Some super-dels -- in particular, those who are also current candidates for office

Do we have any idea how big of a proportion this truly represents? I don't doubt the general thrust of this argument, but I don't think that the majority of the remaining undeclared superdels fall under this umbrella.

Well, perhaps those superdelegates ought to consider that Obama supporters ponied up 20K in 24 hours for Chandler in Kentucky after he started taking heat for endorsing Obama.

It's a shame that other superdelegates evidently don't have the same backbone as Chandler.

Given how some of Hillary's big funders have channeled their inner Tony Soprano and threatened Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi, I imagine this is a real phenomenon and perhaps the reason why more SDs have not yet broken for Obama. Hopefully, Joe Andrew's switch today will help break that dam.

Yeah, all they care about is getting reelected.

Obama should keep bribing them with the money you sent him.

You deserve mcwar not the Clintons.

Very true. I suggest all campaign watchers frequenting this site keep tabs on www.mrsuper.org as well to get an insider's perspective.

TPM-EC should be doing that as well.

Some super-dels -- in particular, those who are also current candidates for office -- don't want to pick either Hillary or Obama yet partly because they're reluctant to alienate the major donors who have lined up with the candidate they don't pick. That's because these super-dels are themselves hoping to raise money from those donors for their own campaigns.

Praytell, Greg, how many of those are worried about the "major donors who have lined up with" Obama?

Hillary has pulled farther ahead of Obama in the Gallup daily tracking. Two weeks ago he was 10 points ahead of her. And there is an interesting inconsistency in Gallup's Jeff Jones comments about it. He describes Hillary's 4 point lead over Obama as "not statistically significant". But later he describes Obama's 4 point deficit against McCain as "statistically significant". Is 4 points statistically significant or not? Perhaps there are different margins of error in the two polls.

Gallup Daily: Clinton 49%, Obama 45%

McCain leads Obama in general election; McCain and Clinton tied

PRINCETON, NJ -- Hillary Clinton has edged ahead of Barack Obama, 49% to 45%, in the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking update.

The four percentage point Clinton advantage in the April 28-30 polling is not statistically significant, but suggests slight movement in her favor after she and Obama had been tied the previous six days. Obama had held a significant lead over Clinton throughout much of April. The current margin is the biggest in Clinton's favor since March 17-19 polling.

Obama has had a rough few weeks in the campaign, with his widely publicized remarks about "bitter" voters, Clinton's decisive win in the crucial Pennsylvania primary, and renewed media attention to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the controversial former pastor of Obama's church, with Wright speaking out publicly this past week. Obama has also come under criticism from both Clinton and John McCain for opposing a proposal to suspend the federal gasoline tax during the summer months. As a result, Obama has moved from a consistent lead over Clinton to a deficit. Obama has just a few days to reverse the tide going into next Tuesday's Indiana and North Carolina primaries.

The latest general election results show Obama now trailing McCain by a statistically significant 47% to 43% margin among registered voters. Clinton and McCain are now tied in the general election at 46%, as McCain's support in relation to Clinton and Obama has picked up in recent days. -- Jeff Jones

Just think - in only a few more weeks, the whole process will be over. By this point, I am getting to the stage where I really do not care who wins. The nation will survive regardless of whom we elect. Even McCain will be better than Bush (albeit only just). I will just be so glad when the whole d@#^ farce is finished and we can stop pretending that any of the nonsense which we are presently being fed amounts even to a hill of beans.

Any claim that the outstanding superdelegates are delaying for any reason beyond A) Strategic timing for their candidate or B) Cowardice or whatever is obviously false. Super delegates are going to vote based on what's best for them, not the party.

I've always assumed that the bulk of the super-delegates who haven't announced are, in time, going to be for Obama for one simple reason: the revenge factor. Forget 'alientating donors' as a factor. That pales compared to 'getting on the Clinton's s**t-list'!)

If you are for Hillary, you would get lots of Brownie points with her for standing up now, during a fairly lean time for her. Even if she doesn't win, it's a safe bet that Obama won't go around chopping off the heads of those who previously supported Clinton.

If, on the other hand, you were to support Obama and Clinton was the ultimate winner ..... different story. She might make nice through the general election, but after that, rough sledding. There might be a Democratic administration after Jan. but you, personally, are going to be toast and have no role in it!!

I don't know that I even consider hesitation for this reason cowardice, maybe simply legitimate, practical concern about your own future effectiveness. Who would want the Clintons as sworn enemies *and* in ultimate power?? It might even be concern for the country, wanting to have some chance of giving realistic input if she does become president. I don't really condemn anyone for waiting until it is safe to take the step. It does mean, however, that the many SDs who have come out for Obama have certainly exhibited bravery, sometimes tremendous bravery.

I keep tracking the numbers, watching the 'number needed' (for Obama to clinch the nomination) and comparing it to the number of outstanding superdelegates. Right now he needs a few more than the total number of uncommitted SDs. With an infusion of pledged delegates from next Tuesday's primaries, however, that 'number needed' will become less than the number of uncommitted superdelegates. At some point, the "SD needed" number is going to be so small that a group movement to Obama (perhaps with even some defections from Clinton to Obama) would be entirely "safe" ... because it would simultaneously make Obama the standard-bearer. That, I think, is how it will **finally** end. It's getting closer, and can't happen soon enough.

Some Super-Dels Reluctant To Take Sides Because They Don't Want To Alienate Major Donors

Precisely. Which is why Obama's grassroots support is so important. If he can make the case that millions of small donors are more valuable than thousands of big money donors, he changes the equation completely. Which is why this month's fundraising numbers are so important for Obama. It's his machine versus the machine's machine. I'm rooting for us.