Correct Intrpret: Superdelegate, Senator Johnson, will honor Obama credo

[PetraPooh]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/03/23/johnson_will_back_clinton_if_she_wins_south_dakota.html

Though some have tried to slant this as Johnson changing his mind. Please note that the correct interpretation of this article/editorial is that Senator Johnson is listening clearly to Obama's campaign credo and will change his vote if his constituency votes for Clinton. I think this means that Senator Johnson is toeing the lines and ideals of the campaign of a great man, not to be confused with Johnson himself having a change of heart.

[cbayer]

1. Do you think Governor Richardson will follow the same credo? nt.

[VeraAgnes]

5. That is a good question.

We won't know til the Convention with him...I think he will lick his finger and see which way the wind blows and go with the breeze myself. In the end, all politicians do that, look after No. 1.

[Adelante]

10. No, I don't think so

They were one delegate apart and Hillary won by about 1500 votes. Richardson said well before he endorsed anyone that he considered it, for practical purposes, a tie and that he felt he had leeway if he decided on an endorsement.

[cbayer]

11. That's his prerogative

As it is with all the SD's.

They have many factors to consider, including their own political careers.

I am just pointing out that neither candidate can have it both ways. The rules allow the SD's to make their own decision and we will have to abide by whatever decisions they make.

[saracat]

2. Or Kennedy and Kerry? Obamites think that that "credo" only applies when Obama wins a state!

Janet Napolitano ought to change to Hillary too by that credo!

[DJ13]

3. Senator Johnson is listening clearly to Obama's campaign credo

If thats the case he is misinterpreting what Obama's campaign has been saying.

They have never said the SD's should follow their individual state's pledged delegates, they've been saying that on a national level the SD's should follow the will of the voters.

That means if one candidate has the overall lead in pledged delegates the SD's should honor that lead by supporting that candidate.

The individual states argument was the Clinton position (the often quoted "that means Kennedy and Kerry should be our SD's since we won Mass."), which has NEVER been Obama's argument.

[saracat]

6. Of course they haven't. Obamites always interpet everything the way that is

most beneficial to themselves.

[stillcool]

8. I don't know where you live...

but my state of Massachusetts has 26 Super Delegates. Senator Obama won my precinct, as he did many others in the State. Are you implying that all 26 Super Delegates are required to support Senator Clinton?

[saracat]

9. Yeah well in that case do you think John Edwards should get delegates

in states that he didn't get 15% of the vote in because he carried several precincts? That isn't how it works.Super Delegates aren't pledged and I don't think they should be.You are differentiating between Supers and Pledged aren't you?

[stillcool]

12. Why not?

These Super Delegates can nominate anyone they want. Isn't that the point of having them? The idea that Senator Kerry and Senator Kennedy are somehow despicable because they endorsed Senator Obama is beyond me. If they reflect the vote in my State there is no problem. If they can support whoever they want there is no problem. What exactly is the problem?
Superdelegate Endorsement List
Here's a list of superdelegates to the 2008 Democratic Convention that have officially announced who they plan to nominate

Note: While superdelegates must be certified by March 1, changes can be made up until the convention starts.

Super-delegates highlighted in red are from Michigan or Florida and do not count toward the nomination at this time.

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

[Smelting Pot]

4. K & R!

:kick:

[jackson_dem]

7. The only other superdelegate to do this is Boxer

And Johnson is changing his mind. This wasn't his position a few months ago.