Oooh, nuance!

I am now counting Craig Crawford as a PUMA, just because he tells the truth about Obama's presumptuous nominee status and how very shaky it is. (Yes, the truth is out there, but so few "journalists" see fit to write about it!)

With the dust settled on the primary season, one thing is clear: Obama is the presumed nominee thanks only to superdelegates. He never did win enough pledged delegates to reach the winning number, falling about 350 votes short. His expected victory stems from beating Clinton among superdelegates 463-257, according to a tally on Real Clear Politics.

All the more reason for Obama to make sure that there is no roll call including Clinton's name on the ballot at the national convention -- which a few die hard fans of the former First Lady are still clamoring for.

This is my only quibble with Crawford's otherwise excellent piece: to call millions of people "a few die hard fans" is award-worthy spin. Otherwise, it's a great point, and I don't think many people realize that Obama's DNC is trying to prevent Hillary from taking her rightful place on the ballot at the Convention. This would be ridiculous and completely against Democratic Party tradition and rules. THIS IS A TIE, FOLKS. I've been saying that since February. If there is a fair fight to break the tie at the Convention, and Obama wins anyway, then that will go a long way towards dispelling the illegitimacy that surrounds Obama's current status as presumptive nominee. Who knows, it might even give PUMAs a reason to vote for him.

I'm sorry, Mr. Crawford; please continue.

Why highlight just how close the Democratic contest really was? And there is certainly no gain for Obama in dwelling on how he had to depend on superdelegates to win the nomination. [emphasis mine]

Why no, Mr. Crawford, there isn't, especially when one remembers that until it was clear that Hillary was going to win the popular vote DESPITE the DNC's shenanigans in Florida and Michigan, Obama and his surrogates were all screaming about how the SuperDelegates should not decide the nomination and the "will of the people" should rule.

Remember this gem, during Obama's peak in February, from Donna Brazile, "uncommitted" superdelegate?

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile — who managed Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign and is herself a superdelegate — says she will quit her position within the Democratic Party if her superdelegate colleagues decide the party's nomination.

[snip]

As Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama continue to run neck-and-neck in amassing the total delegates needed to win the nomination, some have suggested that the party's superdelegates — comprising party activists and high-ranking officials — could make the deciding vote.

But Brazile says the superdelegate vote "should reflect the will of the people."

Many millions of Hillary supporters have breathlessly awaited Brazile's resignation, to no avail. Oh, Donna, Donna, why do you disappoint us so? And as for the "will of the people," well, that meme has quietly disappeared too, considering that many of Obama's most powerful SuperD's would have to don their capes and fly on over to Hillary's side. Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, all of the New York SD's...need I go on?

Doesn't matter, I will anyway. Let's see if I can find anything else from the Obama camp about how the superdelegates should vote as their districts voted. Be right back, or brb, as the kids say on their IM chatty thingies.

Aha! Here's a good one. Looks like Moveon.org, which threw its muscle behind Obama very early in the primaries, used its political power to pressure superdelegates to vote the way their districts voted. This was, again, during Obama's peak in February. The salient paragraph:

MoveOn.org and the Obama camp argue that the elected delegates should vote in line with the will of their constituents. Earlier this week, MoveOn sent a note out to its 3.2 million members asking them to sign a petition to that effect. It's the first time the public has lobbied superdelegates to a convention, says Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia. "The public has never had reason to lobby them before."

Good thing the Obamans can change their "principles" as quickly as chameleons change their colors.

Did I say "the Obamans?" My mistake. I should have said, "some Obama supporters." Because a new group of former Obama supporters has been created. They are mad as hell, and they won't vote for Obama any more. The site got more than 50,000 hits in the first 24 hours of its creation. Welcome, PUMA newbies!

If I were Democratic superdelegates, I'd be paying very, very close attention to PUMA. We are a true grassroots movement filled with internet-savvy, passionate activists from all sides of the political spectrum. And we have the money to help out our candidate when she is feeling "periodically down" because her campaign debt is being used as a blackmailing tool by the DNC.

So, Democratic Party Leaders, put your thinking caps on and find an excuse to nominate the winning candidate in August. In the end, self-interest may do the trick. Or do you really want to be on the Obama train when it crashes in November?