Is this new trend of pledged delegates doing a switchraoo is even advisable ? Wouldn't it set a bad precedent ?

I didn't support Hillary's attempts at pledged delegate stealing, and I don't support this delegate switching, it subverts the will of the people and perverts the process. This isn't Obama's fault, and it just shows the extent to which the Party is ready to end this and rally behind Obama, whether Hillary is willing or not.

But I don't agree with pledged delegates switching, even if it helps my candidate.

But yay for Obama.

I don't like this one bit. I agree with Mr. Johnson vis-a-vis the nomination, but Barack doesn't need this kind of help.

I don't know this guy, but is it possible that this is a tactic in support of Hillary?

Long time reader, first time poster.

Obama should welcome Johnson's support, but graciously decline his vote.

Whether intentional or not, this switch has the possibility of becoming a Trojan horse - just before Hillary is about to win big in West Virginia.

I had an interesting conversation with a pledged delegate for Obama from NJ a few weeks back. I was joking with her and asking if she had any calls yet from Bill asking her to switch, and she said that she actually thought you would be more likely to see pledged delegates go from Hillary to Obama.

She said that most of the Obama pledged delegates are extremely passionate about their candidate, but that some (not all) of the Hillary delegates were party members that were asked to be a delegate when no one else volunteered. They are democrats first, and perhaps Hillary supporters because of who the party in their state or regioin was supporting.

I do think it's interesting that Hillary was promoting this idea and now its working against her. I just don't get her argument that not counting Michigan and Florida is disenfranchising voters, but having pledged delegates switch is not.

Dude need to read the rules. If he was elected as a delegate for her, his vote has to be for her. Thats why they are called pledged delegates.

Look, this is NOT good. If it turns out we can't rely on elected delegates to stay true to their pledges, Hillary's campaign can use that to fight all the way to the convention.

That they're switching to Obama won't matter; they'll argue they've switched once, they can switch again.

Again, not good for the chances of ending this race in June.

Very bad idea. I suppose once the nominee is selected at the convention, everyone then votes for him by acclimation to make it unanimous and show a united party. But to do it now is just a self-promotion move. Tacky and dumb. Ironically ppropriate for a Hillary delegate, but still wrong.

Oh no. Don't like this one bit. We don't need to be making HRC supporters angrier than they are.

I found Jack Johnson's email address and phone, if you'd like to give him a piece of your mind: countyexecutive@co.pg.md.us
Office: 301- 952-4131

Jack, Jack, Jack. Jack Johnson is an ineffective (but harmless) executive of the wealthiest black county in the US. He was an Obama supporter early, but I think Sen. Mikulski and Gov. O'Malley (two MD Clinton supers) were able to bribe/strongarm him into her camp, while his constituents went for Obama 4-1. Now that Hillary's out, he's putting his finger in the air and being the first rat to jump in the direction the wind is blowing (metaphor-mixing is dangerous, and should only be done by professionals). Yeah, it's a dangerous precedent, but I don't think it's one that's going to be followed. This wasn't an act of conscience, it was an act of self-preservation.

This idea was crap when Hillary suggested it & it's still crap (even w/ Obama benefitting from it). There are some things that MUST stand on principal & if the people can't trust representatives to represent their will (as we see so much today) we're simply screwed. I hope this story doesn't gain traction & I hope Obama will issue a statement discouraging such practices. I want so badly to believe that the mission here is to change Washington & the only way we do that is to stand on solid principals of democracy.

I think the Obama campaign should stay as far away from this guy as possible, but I'm not sure it's quite as outrageous as people are saying.

I admit I'd be outraged if an Obama pledged delegate switched like that, but I think the situation is a little different when the candidate has publicly stated that pledged delegates can vote however they want and even that "There is no such thing as a pledged delegate" and pledged delegates are the same as unpledged delegates. Effectively Clinton has released her delegates to vote as they like, so there's nothing to be outraged about.

you fucking idiots:

1.the one question none of you morons ask is, maybe the superdelegates should vote for whoever they think would make the best president? Ever think of that criterion?

2. it's not a national vote, it will come down to FL, PA, OH and maybe MO, NH and WV. Nobody here seems to understand that.

3. I met some Americans in a bar last night, God what a bunch of fucking dolts. But you people are 3x more doltish, at least these clowns had the gumption and ambition to get out of the US for a change.

4. if GI Joe showed up at the AA faculty cocktail party, he'd by lynched.

This is not a superdelegate. Get a clue.

Your rhetoric is truly offensive.

oh, I didn't read the damn thing very closely. but my point remains the same.

"Academically, black children at 17 perform no better than a white 13-year old." Economist, May 10, p. 29. Considering that American children generally perform poorly compared to children in any other industrialized democracy, this is telling.

and p.30: "... studiousness is stigmatised among black children. It would be hard to imagine a more crippling cultural norm."

and " "... when the bar is lowered for black applicants to law school, they are admitted to institutions where they cannot cope."

This is wrong.

A pledged delegate should be tied to a candidate going into the convention.

The Dem Party already has those people to ensure that the party stays on track where the party leaders want to take it: the Superdelegates.

The system devised is a good one: a mix of popular polling and backroom leadership -- if only there were backroom leadership. Nonetheless, to throw out the popular polling in this way sets up a bad precedent.

Hillary was wrong to suggest otherwise. Any thinking person knew it back then. It is wrong now to hope that Hillary's pledged delegates switch.

I think what we are seeing is someone hoping to curry favor with the Obama camp in a very crude and obvious way.

I read the article - Johnson isn't just saying that he wants to support Obama at the convention; he wants the entire Clinton delgation from Maryland to be released so they can support Obama.

This isn't a defection - it's a call to mutiny.

Except, that, maybe it isn't. I don't hear a lot of outrage over the idea of, say, Edwards supporters being courted by either Obama or Clinton. Why? Because he is out of the race. At some point, if Clinton herself is unwilling to concede gracefully, her supporters are going to have to pull the plug on her candidacy.

Johnson is saying basically that he has heard the fat lady sing, even if Hillary is stopping up her ears.

I do think Johnson is jumping the gun, by the way, to say the least. If he had waited until after this round of primaries, his proposal wouldn't sound quite so much like he was betraying his constituents and his own honor. Not to mention there are other less inflammatory ways he could handle his change of heart: even pledged delegates are free to change their votes in good conscience after the the first ballot, I believe. So he could have simply let it be known that he plans on supporting Obama at that point. Or, he could simply temporarily absent himself from the floor and let the alternate delegate cast the vote for Clinton. Or, he could simply resign from the delegation. But none of those acts of conscience would grab the spotlight like this did.

Jack Johnson is my county executive. Jack Johnson probably has approval ratings in the county just a little bit higher than Bush.

Jack Johnson has no problem turning against his friends. He "threw his driver/friend under the bus" after he (the driver) killed a furniture deliveryman in Prince Georges County, Maryland, and wounded the other deliveryman Christmas 2006. Johnson had promoted the guy (who was still a corporal on the police force after 16 years) to County Homeland Security Director. After the incident, Johnson said, "I hardly knew him."

Jack Johnson has no morals and no scruples. I'm not surprised he is a delegate for Hillary Clinton. Prince Georges County (and most of Maryland) voted overwhelmingly for Obama.