North Carolina's superdelegates

Congressmen David Price of the 4th District and Mel Watt of the 12th District, both former John Edwards backers, declared their support for Obama.

Price said Obama is the man to turn North Carolina blue this year. The Tar Heel State typically votes Republican overall in Presidential elections.

“I believe he’s a leader with the kind of change I want to see,” Price said. “Obama is in the strongest position to bring a new day in diplomacy.”

Congressman Watt said there is only one candidate that has captured the spirit of change and inclusiveness that is "uniquely democratic."

The Democrats say the Presidential race will be closely contested in North Carolina, a central battleground according to Obama’s national campaign manager David Plouffe.

In a press release, Obama said he was pleased to have their support.

"Congressmen Price and Watt are both among the American people's finest representatives. Their leadership is proof that with clear and common purpose, there is no challenge too great for our nation to solve," Obama said. "I look forward to working with them both to ensure America's promise for all Americans and build a better future for North Carolina and our country."

List of NC Superdelegates
Joyce Brayboy. Communications consultant who works in Washington, D.C. Committed to Obama.
Susan Burgess. Charlotte city council member and chair of Democratic Municipal Officials organization. Committed to Clinton.
Jeannette Council. Member of Cumberland County board of commissioners in Fayetteville.
Jerry Meek. Chairman of North Carolina Democratic Party. Uncommitted.
Dannie Montgomery. Party activist in Lilesville, N.C. Committed to Obama.
Muriel K. Offerman. Former North Carolina revenue secretary and current state party treasurer. Uncommitted.
David Parker. Lawyer in Statesville.
Carol W. Peterson. Buncombe County Commissioner in Asheville. Uncommitted.
Everett Ward. Former executive director of North Carolina Democratic Party. Committed to Obama.
Michael F. Easley. Governor of North Carolina. Uncommitted.
Rep. G.K. Butterfield. Obama.
Rep. Bob Etheridge. Uncommitted.
Rep. Mike McIntyre.
Rep. Brad Miller. Uncommitted.
Rep. David Price. Obama.
Rep. Heath Shuler. Uncommitted.
Rep. Melvin Watt. Obama.

________________________
Submited by : Libros Gratis

Comment deleted for profanity.

— RTB 

The superdelegates are to be commended for carrying out their responsibilities conscientiously under occasionally stressful circumstances and often without clear logic governing their choices one way or the other.

The Democratic Party has evolved so many special rules and conditions that it often winds up having a party nominating contest which is not even of the same political or constitutional category or character as the general election. So in the fall, the Democratic Party is often proceeding "without a trial run" whereas the Republicans head into the general election with at least some indications of what can constitute a statewide electoral college victory.

In future nominating contests, constitution-minded Democrats ought to challenge the right of the Democratic National Committee to penalize states for seeking to determine the times, places and manners of choosing members of Congress, which is precisely what Article I, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution empowers the states to do.

In the general election, for the most part, the Democratic Party cannot go chipping off a few electoral votes here and there by making a good showing in a state but instead will have to win a statewide majority in each state in order to receive that state's electoral votes.

So the Democratic Party seems to have evolved a constitutional outlook which says: we'll do whatever the heck we want in our nominating process and then in the general election, we'll agree to observe the U.S. and state constitutions. Thus you wind up with candidates who are able to receive majority popular votes in their campaigns who nonetheless are unable to bring home victories in primary or general elections (HIllary Clinton, 2008, Al Gore, 2000).

You start a general election with a campaign organization which is 0-1 in almost all of the major industrial states just so folks in Iowa and New Hampshire will not take offense at some other state holding an early primary election.

It's a heckuva way to run a political party. It keeps all the competing interest groups happy for most of the year, then in November it hands victory over to the Republicans except when the Democratic presidential nominee demonstrates exceptional popularity and adaptability.

It's like an auto race or a horse race when your team agrees to start the final race four or five lengths back. It's tough enough to win a competitive race when you start out even-steven. But as long as the Democratic Party wants to maintain a separate track for its own trial heats, then in presidential contests it will lose more often than it wins in general elections.

And if the Democrats in Congress, who won a majority in both houses in the 2006 elections, fail to act on their own initiative on an entire array of important issues facing the country, then the Republican presidential campaign may wind up running effectively against an obstructionist Democratic Congress for the rest of 2008 just as Democratic President Harry Truman successfully ran against the "Do-Nothing" Republican Congress in 1948.

David McKnight

Who knows what goes into the decision of a superdelegate? My mind, as a lowly voter, is make up. Either Hillary Clinton or John McCain. After suffering through the Carter years, I'd rather have anyone (short of W that is) than a beginner. Obama might be ok after a few years of experience, rather than too few, but I won't take a chance on him now. And this thinking is overwhelming in the Clinton camp. Anyone that thinks buzz words like Party Unity will cut it is delusional. Maybe in ordinary election circumstances. These are extrordinary times requiring specific experienced action, not generalized calls for change. Should John McCain win election over Barak Obama, the Democrat Leadership has to take the credit.

where are the Republican Super Delegates...why do we never hear about them?
anyone know?

Delusion and Illusion you can believe in...he is an empty suit...not much there...pitiful

Greetings, Fellow North Carolina!

My name is Michelle, a White forty year old woman who for the first time, EXCITED about a candidate, his name is "BARACK OBAMA".

Super Delegates, I hope you see that "Barack Obama" is the only viable Presidential Candidate.

Barack Obama has brought younger Americans and new Democrats who are voting for the first time. This new influx of enthusiasm is because of "BARACK OBAMA".

Change we can believe in.

BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!

dahedgehog, that article is about earmarks (like the one Obama gave his wife's hospital after they gave her a huge raise), and it misrepresents the truth by saying that companies gave Clinton's campaign money. Companies can not give money directly, only individuals can give money,and they are limited to $2300 each per year. A company PAC which collects contributions from individuals can also give money, but is again limited to $5000 a year or campaign. What Obama has done is use bundlers who are not subject to the PAC limitations, and they have collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from individuals who head various industries.

I was talking about the HOPE PAC that Obama controls. He has taken corporate big wigs' money for this PAC and has been doling it out to those who endorse him and help him, which is far different from taking money from corporate sources via PACs (like Clinton) and using it in your own campaign or earmarks that create jobs for your district.

To my knowledge, no one has doled out cash to endorsers from a PAC the way Obama has, but I'd be happy to look at a website that says otherwise if you point me to it. And no one has used their own PAC to fund their campaign organization and train their workers because that would be illegal. Obama gets away with it because he said at the time that he had no intent to run for a national office, even though he was already beginning his campaign.

You are correct thatI had not read that opinion piece, and it apparently has not yet been published since it has a pub date of May 1, 2008.

For info on campaign finance I prefer a more neutral source, although it has not been updated to reflect all the additional money Obama and Clinton and McCain have taken in.

To read about how Obama is using his Hope PAC, including the way he lied to use it when he set up his campaign organization and trained his workers, go to

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama/Campaign_Financing

and click on the links to the HOPE PAC.

There is a reason why Bill Clinton is mad at the media. The only time he gets a coverage is when he makes a mistake or says something controversial. The media doesn't report all the adulation he gets on the campaign trail from people who still love the former president because they associate him with the good economy and plentiful jobs of the 1990s.

UNChockeygirl, you've obviously still failed to read this article. Hillary (and McCain) does the same thing:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/20306341/the_queen_of_pork

Have those that have declared their support for Obama gotten money from Obama's Hope PAC? He's been using it that way, but I couldn't find an update on it to see if he had used it to give NC democrats money too.

See http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama%27s_contributions_to_campaign_endorsers

Funny that one of those supporting Obama is a lobbyist since Obama claims he doesn't want lobbyists' support.

Masters of sleaze, so to speak.

I hope Hillary's web "volunteers" receive well paying positions on the McCain campaign after Obama wins the nomination. Their credentials are stellar!

Can we do something about people who do nothing but post chain emails here?

Grandpa's at the keyboard again...

re:FF1304

There are entirely too many negatives pertaining to Barack Obama.
Please support Senator Clinton so the Democrats can win this election.

There are many Clinton supportres will NOT support Obama because of the following:

Pastor Wrights unAmerican antiSemetic comments. Obama has continued to support Wright regardless of his hateful remarks.

Discrepancies about his upbringing pertaining to his father's Muslim religion. Obama says he is not a Muslim, but has not told Americans that his father is a Muslim

Past relationships with Anton Rezko in Chicago who is now on trial in Chicago. Obama denied knowing him more than a few hours. Chicago Times and ABC news says there will be a "cesspool of lies" coming forward.

United Trinity Church of Christ in Chicago and it's support for Farrakhan
a Nation of Islam leader

Farrakhan has been in Trumpet Magazine's Cover and has had a recent "Savior's Day" speech supporting Obama with over 20,000 supporters. Farrakhan is a dangerous man with anti Semetic beliefs.

Willam Ayer's friendship with Senator Obama, a radical terrorist seen on Fox news.

Racial divide...Why are more than 90 percent of African Americans supporting Obama. This in itself is very racial and is viewed like a movement or cult.

Please review all before deciding on supporting one over the other.
Support the only candidate that we will truly be proud of Senator Clinton

I taught within the public schools of North Carolina for 34 years. I have never heard a potential President nor a President in office except Presidential candidate Senator Obama say that "teachers are coming out of their pockets" to help supplement the needs of the students in the classrooms. During the years that I taught middle school, I used at least $150.00 to $200.00 every month to help and encourage the students within my classes. I never complained that taxpayers should bear more of the burden for money needed in any school for the students(more taxes). Thousands of teachers across the state of North Carolina are using their personal money to help the children within their classes. If Senator Obama can focus upon that small detail, then I know that he will help us with the war in Iraq, our economy, health care, and whatever else is needed to continue to make us proud of this country.

The citizens of this state cannot afford this war and the lost of our men and women physically and mentally because of a violent war brought on by false information. The citizens of this state cannot afford to have the present President to continue a pattern of using this country through false pretenses only to have countries around the world to hate the United States. We are continuing to spend more and more money on the war with no return except more and more despair. We lost enough lives in World War 1 and World War 11. Then we continued to lose more lives during such wars as the Korean War, Vietnam War, and Desert Storm. Many of the veterans from this war and the wars in the past bravely risked their lives and have never received any help to make a readjustment into the life of this country. Hating citizens and leaders who want a better state and country through a more committed leader merely places this state in jeopardy for needed jobs and education and more "wars". I remember how Terry Sanford tried to make a better state for us all through education. If we continue to call one another names and/or make fun of those people who want a better state and country "today and tomorrow", then we will not help the children or any citizen of this state or country. If teachers can believe in every child no matter what obstacles they encounter and give personal money every month with no expectation of repayment, then I am sure that every adult in this state can get the best leader to help us make a better state and country. Senator Obama is that leader for me. He has inspired so many people to want to work more to make this country better.

/> watch this video and vote for patriotic hillary. spread the word.. thank you

She's an at-large delegate appointed by Howard Dean.

— RTB 

YES, but again, its NC democrackkks that are doing the EVIL, so thats OK with them! ANYTHING to control POWER and CORRUPTION in NC!!!

Super delegates. Further CORRUPTION from the EVIL party of SLAVERY!

Where did this NONSENSE evolve from? Oh yeah, the need for total DISregard for the electoral process, but its ok, cause its the democrackkks...Democrackkks make me PUKE! STRIVE to be SMARTER than a democrackkk!

No offense to Ms Brayboy, who has done a lot for this state and the Democratic party, but shouldn't delegates from North Carolina have to have lived in North Carolina sometime in the last, oh... say, 15 years?

No. You are talking about apples and oranges.
Voting in a primary and voting at a political party convention are two separate and distinct things.
Being active in the Democratic or Repblican Party does not affect your right to vote in a party primary or general election.

If a person votes in the primary and then votes as a Superdelegate, isn't that person voting twice?