Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Too early to panic, Clinton's Colorado superdelegates say

By David Montero, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published February 14, 2008 at 12:30 a.m.

Text size  

More Elections

More stories »

Barack Obama clobbered Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Potomac primaries Tuesday, but her Colorado superdelegates were still hanging tough behind her Wednesday.

Certainly they saw the ugly numbers Tuesday night - especially out of Virginia - but the only math that seemed to matter to them at this point was what might happen in Texas and Ohio on March 4.

That's the biggest day left on the primary calendar. Between them, Texas and Ohio have 389 delegates up for grabs.

"It's too early to jump off any boats," said Maria Handley, a Boulder-based superdelegate who has been backing the New York senator for a few months. "There are a lot of states left to go."

Handley is joined by Ramona Martinez and Mannie Rodriguez as Democratic National Committee members who have cast their support behind Clinton. Also in Clinton's camp: U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, of Denver.

Superdelegates are the party leaders and elected officials who are free to vote for the candidate of their choice, in contrast to pledged delegates.

Six still uncommitted

Colorado has 15 superdelegates, with six still uncommitted to either candidate. Four have sided with Obama and one won't be selected until the state convention in May.

There are 796 superdelegates scattered around the country, with almost half still uncommitted. But every superdelegate counts and Rodriguez and Martinez said there has been enormous pressure put on them by Obama supporters to change their allegiance.

"They've been sending e-mails, calling my cell and my home phone, and mailing letters threatening that if I don't go for Obama, they won't vote for the Democrat in the general election," Martinez said. "They say that since Colorado went for Obama, so should I. What I say to them is, following that logic, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry should switch to Clinton."

Clinton won the Massachusetts primary - even after its U.S. senators, Kennedy and Kerry, endorsed Obama.

The delegate race is still tight between Obama and Clinton, with Obama taking the pledged delegate lead for the first time - 1,275 to 1,220 - after Tuesday's voting, according to Associated Press calculations.

The superdelegate score still favors Clinton, however - 246 to 152 - according to RealClearPolitics.com.

Key to the outcome

Because regular delegates are allocated proportionally, some calculations show that even if Obama were to roll through the rest of the primary season, he would not be able to secure the nomination with pledged delegates alone. That could result in a floor fight during the convention - with superdelegates key to the outcome.

"I'm going to stick to her 100 percent," Rodriguez said. "I hope it doesn't go to superdelgates deciding, but if it does, I'm with her all the way."

DeGette, too, said she's still doing whatever she can to help out the Clinton campaign and is in conversations with campaign officials to determine how she can best help in Ohio and Texas. That could include anything from making calls to going to the states to lobby for Clinton or talking to uncommitted superdelegates.

But for the Colorado coalition of superdelegates who remain on the fence, they have largely said they won't commit until late in the process.

Former Colorado governor Roy Romer, who is a superdelegate by virtue of formerly chairing the Democratic National Committee, said he is in contact with not only the Obama and Clinton campaigns, but Republican John McCain's as well.

Romer, who is chairman of the nonpartisan Strong American Schools Steering Committee, said he is precluded from publicly making an endorsement, but will fulfill his duty and vote at the convention.

Comments

  • February 14, 2008

    8:56 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    manna writes:

    Sure, CO super delegates should feel free to contradict the will of the voters and return a ruling family to the White House under the spouse's name this time. The Democratic party should also prepare for the destruction of the Democratic party this time. Some of us are still a little mad over the last time super delegates decided to go against the will of the voters in 1984. Voters wanted Hart, but those super delegates knew better and decided to go with a winner: Walter Mondale.
    I worked pretty hard and successfully I might add, to get my neighbors to caucus for Barack Obama, it would sure be a shame if I have to work hard to defeat Dianne DeGette as I voted for her years ago. Also, I'm fairly sure the Democratic party likes the checks my family sends, it would be a shame to have to cut them off.
    Of course, I shouldn't be surprised if the Democratic party wants to go to war with the Democratic voters. Most of them didn't even think twice about authorizing a trillion dollar quaqmire. The surge is working? Uh, it's working so well that we can't ever pull our troops out. It's a shame that that is what passes for common sense these days. Like a lot of Coloradoans, I am economically conservative and socially tolerant. If the Democratic party doesn't want my vote and support, I'm going to need a new party.

  • February 14, 2008

    11:26 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    LafayetteRich writes:

    What amazes me is that you talk about the 1984 convention in this context. You obviously thought the system was broken before you caucused this year. You spent 24 years not doing anything about it. You have no right to complain. People who participate in the process only when it suits them all hat and not cattle.

  • February 14, 2008

    7:53 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    lijakuciai writes:

    I think what manna is trying to say is that those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it. I, too, have walked precincts, parades, made phone calls and stuffed plenty of envelopes over the last 15 years to know that I'm sick of the party drawing defeat from the jaws of victory. The "24 years to do something about it" tangent misses the whole point. It sounds like manna has been involved a lot! Which is probably why so many more average Dems who help the superdelegates get elected are going for Obama instead of buying into sidebar issues and scaretactics.

    The Clintons have done a lot, and, as a working poor single mom, I'm grateful. But, the older boomers can't relate to those of us who had to come of age in the post-Reaganomic era. You can't pay for college on summer wages like you did back in the 60's. You'd have to be working for the mob! That generation had a completely different set of resources and opportunities that have been lost because no one had the broadmindedness to think about the future. "I can only take care of myself" was the mantra of that generation. But they forget that those who created the middle-class that they benefited from took great risks and didn't get to play it safe along the margins of "only looking out for me".

    For the Clintonistas to come out playing victim is a joke, considering their tactics of how they get back at people who disagree with them.