Here is how the WaPo described Webb's comments:

Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) said today that superdelegates to the Democratic National Convention shouldn't feel bound to support the presidential candidate who wins the most pledged delegates elected by the voters.

If they didn't want the superdelegates to have independent judgment, they wouldn't have created them," Webb said during an interview on ABC's This Week.

Webb is the only Virginia Democrat in Congress who has not endorsed Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill), who won the state's Feb. 12 primary with 64 percent of the vote.

The DNC rules are specific in not requiring superdelegates to follow the lead of a state's voters.  The superdelegates were created to use their judgement to help solve dilemmas like this one between Clinton and Obama.

As long as Obama keeps surging, he will be the nominee of the Party.  But a group of Democratic chairs who all support Obama and represent barely half of the Democratic voters in Virginia are stretching it when they demand that the superdelegates change their stripes.

The letter was a good publicity stunt, but jawboning superdelegates is not the way to win friends and influence the vote for Obama.

Rocky Lost!!

oops!

Their voters clearly expressed a preference for Clinton.

I believe when all is said and done that Obama would be the nominee, but how about a little consistency?

They are independent operators under the rules.  You don't change the rules in midstream to meet your needs.

Relax, Obama is going to win this.  There is no need for the Obama gang to use strong arm tactics.

The Clintons think that the rules do not apply to them.  If a rule is in the way of the Clintons, isn't it obvious that it must be changed?

We Obama supporters should focus on supporting our candidate as best we can and let Clinton supporters worry about their candidate.

Pa has been shifting.  If you want to help Obama, write positive stuff ABOUT OBAMA or help the campaign directly.   Do anything, but if you support Barack Obama, stop talking about Hillary Clinton.

Dear Peter and Scott,

I received your thoughtful letter by email on Saturday afternoon and came home this evening to write a response.

I was surprised that I was not given the courtesy to respond to you before it was posted sometime today on Raising Kaine.

Rest assured that I take my responsibility as an automatic delegate very seriously and it is something that I think about every day.   Once it became apparent that we were going to be in this nomination period for a much longer time than anticipated (sometime after the NH primary) I did some extensive research on the role of "superdelegates", how they came to be in existence and what is expected of them.

Senator Jim Webb is correct when he said on This Week with George Stephanopolus yesterday that if the national party "didn't want superdelegates to have independent judgment they wouldn't have created them".  That is why they were created by the Hunt Commission (headed by former Governor Jim Hunt of NC) in 1982 and why they still exist today.  As I see my role, it is to support the candidate who I believe, using my best judgment, will make the strongest commander in chief and get our economy at home back on track.  In my opinion, that is Senator Hillary Clinton.

There is nothing - anywhere - that remotely indicates that the superdelegate should follow the will of the democratic voters of that state.  However, if that is your premise, then please encourage Congressman Rick Boucher (whose 9th Congressional District went overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton) to switch his support from Obama to Clinton.  And please encourage Senators Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Governors DuVal Patrick, Bill Richardson, Janet Napalitano..... the list goes on ..... to do the same.

With all due respect, I have done my national Democratic math as well. To date, more than 27 million Americans have cast a ballot for Senators Clinton and Obama.

Of that 27 million, less than 1% separate the two Democrats in the 2008 campaign for the White House.  (if the roles were reversed and Senator Obama was behind by less than 1%, you would not expect the race to be over).

By my count, Senator Obama leads with 130 delegates, but 887 delegates still remain to be committed to any candidate.

What is wrong with making sure that states like Pennsylvania, West Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana and others to have a chance to say who they want for their nominee.

And making sure that Florida and Michigan are resolved fairly?  Lord only knows we don't need to disenfranchise any more Florida voters!

I believe this race is good for our Party; at least for right now.   States that have never participated before are getting a chance to have their say and we are getting to know who our voters are.  This is a good roadmap for victory not only for this year - but to build the Party in the years to come.  If you don't believe me, ask Governor Kaine how important he felt the 2004 Presidential Primary was to his gubernatorial victory in 2005.

I do hear your concerns about the race going into August.  I do believe it will be and should be decided by then.  But I feel just as strongly that the rest of the states need to vote and Florida and Michigan need to be resolved fairly - and then focus turns to the superdelegates.  I hope that we as a group and individually will be able to bring this nomination process to a close and begin the process of uniting behind our nominee.  While we may now differ on who that nominee should be, I will tell you that I will be the first Virginia Democrat to sign up for Obama for President if he is the nominee.

I will continue to listen to Virginians and continue to closely follow this historical competitive race.

Best,

Susan

I  Think that it looks like this.
To be an Obama delegate at the state level, you need to  campaign for it.
To be a hillary delegate, you just need to be the last person out of the room.

Hillary is in worse shape than you might think.

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is catching up with New York Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary and now trails 50 - 44 percent among likely primary voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

     This compares to a 50 - 41 percent Sen. Clinton lead in an April 2 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN uh-pe-ack) University.

     In this latest survey, one of the biggest shifts is among women who went from 54 - 37 percent for Clinton April 2 to 54 - 41 percent for her today.  A look at other groups shows:

   * White voters for Clinton 56 - 38 percent, down from 59 - 34 percent last week.
   * Black voters back Obama 75 - 17 percent, compared to 73 - 11 percent.
   * Men are for Obama 48 - 44 percent, compared to a 46 - 46 percent tie last week.
   * Voters under 45 go with Obama 55 - 40, while older voters back Clinton 55 - 38 percent.

     "With two weeks to go, Sen. Barack Obama is knocking on the door of a major political upset in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary.  Obama is not only building on his own constituencies, but is taking away voters in Sen. Hillary Clinton's strongest areas - whites including white women, voters in the key swing Philadelphia suburbs and those who say the economy is the most important issue in the campaign," said Clay F. Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.  

     "The Pennsylvania primary is like a game of horseshoes: Sen. Obama needs only to come close to be considered the winner - taking away, perhaps fatally, Sen. Clinton's argument she is the candidate best able to defeat Sen. John McCain in critical swing states like Pennsylvania.

http://www.surveyusa.com/clien...

PA Women, Whites, Stand by Hillary, Turn Back The Clock On Obama:

In a Democratic Primary in Pennsylvania today, 04/08/08, two weeks to the vote, Hillary Clinton defeats Barack Obama 56% to 38%, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted exclusively for WCAU-TV Philadelphia, KDKA-TV Pittsburgh, WHP-TV Harrisburg, and WNEP-TV Wilkes-Barre. The results are almost identical to a SurveyUSA poll released one month ago. Then, Clinton led by 19. Today, 18. In between, however, in a SurveyUSA tracking poll released last week, Obama had closed to within 12 points. What happened in the past 7 days? 1st: Some of the men who flirted with Obama at the end of March have returned to Clinton. Other men have moved to the sidelines. Last week, Obama led by 7 among men. Men were 46% of likely voters. Today, Clinton leads among men. Men are 42% of likely voters. 2nd: Obama lost ground among voters age 35 to 49. A week ago, he had caught Clinton in this age group. Today, he's down 18. By contrast, there is no movement among voters age 50+. Clinton's lead among voters 50+ is stable across all 3 tracking polls. 3rd: In Southeast PA, which includes Philadelphia and which makes up 42% of likely Democratic voters, Clinton had a good week, Obama a bad week. Clinton is above 50% for the first time and Obama is now down by 9 in a region he must win to carry the state. In Southwest PA, which includes Pittsburgh, Clinton polls at 60% for the first time, 25 points atop Obama. Only in West Central PA, which includes Johnstown, has there been consistent movement toward Obama. 4th: Among moderates, Obama lost key ground while Clinton gained ground. Clinton now leads by 24 points, 60% to 36%. Obama also lost ground among Liberals. And while Obama's support fell among Conservatives, so did Clinton's. 5th: Interviewing for SurveyUSA's 04/01/08 release, one week ago, occurred in the middle of Obama's 6-day bus tour through Pennsylvania, which began on 03/28/08. Obama may have benefited a week ago from the media spotlight. Summary: The complete absence of movement among whites and among women is striking. Among white voters, Clinton polled at 61% in all 3 tracking polls. Among women, Clinton was at 62% a month ago, 62% last week, and 61% today. These two unwavering core constituencies help make Clinton so formidable in the Keystone state.

http://www.surveyusa.com/clien...