
    Carol Oh.

    March 20, 2008 at 9:37 pm |
  27. Ravi

    I am surprised to see the citizens of the most powerful country in the world is debating over Clinton or Obama.

    When a CEO of a company is selected, much importance is shown for what he or she did in the past for the type of business he or she is being considered. Greater attention is given for risk management, turn-around, growth, value etc.,

    No novice is selected to head a corporation. However, people in this country is voting for Obama, who has only one term as senator experience and Clinton with First-lady and two terms of senator's experience.

    In my opinion, both Dem and Rep parties should have a min of 5 terms or equivalent other gov leadership experience to field candidates for election.

    So, the Super delegates should think in this direction before pledging their support to a specific candidate.

    PS : Experience does MAKE a person.

    March 20, 2008 at 9:18 pm |
  28. Sam

    Democratic party will commit suicide if they nominate Obama. Obama has almost zero chances of winning against McCain now that his patriorism is questioned and his association with Jeremiah Wright has been exposed who curses America.

    I always understood that the whole purpose of superdelegates is to correct the mistakes voters made during the primaries. If superdelegates have to follow the pledged delegates, then why on earth do we need superdelegates?

    I hope the democratic party will come to senses and remove Obama now if they want democratic party to win the White House. I can bet my life that Obama will not win against McCain specially now that he has been exposed.

    March 20, 2008 at 9:11 pm |
  29. Scott

    Scares me that thus guy may actually determine who may be the next President of the united states. Man is he out of touch with reality.

    March 20, 2008 at 9:07 pm |
  30. Melissa R, Louisiana

    I say let the Republican party pay for the revote in Florida since it was their Republican Govenor who caused all this ruckus down there anyway. Is his last name Limbaugh? Surely with all the money Huckabee, Romney, Guilliani, and others have saved since McCain clinched the nomination there is enough to help their comrad out in Florida. I bet he won't get re-elected as Florida's govenor. Floridians will remember this well into the next generation.

    As for Michigan, Let Carville and Rendel shoulder the cost since they want everyone's voices heard so badly.

    Everyone should vote however not just those who didn't vote the first time. Why doesn't the Clinton campaign want them to re-vote, could it be she is afraid they'll change who they voted for the first time? Shame on you Hillary Clinton for trying to swindle us once again.

    March 20, 2008 at 8:58 pm |
  31. Miki Gartner

    Brian, I agree with most of what you wrote. I am a Canadian who is a rookie when it comes to politics (and blogging as well). Truthfully I am shocked by what is going on. However, I am being told that I am extremely naive. I am a senior and have never seen so much dishonesty in my life in such a short period of time. I truly believe that CNN's anchors will not allow this fiasco to stop. To what end? Was there a legitimate reason to go on ad infinanaton .I find some of them extremely biased against Senator Obama. Is it a matter of sensationalism or just plain discrimination? When I tried to listen to that amazing speech, I could hardly see the screen nor could I concentrate on what was being said. The only thing I can remember is the Pastor waving his hands. Why did they think it was necessary to show those pictures over and over again? Wasn't their point made after the first ten times. Could it be that Barack touched some nerves?

    I have a suggestion on how to settle the battle for the Florida and Michigan delegates. If her only concern is truly about the disenfranchisement of the delegates, why don't they just split the delegates down the middle? Do you think that would satisfy her, or does she have other motives like always. She was the one to break the laws, so why should she gain the upper hand?

    On the subject of Super Delegates. I believe that the PEOPLE of the USA should decide with their votes, that way it will it will be truly democratic. Perhaps some of the SuperDelegates have much to lose should Barack win and much to gain if Hillary continues the traditions of business as usual.

    Please write about your opinion of my suggestion. If you believe it is a good idea, will you help me get my idea out for consideration?

    I will try to blog again because I have some very interesting reading about Hillary perhaps in a more truthful way than she would have everybody believe.

    March 20, 2008 at 8:49 pm |
  32. EBC

    GOD Bless YOU Mr. Rae, someone with some honesty and credibility when it comes to being a superdelegates.

    YOU SIR make me proud to be an American.

    March 20, 2008 at 8:45 pm |
  33. Margaret

    Everyone has a personal opinion about all of this non-sense. None of us are perfect and we're expecting a perfect situation and outcome. It's not going to happen.

    It should be the voters that count as Polaski said and not the super delegate's choice.

    People are so unreal.

    March 20, 2008 at 8:41 pm |
  34. MonicaPG

    There's no way to satisfy anyone on either side(s) of this conundrum.

    If the superdelegates choose Hillary, the Obama supporters (and even those on the fence) will know that the democratic process didn't work, and there are those who will believe that the latest "firestorm" of (NoN) controversy surrounding Obama will stink to high heaven of a conspiracy to smear this candidate because there was nothing of real substance to get on him. The bright side, however it that the Republicans will be gleefully happy as they truly believe that Hillary is more "beatable" than Barack Obama.

    If the superdelegates pick Obama, you can BET that not only will Senator Clinton NOT throw her support his way, but unless he picks her as his running mate the democrats will throw him under the bus and the republicans will gladly run over him. The likes of Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter and the other "conservative Great American talk show hosts" (you know, the Christian Patriots) will have a field day trouncing all over him in an all out war of racism diguised as "voter concern" for the "issues".

    Either way, regardless as to the final outcome, John McCain will win by default because the Democratic leadership, the supporters of the democratic candidates and their campaign staff have acted shamefully to the benefit of an aging RINO who can't even remember who our "enemy" is during wartime......but hey, he's a war hero, so that makes him qualified.

    March 20, 2008 at 8:26 pm |
  35. Sandra D

    Jason,

    I agree with you to a certain extent; it should not appear like a backroom deal. I would howver amend your solution; all supers need to make a decision by end of june, individually not in a backroom, so that way our nominee will have enough time to prepare against McCain.

    March 20, 2008 at 8:26 pm |
  36. Jan from Wood Dale, IL

    Since the DNC approved a proposal for a privately financed MI Democratic presidential primary revote, why did Obama's campaign lawyers object? Wouldn't it have been better to have recognized the registered Democrats in MI and assign delegates based on their vote?

    According to the stats, in 2004 democratic MI primary only 163,769 people voted. In 2008, 592,261 people voted in MI. There was no Republican primary in MI in 2004 because Bush ran without opposition.

    Howard Dean needs to step up and fix this problem.

    March 20, 2008 at 8:10 pm |
  37. Ambrose

    Your stand is right and ideal

    March 20, 2008 at 8:06 pm |
  38. BR

    I think that it is Barack Obama who does not want to do any re-votes. I think that the super-delegates should go for Hillary because she has a better chance to beat Mc Cain. Barack Obama goes to these types of shows like Cnn and Msnbc because they are corrupt and are for him and not for Hillary.

    March 20, 2008 at 8:03 pm |
  39. linda

    I agree with you. It amazes me that these highly intelligent people who govern our country cannot handle a primary! It looks to me like we should get rid of everyone holding a political seat in Michigan
    ( which is where I am from ) and Florida and put people in their spot who can at least follow the rules regarding something so simple as a fair primary. If this was too much for them what can we expect when it comes to complicated state and government issues? Fair primary. Easy, that means that everyone has a chance to vote for his or her candidate. That means the names are on the ballots and we have the primary when we should. Clinton lead Obama and Edwards to believe she was not putting her name on the ballot either and surprise, surprise! And since she was the only one there, running against uncommitted, she won. Now, as unfair as that was, she get away with it and has the nerve to run around bragging about her wins in Michigan and Florida. It gets worse. She is now accusing Obama of not caring for the people, ( she said nothing about these voters and their rights until she really needed them) knowing that if there is a re-do for votes that over or about 1 milion people will not be able to vote because, instead of voting for Clinton they voted republican, and they are locked into that, according to our state. Why?
    Because rules are rules and we must follow them..hmmm. Are we not breaking the rules by having the primary early and won't we be breaking the rules again by allowing this vote or seating of delegates? Why should we stop breaking the law just because it would now, at least, be fair? I wish I was a kid again so I could blindly believe that the people who run things around here know what they are doing, even a little.
    Another issue, when reporting the news how about we leave our personal feelings out of it and just report the news in a fair manner? The coverage of this campaign has been anything but fair. When they get their teeth into Obama they leave them there, everyone else gets a brief mention when they do something wrong or questionable, if it is mentioned at all. The media will break Obama and not loose a nights sleep over it. America, home of the free? Freedom of speech, of expression of religion? How many people in politics, I wonder, follow the KKK, or some other hate group? Someone knows, however, they are not talking at this time. If we are lucky, one day they may run for president against Clinton and McCain and we will know what color underwear they wear and much, much more. How much of it will be true? Well, for truth we have to look at both sides of the story and we don't see alot of that.

    March 20, 2008 at 7:55 pm |
  40. deb in az

    you know jason maybe they should because i have a lot of reservations about this election.......all of this racial stuff is not good and if the republicans are doing this in the primary what will happen in the general election? i think senator obama should stop talking so much.... what is a typical white person now?? first his grandmother and now the typical white person......attending a church that preaches hate........i love that young people have come out in groves for the primarys but will they show in the general election? i really dont want another 4 years of war.......we need the economy straightened out ...... so i would say to the super delegates please make rational votes...

    March 20, 2008 at 7:48 pm |
  41. kathie

    Jason, please reconsider your decision to support Obama. His actions do not support his words. Anyone should be OUTRAGED that any candidate is trying to prevent voters from 2 states from voting in the Presidential primary election, especially since it appears the main reason he is working so hard to accomplish this is that he fears he will not come out on top. Is this democracy? Is it the free and fair election that our men & women in uniform are fighting and dying for in Iraq? NO!! It's the same old politics that your candidate has pledged to " CHANGE"! Shame on him!!

    March 20, 2008 at 7:34 pm |
  42. xtina

    after a closer look at Obama's judgment in making Antonin Rezko and Rev. Wright part of his inner circle, and now with revelations of Obama's connection to William Ayers; yes, there probably will be a nominee before the convention.

    March 20, 2008 at 7:18 pm |
  43. Randy

    Atually, it is a non issue. Consider this.

    Most voters will either vote the party or the candidate in the general election, they will not choose a president based on primary process issues.

    In either case, the party must choose a candidate that will win, there is no value in coming in second place.

    Both potential candidates have serious shortcommings

    Clinton has shown disloyalty to the party and a moral compass that is apparently calibrated in revolutions per second. More importantly,she has failed to attract new followers and has appealed only to those with specific prejudices

    Obama' political lleanings are suspect, Far worse than Reverand Wrights comments have yet to surface, Obama"s extreme radical past is scary. Many non blacks have (or will) come to fear he is another Woodrow Wilson, ;brilliant, ,seductive, but ultimately also a racist who will act against thier interests

    This would suggest that procedural issues on the primnary are irrelevant, and the party should be concerned with self preservation and selecting a candidate.

    I would suggest Obama is the logical choice. Clinton is unredeemable; she has demonstrated that she does not kee her promises, that is how the party has been endangered by the Florida and Michigan primary issues

    All Obama needs to demonstrate is that there is no chance of his imitating Woodrow wilson's racial prejudices, albeit from a radical left perspective. That should not be hard to do.

    March 20, 2008 at 7:17 pm |
  44. liz

    Hillary's popularity just rose on the gallup poll to 49% to Obama's 42%. I think you're going to see this go higher until the convention. Then what? What will the Obama supporters say then. Obama is already disenfranchising Michigan and Florida.

    March 20, 2008 at 6:37 pm |
  45. Brian, Ohio

    The news keeps making Obama culprit of this deal not working out.

    However, its Hillary... The fact that she won last time was a fallacy because he wasn't on the ballot, and barack lost to her getting a decent percent with a higher percent undecided. Now in this new election, Hillary's camp does not want to let those people vote again in the revote.

    She is blasting Obama saying he doesn't want voices heard, when in fact he just wants ALL voices heard.

    March 20, 2008 at 5:44 pm |
  46. Brittany Parker, CO

    Hello,

    With all due respect Mr. Rae, the alternative of not meeting after the primaries have ended seems bleak. Wouldn't it be more beneficial to the party if we had those extra months between the primaries and the National Convention to rally around one candidate rather than bickering and mudslinging until the last possible moment? I think the sooner we have a definite candidate, the better. That way, we can concentrate more on running a campaign that will help us in November.
    Just a thought. Hope life is good.

    Brittany

    March 20, 2008 at 5:24 pm |
  47. Cindy

    Jason,
    I totally agree with you this time. I think that having just the superdelegates getting together after June 3rd and picking the nominee is a really bad idea. It would really look like who ever came out as the winner "bought off" some people in the back room. I think if there isn't a clear cut nominee by June, which I don't think there will be, then it should be decided at the convention with everyone there and everyone having a say. No matter how ugly it may get. That is part of the process, not allowing just a few to decide the whole thing.

    Cynthia, Covington, Ga.

    March 20, 2008 at 5:21 pm |