March 10th, 2008
08:27 AM ET
6 years ago

Clinton notes pledged delegates aren't bound to a candidate

Clinton noted Sunday pledged delegates can still vote for whomever they choose.
Clinton noted Sunday pledged delegates can still vote for whomever they choose.

(CNN) - In a new interview, Hillary Clinton again seems to raise the prospect that "pledged" delegates – those awarded based on election results – might still be considered up for grabs..

"There are elected delegates, caucus delegates and superdelegates, all for different reasons, and they're all equal in their ability to cast their vote for whomever they choose," she told Newsweek in an interview published Sunday. "Even elected and caucus delegates are not required to stay with whomever they are pledged to."

After a similar reference earlier this year drew sharp criticism from Obama supporters, the Clinton campaign said that they had not been planning to try to actively convince the Illinois senator's pledged delegates to switch sides, and would not do so in the future.

Barack Obama leads Clinton among all Democratic delegates, 1,527 to 1,428, in the latest CNN count. Among pledged delegates, Obama leads Clinton 1,328 to 1,190.

–CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand

soundoff (387 Responses)
  1. Bruce, Harpers Ferry, WV

    Being a Republican, I am enjoying this on soooooo many levels.

    March 10, 2008 11:22 am at 11:22 am |
  2. Mondo, NY

    Sad truly. I always said that even if Obama did not win I would support Hillary. But I am finding it harder and harder to think about that. The more she talks the more I turn away. She should be campaigning for the people not for the delegates!

    March 10, 2008 11:22 am at 11:22 am |
  3. Independent

    She is a political monster.

    March 10, 2008 11:23 am at 11:23 am |
  4. Aaron

    question:
    Is there a way we could all stop phrasing the FL/MI situation as "their votes don't count". The fact of the matter is each of the states leaders knowingly chose to have their votes count in this way. there is a big difference. the people of MI and FL would not feel so "disenfranchised" if their votes would have psychologically altered the race as they planned and a nominee was picked as a result.

    March 10, 2008 11:23 am at 11:23 am |
  5. DP

    She has lost her mind.

    March 10, 2008 11:26 am at 11:26 am |
  6. MyMy

    For all of those that insist that the superdelegates must respect the wishes of the public and the popular vote, my question is how do you propose that be done?

    If you wish for the SD to respect the wishes of the electorate, it is very reasonable to expect them to respect the wishes of their specific electorate; i.e the South Carolina SDs should endorse Senator Obama. Taking this approach, Senator Clinton gets the bulk of the SDs as she has won the states that have the most SD.

    Proportional representation at a state level or at a national level don't appear to make sense as this approach would negate the need for SDs all together. The DNC, when they created the role of the SD, definitely did not create the role with the intent of the role having no purpose.

    While the level of vitriolic rhetoric is extremely high surrounding this issue, it is important that people take a step back and look at the actual intent in having super delegates. We may not be happy with the results but we should be willing to look at this with logic rather than emotion.

    March 10, 2008 11:28 am at 11:28 am |
  7. Ivan, Chicago, Illinois

    WHAT'S THE NEWS WORTHINESS OF A STORY ABOUT SOMEONE WHO DID A COMMERCIAL AND SUPPORTS ANOTHER CANDIDATE. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE KNOW THAT COMMERCIALS ARE DONE FOR MONEY NOT BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE IN THE PERSON OR PRODUCT, UNLESS THEY SAY THEY PERSONALLY ENDORSE THE PRODUCT OR PERSON.
    SO PLEASE BE UPFRONT WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND TELL THEM THAT YOU SUPPORT OBAMA.

    March 10, 2008 11:28 am at 11:28 am |
  8. rhonimus

    Wow! just when you thought you've heard it all!

    March 10, 2008 11:30 am at 11:30 am |
  9. Walt

    Pathetic; so why do we have the Primaries then Mrs. Clinton? Only to have you say at the end of the day; Pledged Delegates and the will of the People do not count since the Del. can do what they want at the Convention: Hope this whole thing will be settled in April, then the Dem. can concentrate on defeating McCain in Nov. Obama is the true Statesman.

    March 10, 2008 11:30 am at 11:30 am |
  10. Michael Guinn Ventura, CA

    This woman is amazing! People with OR without a college degree don't need a second look to see what is going on here. Wake up Democrats! She will do or say anything to "win"!
    The Clinton talking heads that get on these blogs and spew her fear and hate message need to sit back, think about this last article, and join the Movement for real CHANGE. It's not too late. We are supposed to be Democrats! This latest is Republican tactics RAW!
    Enough Hillary- Go Away!

    March 10, 2008 12:38 pm at 12:38 pm |
  11. greg

    Hillary should be consistent in her position on the rules. On one hand, she wants the Florida and Michigan delegates seated, clearly a departure from the rules the Democrat party laid out. She doesn't want to disenfranchise these voters – a noble position.

    On the other hand, she wants to go after the Super delegates to get them to push her over the top, even though she won't win the popular vote nor the pledged delegates. The rules of the party state that the Super delegates can vote any way they want. However, wouldn't this be disenfranchising the voters and delegates in all of the primary states?

    March 10, 2008 12:43 pm at 12:43 pm |
  12. Frank in Missouri

    Sure, the entire concept of 'Democracy' does not matter to Clinton as long as she get nominated and elected to be president.

    Imagine Barack Obama would utter such nonsense ... would there not be the 'Big Bang' in the media? Now that Clinton says it, it's a small headline far down in the ticker at best. "Well, we mentionened it." CNN can say ... hardly doing their job of holding the politicians accountable and keeping us really informed.

    OBAMA'08 for the American People, for Democracy !

    March 10, 2008 12:44 pm at 12:44 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16