Add to Technorati Favorites Presidential Politics for America: Seventeen Senate Supers to Announce for Obama

Monday, June 02, 2008

Seventeen Senate Supers to Announce for Obama

There is a significant development today regarding undecided superdelegates. The seventeen remaining undecided superdelegates in the United States Senate are rumored to be ready to endorse Barack Obama en masse after the last two primaries, which are being held tomorrow.

Obama, who is 45 delegates short of the 2,118 majority, is on the doorstep of the nomination. With Montana and South Dakota scheduled to award 31 pledged delegates to Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton, Obama will have his hand on the door handle. Obama is expected to narrowly win both states. Assuming a 19-12 split in his favor tomorrow, that leaves Obama 26 short of the majority. With the seventeen Senators, that leaves him only 9 short. With still undecided superdelegates expected to make a decision after these final two primaries, Obama could be pushed over the top by the beginning of next week.

Stay tuned.


Anonymous said...

Finally, our long, national nightmare is over!!!! (I hope)

Anonymous said...

As all the good old boys crumple under the pressure from the not forget who they are! They can be voted out next go around for ignoring the will of the people, the person who has the majority of votes, who has the popular vote - Senator Clinton. And don't forget about the names of the people on the DNC Rules committee who indeed - made up their own rules as they went along. Clinton was dinged for standing up for the voters of Florida and Michigan. Don't forget that Obama did all he could to not have their votes count. That is not only not democratic - it is un-American. I guess he learned well from Trinity.

Heather said...

I am glad our own party found a lopphole to not count their party supporters; I am voting for Hillary, and if she concedes, you'll have to forgive me, but I will turn to McCain, as this is downright wrong. Our system was not meant to be twisted this way, so that they could choose our President for us....

Anonymous said...

For the people that is upset or just outright mad about the DNC decision on Saturday. Evidently you should not be that upset because you are not a true Dem.
to say that the results of the DNC was not fair. How many rules can can an average person break and get away with it. That is telling our young people you gan break rules as long as you can get away
with.Because You are or you think you PRIVILEGED.

Anonymous said...

So let me get this right, you Clinton supporters will cut off your nose to spite your face. So, say McSame wins the general election vs. Obama, the media will blame it on Clinton supporters, and the Democratic party will be over as we know it. If Clinton runs in 2012, Obama supporters will remember 2008 and promptly take revenge. Amazing, you dems really don't have a clue.

Anonymous said...

To say you will vote for McCain because you didn't get what you wanted. I have to ask why were you voting anyway. Was it the issues
or you were voting to say you were voting. Because any Democrat will be better than a republicans.
Let the Issues be the reason you are voting not the person whom
you just do not like. Both candidates for the democrats are
just about the same and will be
better than a Republican.

Anonymous said...

There are many comments pertaining to the competition about who can talk more trashh about each other's candidate. But I which that the news wires could offer us more insight to make a better analysis of the contest. About the superdelegates, for example, I cant find any news site that can tell me how many delegates each candidate won or lost each day and give me a running daily count. I mean, I know how many pledged candidates in each state each candidate won at their primary and can keep a weekly tally (or sometimes daily when there are back to back primaries). But I can not do this with superdelegates because nobody bothered to publish this information for each day. But, surprisingly, this is the kind of information that will give me insight of the effect of superdelegates on primaries or of primaries on superdelegates or the influence that other very well known delegates' endorsement exert on less known ones. These are valid points of analysis that are kept out of the general public's eye through a lack of more accurate information on the part of the media. Is this done on purpose? Are some journalists keeping this information private on the hope of future book profits? Or is this just something suppressed because it does not sell?

cash advance

Cash Advance Loans