Obama's Super-Del Whip: Many Super-Dels Back Obama, But Won't Go Public
I just got off the phone with Rep. Melissa Bean, who is one of Obama's chief super-delegate whip-counters. She said two things of interest:
First, she predicted that it was "entirely possible" that Obama could pull even with Hillary in super-delegates by next week -- and predicted that at the end of the process Obama would have more super-del support than Hillary.
And second, she insisted that many super-dels who are publicly uncommitted actually are privately backing Obama but won't say so right now.
"They're uncommitted, but it doesn't mean they're undecided," said Bean, who speaks to super-dels daily. Why go public, she asked, "if it's unnecessary and will alienate a portion of your base?"
"You're gonna see more quietly let him know, and some already have, that they're in his column," Bean said.
By some counts, Obama is roughly eight super-dels behind Hillary right now. I asked Bean whether Obama would, by next week, draw even with Hillary in public super-del support, given her insistence that she has locked up so many of them privately.
"It's entirely possible," she said. Her overall prediction: "At the end of the day, he will be ahead. When those who are `undecided' become public, he'll be in great shape."
Separately, I've contacted Bean's office with a follow-up: In all her conversations with super-dels, how often, if ever, does she hear them raise concerns about Reverend Wright or Hillary's claim that Obama struggles with blue-collar whites? I'll keep you posted on any answer I get.
Late Update: Bean answers the Wright question here.
Comments (38)
Jesus, Greg, the New York Times proved your assertion below false:
May 8, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
inartfully worded. I've fixed. But seriously, there's plenty of other good stuff in here. why focus only on that?
May 8, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, Greg, for fixing that.
May 8, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
re: why focus only on that?
Because words matter. And as much as it might bug you, people notice flaws when they stand out.
See, it reads fine until that screeching halt. It's like stepping on a rake in the yard.
In life, no one really notices a clean house, but leave your dirty underwear on the hallway floor, forcing others to walk around it, and they sure will notice that. Just the way it is, and likewise between writer and reader.
If anything, you should appreciate the criticisms as they hopefully make you a better writer over time. Not change your viewpoint, per se, but better able to communicate.
May 8, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
because you insist on throwing one of those in everytime you post about Obama.
May 9, 2008 12:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
May 8, 2008 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Greg:
Hopefully no one will respond to the question because so very few people (maybe some Republican operatives, maybe?)care about Wright. Except you. You care.
hmmm...
And those operatives used Wright in NC and Louisiana, right??? Very, very successful strategy.
Did you ask about the prospect of Haggee being a boon for Democrats??? Did you ask about that, Greg??? Or are you trying to keep the Clinton narrative going about "doubts" surrounding Obama??
That is the Clinton narrative that's kept afloat by your question, right??? Doubts, "questions," "who really knows him." Right?? Right???
How many times does Obama have to win this thing??
May 8, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think there was a story in the Capitol newspaper, The Hill, about the failure of Republicans in using these ads against the Democratic candidates in those races. I'll see if I can find that specific article.
May 8, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
right, this post giving tons of airtime to one of Obama's chief delegate counters is...
...somehow biased against Obama
...wow
May 8, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's fine, and a good question to ask considering it's the dead horse that Hillary is trying to beat to prove that he's unelectable. You're basically trying to find out if anyone actually cares or not.
May 8, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. It'd also be interesting to see if they quote that article from The Hill which talked about the failure of the Wright ads in those races.
May 8, 2008 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I also agree. It'd be interesting to know how many, if any, have been persuaded to endorse her specifically because of that.
Other than that, do they plan to endorse publicly before the convention?
May 8, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nonsense.
Why not go public, and give Obama enough delegates to win the nomination?
This is a non-story.
May 8, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because it looks better if a primary is what pushes his number over the delegate threshold, not Supers.
May 8, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nonsense again. Tell that to Bill Richardson.
May 8, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Should we tell that to the dozens of Supers who endorsed Clinton before the very first primary even took place as well?
May 8, 2008 9:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're going far afield from my original comment.
Bean asks:
Why go public if it's unnecessary and will alienate a portion of your base?
Answer:
This is how Melissa Bean votes in the House. She worries about alienating "a portion" of her base.
Who knows what the supers may have said to her! She can only translate in terms of her own hide-saving logic. Therefore we know nothing we didn't know before.
No wonder Obama hasn't closed the deal.
Here's the moronic quote of the day:
At the end of the day, he will be ahead. When those who are "undecided" become public, he'll be in great shape.
No shit, Sherlock!
May 8, 2008 11:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then what does Bill Richardson have to do with anything?
May 9, 2008 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
That was a direct response to your comment about how it "looks better if a primary is what pushes his number over the delegate threshold, not Supers."
Bill Richardson, a super delegate, went against his state primary results to endorse Obama. He obviously doesn't care what "looks better," right?
Isn't it the whip's job to get people to do something, in this case commit to Obama publicly so there's finally a nominee? According to this story, Bean's not getting that job done. Off-the-record talk (by the supers) is cheap. Sounds like they'll go public when (and if) they feel like it.
May 9, 2008 12:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it obvious? Some of her supporters are, shall we say, delicate flowers, who need to be softly let down instead of outright rejected.
Apparently.
It's rather ridiculous, you didn't see McCain's crew babying the Romney folks, after he dropped out of the race in heavy debt to his campaign. Sheesh
May 8, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg:
Yes, Greg.
I agree with "flufferwink."
Have you every heard of "data?" Or are you, Greg, so committed to keeping the Clinton narrative afloat that you have not really looked at the DATA that others are just beginning to parse. Chuck Todd also has an interesting analysis. There are interesting analyses everywhere, picking apart the constructs you so blithly (sp) repeat ("working class whites", "rural voters, "white voters" etc., etc).
Oh: And what about the entire STATES of white, working class voters Obama won?? Oh, did you know that Bill Clinton got a whopping 41 percent of "white, working class voters" in 1992? Do you know, Greg, anything about the loooonnnngggg history of the twists-and-turns of the Democratic Party's relationship to "white, working-class voters?" The dips in that relationship occuring before Obama was born??
Oops: Maybe you might want to ask this person is anyone worried about the insignificant votes of African Americans (working, middle and lower-income AAs)??? Even George Will thinks those votes are important. Why don't you ask her about our votes, Greg. Since you are so curious and just want to know so many, many things.
Data and analysis are enemies of the Clintons. But you know, let's just keep asking those questons and keep the Clinton story going. (By the way. Before you repeat "exit polls" data about Wright and voting, perhaps you might want to qualify those data with how incomplete exit data is without probes/follow-up questions).
How many times does Obama have to win this thing??
May 8, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unless I'm mistaken, some of those supers have primaries of their very own looming. It's too bad, but I can see that some might want to remain neutral for a bit longer.
May 8, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ask them when Obama will take the lead on something like the price of gas.
When will he step up and show leadership?
Where is the beef?
May 8, 2008 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
How's that gas tax holiday legislation going by the way? 17 days and counting till Memorial Day...
May 8, 2008 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Totally with you on this one Gotalife - I for one was sickened by Oblabla's complicated explanation of how we can take ourselves off of foreign oil dependency. Just give me my $28 and get out of my life!
May 8, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Will you guys be joing me on a...
GAS TAX HOLIDAY ROADTRIP!!!!!!!!! WOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
May 8, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are really beating this drum hard. Too bad nobody's listening.
May 8, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
hey gotaLIE, i thought the gas issue was settled by hillary?
hahahaha
have no fear Obama is on the way!
May 9, 2008 12:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
More Goatshite to be stepped around. Hillary please come and get your stinking Goat.
May 8, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on.
No one has done more for superdelegates than Barack Obama.
May 8, 2008 9:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
This comment has potential. :)
May 8, 2008 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The over 65 blue collar whites that Obama needs is probably over half women. And women will show up for Obama once they recognize that McCain has promised to put conservatives on the Supreme Court with right to life as the litmus test, and Roe vs. Wade can be overturned with only one or two additional conservative justices. That's another reason Hillary is not necessary as VP. NOW will get the women out to vote Democrat to save women's right to choose.
May 8, 2008 9:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah right.
May 8, 2008 10:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've got some kleenex here somewhere...I know, I know, I've been watching my candidates end up in the shitter for a long time now, so I know it's tough.
But she lost, and McCain is past it. Deal.
May 8, 2008 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on,
No one has done more for the KKK and Aryan Nation Trolls that Hillary KKKlinton has!
May 8, 2008 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
You ain't gotalife if you think a gas tax holiday
shows leadership in regards to gas prices.
...Might as well bomb Iran.
BTW, the Beef was on Hillary's backside but may have been eaten by the Billygoat.
Please put your Depends back on you make excrement on this blog.
May 8, 2008 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The job of the supers is to protect the party, right?
This is the same sort of spineless ass covering that got us into the Iraq war...can't buck the system or the system candidate...must go along and not create waves.
There is no one base to the Dem party. Women are part of it and blacks are part of it. There are other parts of it as well.
Women and blacks are supporting their candidate and aren't likely to move which has the potential to blow the party up.
This country is begging for strong, open and honest leadership. If the current supers aren't capable of leading the party out of this mire, they should hand back their votes to the party and work to eliminate this leadership position in the primary process.
To mealy mouth around because they have a primary coming or they don't want to alienate the old guard or whatever far fetched reason is the exact reason we are in this never ending war.
Grow a spine and lead or get out of the way. We need to change the way DC works from top to bottom.
May 9, 2008 1:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I had a conversation with WA Dem state party chair Pelz (superdelegate) and he made it pretty clear that he supported Obama, but that he couldn't come out until late in the game. I imagine there are a lot of supers in that situation. Can't imagine that McDermot would be supporting HRC either.
May 9, 2008 2:10 AM | Reply | Permalink