Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
There is no rule that the winner is the one with the most pledged delegates. It's always been who has recieved the popular vote that swing the superdelegates to them.


That's pretty much grasping at straws though.



Chuck Todd's got an interesting article up on MSNBC this morning. Titled "Can Clinton Win Over Superdelegates?" Todd's write points out some primary-related issues being primarily overlooked. For example, here he is on why the Clinton legacy may dredge up bad memories for the Democrats:

 Quote:
Simply take a look at Bill Clinton's record from '92 to '00 and you’ll understand why they're having a harder time corralling party activists and elected officials to their side.

Remember, when his name was on the ballot ('92 and '96) the Democratic party lost Senate seats both times. Never mind the beating the party took in '94; a walloping often blamed on both Bill and Hillary.
Even in '98, which was, perhaps, the most successful Congressional election of the Clinton era, the party netted zero Senate seats and gained less than a handful of House seats.


Here's Todd on why the media's got Clinton still in the game:

 Quote:
A Clinton always finds a way to survive, so goes the myth.

Bill Clinton has escaped political death more times than any politician in history. And profiles of Hillary Clinton are rarely written without the word "resilient" being featured prominently.


Todd also spends some time explaining both the media bias towards keeping the campaign going and towards going with what history's taught:

 Quote:
Many a reporter believes that someone with the last name of "Clinton" should never be counted out.