Clinton Produces Co-Signed Support Letter from Former DNC Chairs

Sometimes a superdelegate decision is more than just a superdelegate decision.

In an interesting turn of events today, no new superdelegates were released by either campaign. Obama's campaign "re-introduced" former DNC Chair Paul Kirk today, but it appears that this is not a new superdelegate for Obama.

I was wondering why the pace had just stopped today, after multiple superdelegates were announced in the past few days. I have come upon a theory that explains why my previous post was so off in terms of superdelegate announcements.

My opinion is that the Joe Andrew switch from Clinton to Obama has some juice left in it, and the Obama campaign does not want to shift the attention from this major defection to his side. I also think that by "re-introducing" former DNC Chair Paul Kirk, the Obama campaign was trying to (in one of their favorite words) "amplify" the effect of the Andrew switch and the call for superdelegates to bring this race to an end because every step forward hurts the party and every vote for Clinton is a vote for McCain (to paraphrase the general comments that have emerged).

This theory is given validation by the fact that the Clinton campaign has responded with the following letter signed by the following people:

Kenneth Curtis
Former DNC Chairman (1977-1978)

Charles Manatt
Former DNC Chairman (1981-1985)

The Family of the late Ron Brown
Former DNC Chairman (1989-1993)
Mrs. Alma Brown, Michael Arrington Brown & Tracey Brown James

Debra DeLee
Former DNC Chair (1994-1995)

Don Fowler
Former DNC National Chairman (1995-1997)

Steve Grossman
Former DNC National Chairman (1997-1999)

Governor Edward Rendell
Former DNC General Chairman (1999-2001)

Terence McAuliffe
Former DNC Chairman (2001-2005)


Some quotations from the letter that caught my eye:

"Hillary has run one of the most formidable campaigns in the history of our Party."

Interesting choice of words. If she's formidable, what's Obama? And they use this word twice in the same paragraph.

The selective use of the AP-Ipsos Poll that sparks this quotation: "In a hypothetical general election matchup with McCain, Clinton is winning handily (50%-41%) while Obama is statistically tied with McCain (46%-44%)"


"Both states [Indiana and North Carolina] have sizeable voting blocs that resemble constituencies who supported Hillary by large margins in Pennsylvania, Ohio and other contests."

North Carolina has a 30+% African-American voting bloc.

"Hillary’s campaign is currently operating at full capacity..."

The subtext is that she does not have money problems holding her back

"The record numbers of Americans who are registering and coming out to vote reflect the excitement about our candidates and the strength that our nominee will have behind him or her in the fall."

Is there a way to parse how much of this excitement is due to Clinton or to Obama?

"We encourage you to continue to fully consider Hillary Clinton and the fact that she is qualified and accomplished."

Split infinitive, anyone? [yeah, that was picky]


In a race where superdelegates are unveiled in quantity, it's important sometimes to marinate in the effects of a superdelegate announced that provides a level of quality in the race. Governor Easley from North Carolina is one that the Clinton Campaign has highlighted, and now Former DNC Chair Joe Andrew is another one for the Obama Campaign.

Sometimes it is what is not done that matters. Silence can be golden.

I expect a surge of superdelegates on Monday, to coincide with the add-on delegates announced in Illinois, Maryland, Louisiana and South Carolina which will mimic "momentum" for those not savvy to the differences between add-on delegates chosen on a schedule and superdelegates deciding at key moments.

Obama will pick up at least 5, if not all 7, of these add-on delegates to be announced. And if the two new Guam superdelegates (once Guam's Party Chair and Vice-Chair slots are filled) declare before Tuesday, it could be more.