FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Another day closer to the slow, painful, but inevitable end that seems more and more to be staring Hillary Clinton square in the face. Barack Obama has now drawn almost even with Clinton among the superdelegates.
Three months ago, Clinton led Obama by more than one hundred superdelegates. Now her lead is down to 28. Since March 4th, 17 superdelegates have publicly announced for Obama while Senator Clinton has actually lost one. They include New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar and Wyoming Governor Dave Freudenthal, who had been appointed the state's U-S attorney by Bill Clinton. Plus former President Jimmy Carter - who won't disclose who he's backing, but strongly hints that it's Obama.
Some Clinton supporters are now suggesting that she needs to top Obama in the popular vote in order to have any chance of winning. New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine says he may cast his superdelegate vote for Obama if Clinton doesn't win the popular vote. And Pennsylvania Congressman John Murtha insists Clinton must win Pennsylvania and the popular vote. Polls there show Obama narrowing Clinton's one-time lead of more than 30 points to an average of just 11. Another Clinton superdelegate, Missouri Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, says he would "be stunned" if Obama isn't the next president of the United States.
One Democratic pollster told the Los Angeles Times, Obama is winning over superdelegates because "his arguments are more persuasive." Clinton has a whole team of aides who stay in constant touch with superdelegates in an attempt to keep them from deserting, but it's not working.
Meanwhile, DNC chairman Howard Dean is putting the pressure on the remaining undecided superdelegates – saying he wants them to make up their minds shortly after the voting ends in June.
Here’s my question to you: Should the DNC ask superdelegates to make up their minds early?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Michael from Ohio writes:
Despite Senator Clinton's popularity with elements within the Democratic Party, it is becoming increasingly evident that her high negatives and willingness to be divisive are creating a terrible risk for the Democrats' chances in the autumn. Since the upcoming election is so significant for the future of the country, the superdelegates should do what is best for the party, make their assessment known and conclude the race as soon as practical.
Superdelegates should have made up their minds after Clinton failed to significantly cut into Obama's pledged delegate lead when Ohio and Texas voted. For all the talk of this phantom "popular vote" metric, there is no way the supers can ultimately overturn a 100+ pledged delegate lead without destroying the party. It's true now, it will be true in Denver, and it was true back on March 5th.
Laura from Sammamish, Washington writes:
Jack, The purpose of the superdelegates is to vote their conscience and vote for who they think would be best qualified for president. They have the same right as all Americans to vote for whom they want. The DNC should be working on getting Fla. and Mich. voters included in this election.
Cee from Lawrence, Kansas writes:
Right now Obama is flying high and Hillary is in "vulture mode". If Obama falters, she'll pounce. Most of the remaining uncommitted delegates will allow that for another month or so until the primaries have ended. Then these politicians who want to be on the winning side will speak out and it'll be over except for the formality of the convention.
Suraj from Dearborn, Michigan writes:
No, they should wait until all states complete their primaries. Otherwise it's like a judge or jury making their decision in the middle of the trial! Why is this so hard to understand?
The majority of them already know who they are going to support but don't want to be subjected to the Clinton/Carville wrath that Bill Richardson is going through. Tell them not to be scared, it will be okay.