Candidates, voters wary of super delegates in wild Democratic contest

This wild ride called the Democratic primary season has taught us that nothing is certain. To predict is to err.

Still, tempting fate, it seems nearly safe to say that neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton will win enough pledged delegates in remaining primaries to clinch the presidential nomination. Party rules for allocating delegates render it virtually impossible.

If that's so, then superdelegates -- those roughly 800 high-ranking party officials -- will decide the nomination.

Raising this question: Do superdelegates simply put their stamp of approval on the candidate holding more pledged delegates and more popular votes when the final primary is done?

Or, if those margins are razor thin, as they easily could be, may superdelegates legitimately weigh other factors -- such as which candidate they think has the better chance to win in November?

Superdelegate Dick Durbin, Obama's senatorial partner from Illinois and a vocal backer, acknowledges that superdelgates have no rulebook to follow. But he says if one candidate leads in pledged delegates and popular votes after the final primary, then the superdelegates' path is obvious.

"If the elective process has produced a clear winner, whether by five delegates or 100 delegates, then it's extremely difficult to overrule that without undermining the unity of the party," Durbin said. "Many people would say 'it just isn't fair.' "

By contrast, the Clinton camp and some independent observers say superdelegates who look ahead and add up electoral votes in November might reasonably choose Clinton even if Obama enjoys slim leads in pledged delegates and the popular vote.

Leticia Van de Putte, a co-chair of the party's national convention and a Texas state senator, said "A lot of Democrats are wary and worried, because they saw what happened to the popular vote (in 2000). I think some superdelegates are not saying, 'Who would be the better leader?' but 'How can we win?' They'll look at the math and the Electoral College."

Clinton points to her success in big states, richest in electoral votes, as reason for those superdelegates to select her.

In the seven largest states contested to date, Clinton has won primaries in California, Texas, Ohio, New Jersey and her home state of New York. She won Florida, too, which, because of party-imposed penalties, will not count unless the state conducts a new primary. Among those seven, Obama has won only Illinois, his home state.

Primary victories, of course, do not necessarily translate to November victories.

"Recent polls have come out in these battleground states that show Obama does as well as or better than Hillary Clinton against John McCain in the general election," said Illinois superdelegate and Obama backer Tom Hynes. He called any analysis giving Clinton a big-state advantage "just faulty."

Virtually all analysts agree that some big states will not be in play come November. For instance, the Democrats almost certainly will win New York and Illinois no matter who their nominee is. By contrast, they might not win Texas no matter whom they nominate.

That could leave just a handful of big states as pivotal, some experts say. Ohio and Florida would be among them, based on recent elections.

Syndicated columnist Marie Cocco wrote of Ohio last week that "there's no papering over the depth of the problem Obama faced there. He won only five of the state's 88 counties, an inauspicious foundation for a general election campaign."

Other analysts say Obama's documented problems drawing votes from blue-collar workers and Catholics make Clinton more electable in states like Ohio, which determined the outcome of the 2004 race between George Bush and John Kerry.

Still, Obama's backers say that's no reason to nominate Clinton over Obama if he ends the primary season with a lead in pledged delegates.

"This is not a big-state nomination process," said U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., a superdelegate from Chicago backing Obama. "If that were the case, then one would need only to set up a campaign in the big states and ignore the rest."

Jackson said Obama can meet some of his big-state challenges by "ticket-building" -- strategically choosing his running mate.

He added a point largely borne out by primary exit polls -- one that also could help tip the superdelegate scales in Obama's direction as they calculate their party's chances in November.

"Only Barack Obama," Jackson said, "has shown the ability to reach out to both independents and Republicans."