The Clinton donors try to flex their muscle (and threaten the superdelegates)
An interesting tidbit over at TPM, a group of big money (Clinton supporting) fundraisers wrote a letter to Nancy Pelosi to chastise (threaten) her regarding her recent statements that superdelegates should affirm the pledged delegate totals.
But this isn't about Pelosi at all.
By formalizing this in a letter and making it public, there's no way that Pelosi could capitulate. The point here is to get the attention of all those politicians looking at reelection, to pass through a threat to the fundraising of those House members (and other politicians) who are superdelegates.
The message is, "if you say "pledged delegates rule" or otherwise publicly speak against Clinton, you will be on the Clinton donors' bad side," and "if we can threaten Nancy Pelosi, think what we can do to you."
That's what this is all about.
(This comes in the wake of several profile superdelegates saying in the last few days that "pledged delegates" should determine the winner. Sen. Maria Cantwell and the Tennessee Governor just yesterday.)
Also, this is a rather interesting step as it also puts a cloud over the Obama "coattails" argument. The message being, "sure he can bring out voters and raise money for himself, but can he work the machine for you?"
I wonder how this will go down?
But this isn't about Pelosi at all.
By formalizing this in a letter and making it public, there's no way that Pelosi could capitulate. The point here is to get the attention of all those politicians looking at reelection, to pass through a threat to the fundraising of those House members (and other politicians) who are superdelegates.
The message is, "if you say "pledged delegates rule" or otherwise publicly speak against Clinton, you will be on the Clinton donors' bad side," and "if we can threaten Nancy Pelosi, think what we can do to you."
That's what this is all about.
(This comes in the wake of several profile superdelegates saying in the last few days that "pledged delegates" should determine the winner. Sen. Maria Cantwell and the Tennessee Governor just yesterday.)
Also, this is a rather interesting step as it also puts a cloud over the Obama "coattails" argument. The message being, "sure he can bring out voters and raise money for himself, but can he work the machine for you?"
I wonder how this will go down?
posted by mikevotes at
2:25 PM
5 Comments:
This is an example of the "soul of the party" stuff I was talking about earlier. The Democratic party needs to decide whether it's merely a tool of moneyed elites, or if it's truly a democratic (small 'd') party. This is a cancer that goes far beyond this election.
As you know I think political parties are by their nature undemocratic and a pox upon a truly democratic process. So I don't hold much hope for the Dem party, especially if it insists on fulfilling Nader's assertion that there's no difference between the Repubs and Dems -- at least as amoral, valueless machines.
What do these big donors want? Are they really, really passionate about universal health care? Bankruptcy reform? Providing affordable higher education to all Americans? Yeah, right.
Maybe it's time to pull the plug on the ol' mule and let 'er die. The 2006 success were due to Dean's 50-state strategy and bottom-up activism -- the antithesis of the DLC and what we're seeing coming from the Clinton camp and their deep pocket sugar daddies. The party can turn it's back on the grass roots, and they can look at another generation in the wilderness...
I just wish these dinosaurs would go extinct already.
By
-epm, at 4:26 PM
How do the people who uncritically support Hillary feel about her attempts to game the system, or ignore the system totally?
This is one of the reasons we're booting Republicans, fer cryin' out loud.
By
Anonymous, at 4:56 PM
EPM, It's impossible for me o get an objective sense, but I really feel that pressure building on Clinton.
I think that's why they issued this letter, to try and stop any supers leaning towards Obama, because any any trickle of super support could start a landslide.
That's what the Obama camp was hoping Richardson would create. Notice the emphasis in his endorsement, not so much on the candidate, but on "the nastiness has to end."
....
Anon, They see it as right. They think she's the better choice. It's highly emotional at this point, on both sides.
By
mikevotes, at 6:06 PM
Regarding Obama's coat tails... Two words: Bill Foster
Sure, it's only one example, but doesn't it say something about Obama's ability to a) support fellow dems and b) to positively affect an election?
By
-epm, at 6:57 PM
Right. And I also heard the point made that Obama has shown that he, at least, can fundraise around the traditional donors, alot of whom backed Clinton.
By
mikevotes, at 9:26 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home