Letters to the Editor
-
What's wrong with this strategy?
We've got two incredibly popular candidates, each of whom draws support from just about half of Democratic lawmakers and voters. Neither one will win without superdelegate support, and there's a real concern that any overt attempt to influence the race before it's run will make it look like party insiders rigged the primary (at least to the losing side). Many of the superdelegates themselves are torn between the candidates, and some are probably hoping for some sort of bolt from the blue to make their decision easier, like a huge stumble or scandal that disqualifies someone, or a game-changing victory that proves that one of the candidates is clearly the superior choice. It's an incredibly sensitive political issue, and it needs to be resolved in a way that doesn't rip the party in half.
So what's wrong with exerting some gentle pressure now, and ramping it up once the primaries have come to an end? I, for one, would rather that Dean, Pelosi, and Reid keep their distance for the next 5-6 weeks and remain as impartial as possible, rather than have them stir up bitterness in the party by strongarming superdelegates who really, really don't want to decide right now.
You can make the argument that an extended primary risks permanent damage to both of the candidates, but Obama needs the seasoning of a tough primary fight. And as long as McCain can't do any better than poll even with them when they're not even focusing on him, I think we can afford to let things play out for a little while longer.