Superdelegates Waiting Until Convention?

[GaryC 7]

Superdelegates Waiting Until Convention?

N.C. Superdelegate David Parker says Dems will have a "better view in August."

Watch video here

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

18 of the remaining 300 committed over the last 48 hours. There aren't going to be many undecideds left mid June, let alone August. I know you're hoping for this together with Hillary's following but it just isn't going to happen. Sorry bro.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I love watchin the deterioration of the democrats! Devided are yaaaaaa? So fckin funny! Thats what happens when principals are no where to be found. When a victory is more important than anything else.

Edited May 2, 2008 by CarolsMarc

[GaryC 7]

18 of the remaining 300 committed over the last 48 hours. There aren't going to be many undecideds left mid June, let alone August. I know you're hoping for this together with Hillary's following but it just isn't going to happen. Sorry bro.

I am confused by something Dog. Not to long ago you said that if Hillary won by virtue of the SD you wouldn't like it. But now you seem perfectly happy to let Obama win by the SD. Why the change?

You also say that the SD should reflect the will of the people. Looking at the national polls there has been a shift in support over to Hillary. It seems to me if you really want the SD to reflect the will of the people you would want them to wait until both candidates have been fully vetted. Things have changed a lot in the last few weeks. Who knows what the "will of the people" will be in Aug? Given the last few weeks events what do you think the outcome of the primaries would be if some of the early ones were re-run? Since that can't happen it seems the only fair thing to do would be wait until we know more about both of them and then let the SD pick so the will of the people will be represented. Or do you only want it to reflect what your will is?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

18 of the remaining 300 committed over the last 48 hours. There aren't going to be many undecideds left mid June, let alone August. I know you're hoping for this together with Hillary's following but it just isn't going to happen. Sorry bro.

I am confused by something Dog. Not to long ago you said that if Hillary won by virtue of the SD you wouldn't like it. But now you seem perfectly happy to let Obama win by the SD. Why the change?

No change. Obama is ahead in votes, contests and pledged delegates won. Not that votes and contests even really matter since the nomination is decided by who gathers to most delegates. Either way, the essential math won't turn against him over the next few weeks. Hence, he should be the nominee.

[GaryC 7]

18 of the remaining 300 committed over the last 48 hours. There aren't going to be many undecideds left mid June, let alone August. I know you're hoping for this together with Hillary's following but it just isn't going to happen. Sorry bro.

I am confused by something Dog. Not to long ago you said that if Hillary won by virtue of the SD you wouldn't like it. But now you seem perfectly happy to let Obama win by the SD. Why the change?

No change. Obama is ahead in votes, contests and pledged delegates won. Not that votes and contests even really matter since the nomination is decided by who gathers to most delegates. Either way, the essential math won't turn against him over the next few weeks. Hence, he should be the nominee.

But should it be what the people want after both candidates have been fully vetted? Don't you think that if some of the early voting states had it to do over again the outcome would be different? Which is it? The candidate should be the one that the majority of voters want or the one that gets the most votes despite a change of heart of some after learning new things about them? It seems that is the reason you have SD's, to reflect the will of the people.