NPR: Superdelegate Numbers Not Going Clinton's Way

Superdelegate Numbers Not Going Clinton's Way

In an interview with a Nigerian newspaper, former President (and superdelegate) Jimmy Carter was asked about who he would support.

"My children and their spouses are pro-Obama. My grandchildren are also pro-Obama," Carter told the paper. "As a superdelegate, I would not disclose who I am rooting for, but I leave you to make that guess."

The fact that Carter may not be supporting Sen. Hillary Clinton should not come as a complete surprise -- relations between Carter and the Clintons have never been particularly friendly -- but it's an illustration of how Clinton's lead among superdelegates has been slowly ebbing away. As the Obama campaign is fond of pointing out, 65 superdelegates have announced their support for Obama while less than ten have done so for Clinton since Super Tuesday.

In December, according to an Associated Press tally, Clinton led Obama by 106 superdelegates. On Thursday, it was down to 30.

Meanwhile Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), a superdelegate supporting Clinton, told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation last weekend that Obama would win both the nomination and the presidency.

Not that he was particularly complementary to Obama. "For White Americans, it's like, this guy can speak," Cleaver said in the interview. "If you put him on a level with a lot of other African-American public speakers, he may not even measure up." But then Cleaver added, "I will be stunned if he's not the next president of the United States."

On Tuesday the Clinton campaign said they appreciated the support of Cleaver, but said they "disagreed" with him on this issue.

And Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster who is unaffiliated in the presidential race, told the Los Angeles Times that Obama is winning more superdelegates because ""his arguments are more persuasive."

"It's a slow drip, drip, drip -- but it's dripping the wrong way," said Joe Trippi, who was an advisor to former Democratic candidate John Edwards in the same article. "Psychologically, they're playing defense with superdelegates, not offense."

Mellman adds that the Clinton camp hopes that will change with a big victory in Pennsylvania.

UPDATE: It's not just Clinton superdelegates who are giving their candidate headaches. Obama supporter Sen. Claire McCaskill (also from Missouri -- maybe it's something about the state) said the Illinois Senator would lose Pennsylvania by double-digits. That might help to lower expectations, but Obama advisers feel he needs to be in single-digits in order to blunt any Clinton victory with the media.

2:28 PM ET | 04- 4-2008 | permalink

Comments

Where is NPR's coverage of the story of Mark Penn, Hillary Clinton's top paid campaign advisor and pollster meeting with Columbian Government officials to assist them in getting a new trade agreement with the United States passed at the same time that Hillary Clinton is telling the voters in Pennsylvania that she strongly opposes the deal. How about some old-fashioned professional journalism and investigative reporting? Don't you think that this is something that voters might want to be informed about?

Sent by Steve Ferrell | 2:45 PM ET | 04-04-2008

Shouldn't their be some sort of lunacy clause in the assignment of superdelegates?

Carter is lucky.

Sent by deek | 2:47 PM ET | 04-04-2008

My question is, given everything that Clinton has done and said about Obama during the campaign, how will she possibly get behind and support him when Obama earns the Democratic nomination? Will she storm out of the convention and leave her party to lose? Or will she tuck tail, smile, and talk about what a great guy he is?!

Sent by ron | 3:19 PM ET | 04-04-2008

Well, I know I'm the only person who will say this so I will say this: I care a lot about what Jimmy Carter thinks about this race. I think sometimes I'm the last person around who admires the guy but I do. Anyway, these supers are looking at down ticket races and even if Clinton makes the argument she can win, which I think is unlikely, she won't, if Bill Clinton was any indication in his own election, be any help to Congress. A majority in congress is just as important as which party controls the White House and I think Obama is making the argument better that he can be helpful in time, popularity, and money in some key districts which is part of the duty of the standard of the party.

Sent by Nick Martinez | 1:34 PM ET | 04-05-2008

Ron writes "My question is, given everything that Clinton has done and said about Obama during the campaign, how will she possibly get behind and support him when Obama earns the Democratic nomination?"

That's the right question to ask Ron.
Her supporters will not support Obama. She's not making this up : she has been saying to the super delegates "Obamna can't win" in November. Either Hilary somehow gets the Democratic nod and then wins the White House or Democrats will have to wait another four years. I'm afraid she's right about this. You heard it here first.

Sent by mediahack | 2:47 PM ET | 04-05-2008

mediahack, I and many others will vote McCain if Hillary somehow wins the nomination. So, I believe what you are saying can definitely go both ways.

Sent by Ryan | 4:32 PM ET | 04-05-2008

Hillary will not win the nomination. She will probably go on to lose her senate seat. Obama will be the next president of the United States. It's that simple, when we are confronted with the possibility of having John McCain for four years, we will chose Obama. I was for Clinton until the lies surfaced.
I must add, the Clintons are rich! I would like to see more scrutiny of where this $109 million has come from.
It is hard to imagine that a woman from Chicago's richest suburb knows what we face. She has never gone a day without a meal. She has never had a college loan. She comes from money and is for money.
We must think, what exactly do the Clintons want now? They have had their time. They gave us Nafta, Monica, Whitewater, Vince Foster, etc. The Clintons are as dirty as they come.
We need to wake up, we don't need families running this country! There are more than 300 million people in this country, can anyone insult us to tell us that we have to have presidents from the same families in power? Are we that stupid?
Let's all join together and support Obama. Let's show CNN (the Clinton News Network) that we are a nation the cannot be fooled.

Sent by Warren B | 4:41 PM ET | 04-05-2008

mediahack writes "Her supporters will not support Obama." From whence comes this prognostication? I haven't seen polls that support this claim, nor does my daily experience coincide with this view. Every person I've spoken to who voted for Clinton made a point of saying "But they are both strong and I would vote for either one in a general election."

Sent by Nina | 4:57 PM ET | 04-05-2008

Hillary can decide to make it impossible for Obama.
There is also news for Hillary, she would have to overcome about 80%+ black vote plus Republican vote to get into the white house. Amen

Sent by Ty | 5:17 PM ET | 04-05-2008

For every old, rich, white and female Hillary support who snubs Obama .. there will be 10 new engaged young voters to take thier place.

You old Democrats need to wake up, the Party Elite won't be calling the shots much longer.

Now that new canidates see the power of the people (ie. Money) they will all start to pander to the common voter and not just the few historical donors.

Mark my words, Lobbiests and power-brokers are in for a big slap in the face over the next 10 years.

Hillary isn't fighting to save the Democratic party, she is fighting to maintain a power status-quo.

To be fair, this is what the old white guys in the 50's were affraid of when blacks got the vote.

Obama '08 - '12 !!!!!

Sent by Michael S Cowan | 8:40 PM ET | 04-05-2008

Wow, I complete argree with the others - there is NO WAY that Hillary Clinton could =ever= win the 2008 election.

Hopefully the MSM will start doing their job and actually reporting on all the fabrications coming from her camp - as well as Mark Penn's no so illustrious background.

If Senator Obama gets the Democratic nomination, he will win the election handily!

Sent by Soldiers for Obama | 10:13 PM ET | 04-05-2008

Senator Obama speaks plainly on issues to American values and hopes, and his campaign is supported by ordinary Americans like me. But the Clintons' bank account of 109 million dollars may very well buy the U.S. Presidency for Mrs. Clinton. Hillary loaned herself $5 million of her own money, "a good investment," in her own words, to further her campaign when it was running out of money. Then, she asked blue-collar working class women to send her campaign their few hard-earned dollars because she claims she identifies with their class position. The Clintons pay over $40,000 each year just to have their houses cleaned, more than what working-class women earn working 40 hours a week over a year. Bill is paid thousands for an hour-long speech by corporations whose lobbyists give big bucks to Hillary for her campaign. Like coming sniper fire, Hillary won votes in Ohio, Texas, and elsewhere by lying to blue collar workers about NAFTA and about her wealth. The more the Clintons' wealth is investigated, the more their mis-use of tax-deductible "charity" contributions to the Clinton family foundation will stink as unethical if not technically illegal. The Clintons are turning our republic into an oligarchic dynasty. Dear fellow citizens, please turn the page to save our democracy.

Sent by shirl | 12:11 AM ET | 04-06-2008

Superdelegates that do not support establishing of royal families and do not support war in Iraq must come soon for Obama.
By the way, for all who is guilty in launching this war, it would be honest to establish some foundation and pay their own money to compensate at least something. Why not Hillary start? - she got money...

Sent by Oleg | 12:50 AM ET | 04-06-2008

I say this to everyone when this topic comes up: I've never voted for a Republican running for president, but I'll vote McCain before Clinton. She would do a decent job, and I disagree with McCain on certain things, but McCain has more integrity. He came from behind to win his party's nomination without bitter attacks on his rivals, who are members of his own party.

For me, however, the selling point is still this: it's been twenty years since I've had a President who's name wasn't Clinton or Bush. Change is long overdue.

Sent by Ben | 1:03 AM ET | 04-06-2008

The more I hear it seems to me that the Clinton's are the bulies of the democrat party and it is refreshing to realize that superdelegates are exersicing their independent judgment

Sent by alma Ludivina | 3:03 AM ET | 04-06-2008

I am calling on the Democratic party to do away with the superdelegates after this circle.It is not democratic for a group of elected and appointed people to have the final say on who becomes our nominee.Besides these superdelegates have voted or should have voted during the primaries/caucus in their states.Why make us go through the trouble of voting if the popular vote does not count.Since they are superhumanbeing why not meet in Washington and pick our party's flag bearer.Republican party has winner take all.the winner of the popular votes takes all the delegates in that state.that is democracy.This tight election between senator Obama and senator Clinton,has exposed the Democratic party's un-democratic process of electing our flag bearer.

Sent by Lexy Ayaugbokor | 5:52 AM ET | 04-06-2008

Democrats, Independents: Let's vote for a Democratic president in 2008! Whatever Clinton's last name is, and whatever complaints any of us have about her or Obama, their platforms are nearly identical. I understand not liking one or the other Democratic candidate, but I don't understand being willing to turn the White House over to Republican leadership if your candidate doesn't win the nomination. If you like Clinton for her support for the middle class, health care, and better foreign policy, then it should be easy to swing your vote to Obama, and vice versa. If you are a Clinton or Obama supporter, and you vote for McCain, you're voting against everything your favored candidate is fighting so hard for right now.

Sent by Michelle | 1:11 PM ET | 04-06-2008

if really clinton is loyal to democrats or indeed america then she should step down for Obama n that will be noble.that score a lot from me

Sent by kaybanks | 6:20 PM ET | 04-07-2008

E-mail this Page

Recipient's e-mail address:	» Up to twelve addresses, separated by commas.
Your e-mail address:
Your name:
Personal message (optional, 600 characters max):
Your NPR member station:
Are you a member of your local NPR station?	Yes No
Would you like to receive information from your local NPR member station? (see NPR's privacy policy)	Yes No
Please send me updates from NPR.	Yes No

(Information collected by NPR will be used solely for internal NPR or NPR member station purposes and only if you selected 'yes' above. See NPR's privacy policy for more information.)

Tom Regan

Blogger

About Us

This year's election cycle has been one of the most exciting in memory. At the NPR News Blog we'll do our best to bring you interesting, informative -- and controversial -- stories from our own reporters and bloggers, as well as the rest of the best of the Internet and blogosphere. And we hope you'll let us know what you think as well.

Want to learn more? Be sure to read our Frequently Asked Questions and our discussion guidelines.