Sink, Korge disagree with Pelosi

CFO Alex Sink - who hopes to be tapped as a unpledged delegate at the convention - has been pretty quiet on this FL Democratic delegate mess. So Buzz asked whether she thinks uncommited superdelegates ultimately have an obligation to back whoever is leading in pledged delegates and popular votes. Nope. "The rules are the rules,'' said Sink, who is officially neutral though husband Bill McBride is backing Clinton.

Meanwhile, TPM has Chris Korge of Miami among 20 top Clinton fundraisers chastising Speaker Nancy Pelosi for suggesting the supers must support the pledged delegate leader.

Sink said she is confident Florida will get seated, that the Jan. 29 vote should be taken into account, and that she would be comfortable with Florida Democrats losing half their delegates. She doesn't see the need to take a central role in trying to fix the mess: "There are a lot of cooks in the kitchen and I don't think one more cook is going to necessarily add anything."

Comments

Enjoy the long death gasps of the Hillary Clinton campaign.

The Clinton lies mount by the day.

"Evasive maneuvers in Bosnia under sniper fire" was "misspoken"

"Opposition" to NAFTA when her records show no less than 5 startegy sessions on how to get Congress to support it.

"Pledging" not to participate in Florida's primary, then demanding it counts.

Is there no end to the Clinton hypocrisy and lies? Who seriously wants that scum back in the White House?

Go back and reread the Starr Report. Bill may not have done anything illegal, but he certainly showed he is a pathological liar, just like his old lady.

[UF Student]

I can at least respect Sink for saying what is right. DNC members and Obama supporters say that Florida and Michigan can't count because it would go against the rules. But telling the super delegates they have to vote for the delegate leader is breaking the rules too! It's amazing what rules can be ignored when it's not convenient for your candidate.

Speaking of liars, have you read McCain's foreign policy positions - ha ha ha laughing at you neocons, this guy's just stringing you along while running away as fast as he can - he's a BINO - Bushite In Name Only. We're going to have a DEM in the White House regardless of which of the 3 wins.

UF Student

When did Pelosi ever say they "have" to vote for the front-runner. A speculative implication is much different than an order or obligation.

She sets no policy as far as the rules concerning superdelegates go. get over yourself!

[Herb]

Pelosi and other Obama suragates are desparately trying to avoid defeats in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucy, West Virginia . . .

The Obama campaign doesn't want the voters to decide . . .

Though his plan to ignore Florida is starting to fall apart.

[UF Student]

Oh sorry 4:24 for not using the exact right language. It's Pelosi's implication that it is the job of a superdelegate to vote for the delegate leader. Which it is not. This line of thinking isn't just held by Pelosi, it's held by virtually every Obama supporter. And did you tell me to "get over myself"? I'm not really sure what that means, but let me know when you get out of middle school

Herb,

You have never answered the question:

Why did Hillary sign the pledge on 9/1/2007?

UF Student -

Pelosi is entitled to her opinion, as are you, and me. But you stated at 4:21 that "telling the super delegates they have to vote for the delegate leader is breaking the rules too"

Alas, while some might think that, no one with appropriate authority has yet to state that that scenario MUST happen, only that they think it should.

Please, spare us your overtly biased opinion and instead deal with fact.

By virtue of your handle and at your inability to form a logical, cogent argument, it appears you might still be in middle school yourself.

[UF Student]

I never meant to mean that Pelosi has the power to tell Superdelegates what they MUST do, just that she is throwing her weight behind the idea that Superdelegates SHOULD vote for the delegate leader, which is wrong. It's a slight error in tongue on my part, nothing that should have gotten you so excited as it did. Biased? How is that? I'm a McCain supporter.

"It's a slight error in tongue on my part, nothing that should have gotten you so excited as it did."

Isn't that what Hillary said yesterday

=)

I am glad we agree on McCain. My apologies for assuming you were a Clinton supporter. Though beating Clinton might seem easier than Obama, my own personal distaste for Hillary fuels my agenda until that nominaiton is settled - then, we can save the full cabal to destroy Obama this fall.

I don't think beating him is as hard as the GOP might think.

Here's the whole letter. simply breathtaking:

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the US House of Representatives

Office of the Speaker

H-232, US Capitol

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Madame Speaker,

As Democrats, we have been heartened by the overwhelming response that our fellow Democrats have shown for our party’s candidates during this primary season. Each caucus and each primary has seen a record turnout of voters. But this dynamic primary season is not at an end. Several states and millions of Democratic voters have not yet had a chance to cast their votes.

We respect those voters and believe that they, like the voters in the states that have already participated, have a right to be heard. None of us should make declarative statements that diminish the importance of their voices and their votes. We are writing to say we believe your remarks on ABC News This Week on March 16th did just that.

During your appearance, you suggested super-delegates have an obligation to support the candidate who leads in the pledged delegate count as of June 3rd , whether that lead be by 500 delegates or 2. This is an untenable position that runs counter to the party’s intent in establishing super-delegates in 1984 as well as your own comments recorded in The Hill ten days earlier:

"I believe super-delegates have to use their own judgment and there will be many equities that they have to weigh when they make the decision. Their own belief and who they think will be the best president, who they think can win, how their own region voted, and their own responsibility.’”

Super-delegates, like all delegates, have an obligation to make an informed, individual decision about whom to support and who would be the party’s strongest nominee. Both campaigns agree that at the end of the primary contests neither will have enough pledged delegates to secure the nomination. In that situation, super-delegates must look to not one criterion but to the full panoply of factors that will help them assess who will be the party’s strongest nominee in the general election.

We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August. We appreciate your activities in support of the Democratic Party and your leadership role in the Party and hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters.

Sincerely,

Marc Aronchick

Clarence Avant

Susie Tompkins Buell

Sim Farar

Robert L. Johnson

Chris Korge

Marc and Cathy Lasry

Hassan Nemazee

Alan and Susan Patricof

JB Pritzker

Amy Rao

Lynn de Rothschild

Haim Saban

Bernard Schwartz

Stanley S. Shuman

Jay Snyder

Maureen White and Steven Rattner

[Gene Smith]

This is what is known colloquially as "political arm twisting" by the donor class group of Clinton supporters. Because what Speaker Pelosi has suggested is not advantageous to their candidate (that is, Hillary is NOT going to gain the lead in pledged delegates), they are clearly threatening to withhold financial support for Congressional candidates.

I hope the Speaker tells them to take their money and stick it where the sun don't shine.

Hey Gene remind us again whose a*ss gets kicked in November. Seems like the Democrat party is doing a great impersonation of a rat eating his own haunches.

[Flagophile]

The latest poll shows that Obama has survived the Rev. Wright fiasco.

The greatest impact was among Republican voters who weren't going to vote for him anyways.

He still beats McCain although they are within the margin of error.

His ability to weather this storm, much to the chagrin of Hillary and McCain, will strengthen his position with superdelegates.

It must also be terrifying for Republicans that Obama, despite a terrible week, is still tied with, if not ahead of, McCain who has received nothing but favorable media attention in the past couple of weeks.

It certainly sucks for the others that you can give $22,000 to a guy running your chosen church who spews that the Klan runs the country and those Italians "with their garlic noses... killed Jesus on the cross,"--- and you come out smelling like a rose.

[Shelly]

Korge raises money for a living - that's how he made his fortune - raising funds for politicians who he then can "call in the favor" later for another client - aka lobbyist. Is he working for you and I? heck no, he's working for his corporate buddies aka Clinton and the DLC - he, nor Clintons, care little about you and I - it's all about lining their own pockets and gaining favors to call in later.

disgusting, true dino's.

OBAMA RAMA and the Hillarites are upset and mad as heck.

Oh Boy. Look out kids that kooky lady is going to lose it.

OBAMA is as cool as the other side of the pillow and you know this.

Play on!