Hillary, the popular vote and super delegates

I guess there are a few things I need to get off my chest.  First I really like Obama.  He represents a breath of fresh air in the electoral process.  Like Gary Hart, George McGovern, Eugene McCarthy and Adlai Stevenson he brings an intellectual openness lacking in most mainstream politicians.  Secondly, I don't like Hillary.  She reminds me too much of Richard Nixon; say anything and do anything to get elected.  In Gore Vidal's production of "The Best Man" from 1964, Hillary is the personification of the ruthless presidential candidate Joe Cantwell (portrayed by Cliff Robertson) to the intellectual moderate Bill Russell (Henry Fonda) who best represents Obama.

However, if the ultimate goal is to prevent John McCain from becoming President and expanding the Neocon/Likudnik Crusade to Iran, Pakistan and God knows where else, there are a few things to consider.  While the winner of the aggregate popular vote in the primaries should not automatically be declared the winner, it still has to be something for super delegates to consider before deciding who they will vote for.  Obama may have the most pledged delegates, but if Hillary has the most popular votes (excluding Florida and Michigan) I don't see how super delegates can be dismissive.  After all, super delegates are not rubber stamps (otherwise what is the point of having them).  Their function is to use their best judgment in determining who has the best chance to win in November.  No Democrat can win in November without securing the "Reagan Democrats" (predominantly white, Catholic and blue-collar), as well as attracting more registered Republicans/Independents than the Republican can attract registered Democrats/Independents.

If Hillary goes to the convention with the most popular votes (excluding Florida and Michigan), and does particularly well with the demographic groups mentioned above, I think there will be tremendous pressure on super delegates to support Hillary even if Obama has more pledged delegates.  The general election is not decided by pledged delegates; it is decided by voters, and if Hillary has more voters in her corner than Obama, super delegates have to consider that.  My guess in that scenario would be for power brokers and super delegates to offer Obama a fait accompli; take second spot on the ticket behind Hillary or sit out the general election.  Assuming super delegates unite behind Hillary and she wins the nomination, chances are whoever she does pick for VP would become the presumptive heir, and Obama may miss his chance to become the heir apparent.

If Obama takes second place on the ticket he would be in a win-win situation.  If Hillary loses he becomes the heir apparent and a virtual shoo-in for the party's nomination in 2012.  If Hillary wins he becomes Vice-President and presumptive heir if Hillary is not re-elected, and if Hillary is re-elected and becomes a lame duck, Obama becomes de facto President and heir apparent in 2016, at which point he'll be in his prime age wise and in terms of stature and experience.

I think all Democrats should be patient and keep their eyes on the prize; defeating John McCain in November.