Obama Picks Up Support of Super Delegate

Despite Hillary Clinton’s attempts to play fast and loose with party rules regarding the Florida primary, it is Barack Obama who is picking up a delegate today. U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva of Arizona, a super delegate previously backing Edwards, is shifting to Obama:

Grijalva cited Obama’s electability and his intention to “fundamentally change the rules of the game” in Washington, according to a statement obtained by The Associated Press in advance of a planned Tuesday conference call with reporters.L

The third-term congressman, whose southern Arizona district includes Yuma and parts of Tucson, is the second prominent Arizona Democrat to endorse Obama in the immediate run-up to the state’s Feb. 5 presidential primary.

Gov. Janet Napolitano endorsed Obama on Jan. 11 after being courted by Obama and rival Hillary Rodham Clinton. Since then, Napolitano has campaigned for Obama in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico.

Clinton has led Obama and Edwards in the first of two recent polls but the margin between Clinton and Obama decreased in the second.

Grijalva had endorsed Edwards on May 3, saying the former senator from North Carolina “has shown principled leadership on the way in Iraq and on economic opportunity in America.”

In the statement explaining his switch to Obama, Grijalva said it “was not a repudiation of Senator Edwards, rather the understanding that Senator Barack Obama is the future.”

“The best opportunity to win in November rests with Senator Obama,” Grijalva added. “I am proud to support Senator Obama as we move forward toward the nomination. This election is not merely about moving the pieces around in Washington D.C., but to fundamentally change the rules of the game. I am proud to help Senator Obama work toward that change.”

While Obama has won the most committed delegates in the primaries and caucuses to date, Clinton has a lead when the preferences of super delegates are included in the count. This shift demonstrates that early support from a super delegate does not ensure a vote at the convention. Clinton received more support from super delegates early, when she appeared to be the inevitable winner. With momentum moving in Obama’s direction, and with many Democratic leaders upset by the tactics being used by the Clintons, I would not be surprised if more super delegates wind up backing Obama.

Be Sociable, Share!

6 Comments

  1. 1
    plum says:

    That’s good for Obama, but Clinton just picked up Maxine Waters.

  2. 2
    plum says:

    Apparently, Maxine Waters has long been in the Clintons’ camp, stretching back to the Sister Souljah incident.
    http://www.theroot.com/id/44468/page/2

  3. 3
    Wayne says:

    I think it is time for the two parties to either 1 – abandon the farce that the voters pick the the candidate and go back to the old back-room horse trading, or 2 – abandon the “super delegate” concept (which on the Democratic side puts almost 20% of the delegates required to win the nomination out of the hands of the voters) and make all the delegates chosen by the voters.

  4. 4
    Ron Chusid says:

    In a two way race I doubt that the super delegates would go against the clear winner so I don’t think it matters much in a practical sense. In a two way race one candidate will probably come into the convention with a clear lead.

    It might have made a difference in a three way race where it was possible that nobody would have won a majority. Then I think the super delegates would have wound up going with the strongest candidate to avoid a dead locked convention. Where they might have made the biggest difference would have been if it was a virtual tie between two candidates and they wound up being the deciding factor.

  5. 5
    binkis1 says:

    Super delegates are pledged but will shift with the majority…They are supposed to be the traffic cops for candidates but often just have personal agenda’s…like DeGette from Co…She needs help with the stemcell bill and hill proomised..not that she will keep her promise.

    OUTRAGOUS —-Clinton also alluded to a tax garnishment for making people pay for healthcare.

    Clinton health plan may mean tapping pay

    By CHARLES BABINGTON
    Associated Press Writer

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.

    The New York senator has criticized presidential rival Barack Obama for pushing a health plan that would not require universal coverage. Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would embrace, but when pressed on ABC’s “This Week,” she said: “I think there are a number of mechanisms” that are possible, including “going after people’s wages …”

    GOING AFTER PEOPLE’S WAGES …

    IS THAT THE WAY DEMOCRATS TALK? …

    THE REPUBLICANS WILL KILL THE DEMOCRATS WITH THAT KIND OF LOOSE-LIPPED LUNACY …

  6. 6
    avijit says:

    The issue of super delegates and the democratic party is unconscionable. Currently Obama is ahead in the popular vote and behind in the delegate vote. We can not have 800 party insiders decide the primaries for us! I have created a protest page here

    If you think this is an issue please add a comment to the protest page of the website. I will print out all the comments and give them to the Democratic party.

Leave a comment