A Civil War?

No, not in Iraq. I'm talking about the fight between Hillary and Obama supporters and how the superdelegates should vote.

On one side we have Obama supporters who say that the superdelegates should be powerless. Their only function is to ratify the candidate who is ahead in committed delegates and/or votes. Recently House Speaker Nancy Pelosi joined this camp. In addition to this logic, Obama's supporters are passionate and are promising a level of violence worse than Chicago in 1968 if their man isn't on the ballot.

On the other side are the Hillary supporters. They point out that she has done better in large states which Democrats have to win. Many of Obama's wins have been in states that almost always go Republican. They point out that the whole point of having superdelegates is to choose the most electable candidate when no single candidate gets a majority of committed delegates. She was recently joined by a group of major donors who suggested that they would withhold cash from the congressional race if Pelosi continues to tell the superdelegates how to vote.

Then there are polls showing that a significant percentage of each candidate's supporters will vote for McCain if their candidate doesn't lead the ticket.

I'm glad I'm not a superdelegate. The pressure on them has to be fierce and half of the party is going to hate them no matter how they vote.

Some other considerations:

News reports make it seem like Obama has a huge lead over Hillary in committed delegates. It is around 150 which is only a 6% difference.

Obama may be damaged goods. First, he can't shake Reverend Wright quotes. Then there is the matter of equating Wright and the grandmother who raised him. He compounded this by excusing her as a "typical white person" who has racism "breed into them in this country." This seems to disqualify him as the first post-racial candidate. I'm not sure that the country is ready for a candidate who stereotypes whites as racists. The controversy hasn't hurt him much so far. Most of the country hasn't heard these quotes - yet.

Democrats in Michigan and Florida are upset that their votes were disqualified. The whole idea that only a handful of select states can vote before Super Tuesday is annoying to the rest of the country. The Republicans had a good compromise - let the states vote early but penalize them by reducing their delegates in half. The Democrats did not compromise leaving millions of Democrats in swing states upset with the party. Rumor is that the Obama campaign kept them from having a do-over election. Regardless, it is clear that many Democrats wanted to avoid a do-over in order to help Obama. The Democrats are certain to lose a lot of votes in these states. If the election hinges on Florida and McCain wins then the party can blame Howard Dean.

A lot more Hillary supporters say that they will vote for McCain than Obama supporters if the other candidate is on the ballot. I'd like to know why. Are they turned off by the cult of personality? Did they hear about the Reverend Wright? Are they reluctant to vote for a black man (I know, Democrats are supposed to be above that sort of thing but let's get real).

In the meantime, Democrats are sharpening their knives for McCain. Their main attacks are going to be:

A third term for the Bush/McCain administration. Obama loves this line. The Democrats will blame everything they can on Bush then insist that there is no difference between Bush and McCain. Both Obama and Hillary are pushing for more government scrutiny into everything and attacking Bush/McCain for not already doing the same thing.

He is for 100 years of war. This is a gross misrepresentation of what he said. He said that he was in favor of 100 years of occupation as long as the troops were safe and compared it to Japan and Germany.

He is ignorant of economics. Mitt Romney, a successful businessman, could use this line. Two ivy-league lawyers are going to have trouble backing it up.

He is not a moderate maverick, he is an ultra conservative flip-flopper. The feeling is that it worked on Kerry so it will work on McCain. The Bush tax cuts are being mentioned. McCain voted against them but would continue them. What is not mentioned is that he was against them because he wanted accompanying budget cuts to pay for them. He is against eliminating the cuts because, after this amount of time it amounts to a tax hike which he is against. As for painting McCain as a conservative, that will be tough when Rush and Ann Coulter are saying that he is too moderate.

In the meantime, McCain has the luxury of being able to travel around the world and look presidential while Obama and Hillary are stuck talking about what relationship they would have with a minister.