PrintDavid Holmes, a 34-year-old political/legislative consultant, is a Democratic superdelegate from Austin, Texas. He pledged to vote for Hillary Clinton about three weeks before the Iowa Caucus, but recently, there have been rumors that he’s thinking about switching his support to Obama. Let’s just say that he’s been getting a lot of phone calls lately. ...
Holmes agreed to keep a diary for TNR of his superdelegate experience.
February 15, 2008
I am David Holmes, and I am a superdelegate. Actually, I prefer to call myself an automatic delegate, because there is really nothing “super” about superdelegates.
I have an automatic vote at the Democratic National Convention because I am an elected member of the DNC--elected by the 6,000 or so delegates who showed up to a Texas party convention eight years ago, and then again four years ago. The issue of automatic delegates has become something of a controversy, and though it’s valid to question whether or not the system is set up logically or even fairly, it’s also worth remembering that the rules for delegate selection were decided and understood by all campaigns long before the first vote was cast in this presidential cycle.
Since this race has remained tight much longer than expected, a spotlight is on all the approximately 800 Democratic superdelegates in the country. With the Texas primary coming up, I’m feeling the glare particularly intensely right now.
I started my day with a taped interview with the “CBS Evening News”; recorded an interview with KEYE, the local CBS TV affiliate; and fielded a call from The New York Times, who had found on a blog somewhere that I might have switched my presidential preference for Hillary Clinton (I hadn’t).
I received a couple more e-mails today from people I don’ t know asking me to support their presidential preference, and then responded to the couple dozen friends who asked if I might know a way to get them into the Texas Debate next week between Hillary and Obama. (No, sorry, I don’t.)
I ended the long day with dinner with a group of friends, over half of whom disagree with my presidential preference and made sure I understood that clearly. I like both of the candidates and think they’re both ready to take on and defeat John McCain. But I am supporting Hillary for a variety of reasons--primarily because I know she has experience navigating Washington, and the determination and strength to fight to get our country back on the right track. Still, I have to admit that Obama’s campaign appears to have a momentum and energy that captures my attention.
When I was elected to the DNC nearly eight years ago, I was the youngest member to ever be elected by any state up to that point. Youth involvement and moving the party forward are priorities of mine and likely always will be. A number of my friends contend that Obama and his campaign embody all that I have been fighting for over the years.
Given the potential impact of my vote as an automatic delegate, I am feeling the weight of my responsibility and hope that this public deliberation will not only help others understand whatever action I take in the end, but will also actually help me make my decision.
We’ll see what this weekend brings. ...
February 16, 2008
I woke up craving donuts. As I drove away from Krispy Kreme, my cell phone rang and showed a 703 area code on the caller ID. Normally, I do not answer calls from numbers I do not recognize, but these days I receive more calls from people I don’t know than those I do. I answered it.
It was former Indiana congressman and 9/11 Commission member Tim Roemer. He told me that he is supporting Obama and would like me to consider doing the same. He said that his support for Obama is based on his belief that Obama will bring a new, diverse set of people into the Democratic Party and that he feels Obama has ideas to move the country forward. He feels Obama is the more electable of the two remaining Democrats in November and that his momentum is only growing.
I shared with Congressman Roemer my thoughts on Obama’s experience and position in the race, saying that I feel as though I still don’t know what makes Obama ready to be president. Then I told him that I felt uncomfortable with the manner in which the Obama campaign is, well, campaigning against automatic delegates such as me at the same time that it pursues our support. Rohmer made it clear that he was sticking with the idea that superdelegates should not be free to vote their own conscience. It was a nice conversation, but overall did not give me much new information.
At night, a rally was held at the South Austin headquarters of the Hillary Clinton campaign--which recently served as the headquarters of Kinky Friedman for Governor.
Bill Clinton was the headliner. The crowd was large enough that it had to be split in two parts. The people who arrived first were lucky enough to fit into a large room out of the cold. The rest were stuck outside. State Representative Valinda Bolton, her husband, and I greeted President Clinton as he walked into the building. This was not the first time I had met President Clinton, but this was the first time he was prepared to greet me by my name. He told me about his trips to Amarillo and Lubbock earlier in the day as we walked to the inside stage where he spoke first.
After the first speech, he headed outside, climbed on to the bed of a pickup truck and delivered his speech again to the people who had been waiting outside.
After his second speech, State Democratic Executive Committee member Michael Wilson and I were allowed to spend a few minutes with the president to record a segment for the podcast Michael and I produce, which covers Texas politics and music. He had a line I hadn’t heard before: Due to our unique primary/caucus process, he said, “Texas is the only place you can vote twice in the same election without breaking the law.”
COMMENTS (21)
With all due respect, since this guy buys into the Hillary Clinton media strategy enough to use the canned phrase, "authomatic delegate"...I'm not sure he's really up for grabs.
With all due respect, since this guy buys into the Hillary Clinton media strategy enough to use the canned phrase, "authomatic delegate"...I'm not sure he's really up for grabs.
that was the first that struck me. He's not open to discussion about which candidate would really serve us better, or what the role of super delegates should be. He's campaigning for her.
Could it be that "it wasn't the first time I had met the President...." I don't see how that line was relevant to anything except that he feels connected.
But the point of his diary may simple be to log the experience of being a super delegate. An elite class that has the power to over ride the voices of the voters in the primaries. It doesn't seem to be about the journey to a decision, as that's already made.
that was the first that struck me. He's not open to discussion about which candidate would really serve us better, or what the role of super delegates should be. He's campaigning for her.
Could it be that "it wasn't the first time I had met the President...." I don't see how that line was relevant to anything except that he feels connected.
But the point of his diary may simple be to log the experience of being a super delegate. An elite class that has the power to over ride the voices of the voters in the primaries. It doesn't seem to be about the journey to a decision, as that's already made.
Meh. We know who he is. If he's going to vote for Hillary in a manner that gives her the nomination, we can send some guys over to pants him.
Meh. We know who he is. If he's going to vote for Hillary in a manner that gives her the nomination, we can send some guys over to pants him.
Man -- the more I learn about these superdelegates, the more irritated I am with the Democratic Party. A couple of weeks ago, we learned that some college kid was among the superdelegates. Last week, we discovered that Nancy Pelosi's daughter was a superdelegate. Now, this "political/legislative consultant."
The Democratic Party needs to reform this antiquated, anti-democratic system, or do a much better job involving the unwashed masses in the election of these super-citizens who enjoy such extraordinary privileges.
Why should this David Holmes get to cast the equivalent of thousands of votes? The more I think about it, the angrier I get.
Man -- the more I learn about these superdelegates, the more irritated I am with the Democratic Party. A couple of weeks ago, we learned that some college kid was among the superdelegates. Last week, we discovered that Nancy Pelosi's daughter was a superdelegate. Now, this "political/legislative consultant."
The Democratic Party needs to reform this antiquated, anti-democratic system, or do a much better job involving the unwashed masses in the election of these super-citizens who enjoy such extraordinary privileges.
Why should this David Holmes get to cast the equivalent of thousands of votes? The more I think about it, the angrier I get.
Hillary has "the determination and strength to fight to get our country back on the right track", "youth involvement and moving the party forward are priorities of mine" - is there some automatic virus you get as soon as you get active in any kind of politics beyond local activism that makes you talk only in meaningless soundbites? I mean, "moving the party forward" is a priority of his - what does that even mean? And that would be as opposed to all those other Democrats trying to move the party backward?
I realise I'm being ungracious here - it is actually interesting to read what the journal of a superdelegate is like. It's a choice peek into the mindset behind ... view full comment
Hillary has "the determination and strength to fight to get our country back on the right track", "youth involvement and moving the party forward are priorities of mine" - is there some automatic virus you get as soon as you get active in any kind of politics beyond local activism that makes you talk only in meaningless soundbites? I mean, "moving the party forward" is a priority of his - what does that even mean? And that would be as opposed to all those other Democrats trying to move the party backward?
I realise I'm being ungracious here - it is actually interesting to read what the journal of a superdelegate is like. It's a choice peek into the mindset behind the hundreds of votes that superdelegates like him will cast, so count me intrigued; I'll keep reading. But really - how dissapointing a peek it is. What soulless, unoriginal superficiality.
"Actually, I prefer to call myself an automatic delegate, because there is really nothing 'super' about superdelegates."
...except that you "automatically" get to decide who the next Democratic nominee is if the race is close, right? And that your single vote as an "automatic delegate" has the same weight as about 15,000 primary/caucus voters, right?
Right. Nothing "super" about that.
"Actually, I prefer to call myself an automatic delegate, because there is really nothing 'super' about superdelegates."
...except that you "automatically" get to decide who the next Democratic nominee is if the race is close, right? And that your single vote as an "automatic delegate" has the same weight as about 15,000 primary/caucus voters, right?
Right. Nothing "super" about that.
David,
I'm a Democrat here in Austin, just like you. I'm sure you're getting lots of e-mail and other communications about your commitment to Hillary. I applaud your dedication to the party and to public service, which is no cakewalk -- as you are no doubt discovering these days.
My take on this election: I want to win. Hillary is just too big a gamble, not because of her positions on issues or her competence, but because there are just about a bazillion Americans who will turn out to vote against her -- not to vote for John McCain, but to vote against Hillary and Bill Clinton. McCain will not get the kind of grassroots enthusiasm that put Bush into the White House. But he could ride a wave o ... view full comment
David,
I'm a Democrat here in Austin, just like you. I'm sure you're getting lots of e-mail and other communications about your commitment to Hillary. I applaud your dedication to the party and to public service, which is no cakewalk -- as you are no doubt discovering these days.
My take on this election: I want to win. Hillary is just too big a gamble, not because of her positions on issues or her competence, but because there are just about a bazillion Americans who will turn out to vote against her -- not to vote for John McCain, but to vote against Hillary and Bill Clinton. McCain will not get the kind of grassroots enthusiasm that put Bush into the White House. But he could ride a wave of anti-Clinton sentiment into the White House. And that would be disastrous for the country.
There are plenty of questions about Barack Obama's experience, as you have noted. (Personally, I put a lot more stock in his Chicago neighborhood organizing experience than in Hillary's experience as an attorney for Wal-Mart or Tyson Chicken.) But let's face it: Obama can fire people up, he will get the youth vote, he will get the Democratic vote, and he will get a fair number of independents and even a few Republicans. Some people will vote against him because he's black or young or because he has a funny name. But the numbers of those people will be tiny compared to the people who will vote against Hillary. I believe this to the core of my being, because I talk to both conservatives and liberals every day. Most Democratic activists are at best lukewarm, and at worst just antipathetic, to Hillary, while most conservatives are at best antipathetic to Obama, but filled with revulsion over Hillary.
Obama is a fresh start. It's true that he can sound naive -- but that may be what we need right now, after so many years of mud wrestling. He can be a beacon of hope to the rest of the world, which is definitely what we need after so many years of telling the rest of the world that we're in charge, take it or leave it. His rhetoric may be "just words," but they're words that are quenching a huge thirst, you have to admit.
But most of all, I want to WIN. The idea of another four years of a Republican in the White House is just too painful to contemplate. McCain is no match for Hillary. But Hillary will turn out every right-wing bonehead in the country to vote against her, and the Democratic Party will go down to defeat again. Liberals who have been swayed by the Obama magic will be only tepid supporters, and maybe even stay home. If Obama is the nominee, they will fight like you've never seen Democrats fight, not in your lifetime anyway.
Hillary is over, believe me. It's time to move on, to use a pun. Please. This is important.
Part of me sort of wants Hillary to try to take the nomination using superdelegates. She'd be ruined forever...
Part of me sort of wants Hillary to try to take the nomination using superdelegates. She'd be ruined forever...
"I prefer to call myself an automatic delegate, because there is really nothing “super” about superdelegates."
Yeah. That might work on cable news, but not here, buddy. We do, actually, understand why the Clinton campaign sees a strategic advantage in rechristening superdelegates. You're a superdelegate who supports Clinton---fine, there are legitimate reasons for doing so. Just don't try to muddle the language on the issue.
And really...there's nothing "super" about superdelegates? You sure about that? How about how your vote in this one presidential primary has a bigger impact on the outcome of the race than all the votes that everyone who responds to this pos ... view full comment
"I prefer to call myself an automatic delegate, because there is really nothing “super” about superdelegates."
Yeah. That might work on cable news, but not here, buddy. We do, actually, understand why the Clinton campaign sees a strategic advantage in rechristening superdelegates. You're a superdelegate who supports Clinton---fine, there are legitimate reasons for doing so. Just don't try to muddle the language on the issue.
And really...there's nothing "super" about superdelegates? You sure about that? How about how your vote in this one presidential primary has a bigger impact on the outcome of the race than all the votes that everyone who responds to this post will ever cast, combined, for the rest of our lives.
Unless this thread gets Beauchamp'd. Then anything goes.
Huntlib: Brevity is the soul of wit. I suck.
Huntlib: Brevity is the soul of wit. I suck.
VA, she is trying to take the nomination with superdelegates as we type. She's hasn't been ruined yet.
VA, she is trying to take the nomination with superdelegates as we type. She's hasn't been ruined yet.
guyminuslife: haha, gmta.
"How about how your vote in this one presidential primary has a bigger impact on the outcome of the race than all the votes that everyone who responds to this post will ever cast, combined, for the rest of our lives."
Well, thank goodness. Youth involvement and moving the party forward are priorities of his. Without movers and shakers like him & Hills, there would be no youth involvement. And the party wouldn't move forward. He believes in real change, and in real results. He's a doer, not a talker.
guyminuslife: haha, gmta.
"How about how your vote in this one presidential primary has a bigger impact on the outcome of the race than all the votes that everyone who responds to this post will ever cast, combined, for the rest of our lives."
Well, thank goodness. Youth involvement and moving the party forward are priorities of his. Without movers and shakers like him & Hills, there would be no youth involvement. And the party wouldn't move forward. He believes in real change, and in real results. He's a doer, not a talker.
huntlib-
You wrote:
And really...there's nothing "super" about superdelegates? You sure about that? How about how your vote in this one presidential primary has a bigger impact on the outcome of the race than all the votes that everyone who responds to this post will ever cast, combined, for the rest of our lives.
Brevity issues notwithstanding (and I am someone who can't clear my throat without at least 1400 words and two or three paranthetical phrase)(see?), that sentence alone made me ill. That is a truly excellent summation of the mind-blowing, hyper-irritating process. Good lord, it made me need a drink.
Luckily, I already have one.
David Holmes, thanks for thi ... view full comment
huntlib-
You wrote:
And really...there's nothing "super" about superdelegates? You sure about that? How about how your vote in this one presidential primary has a bigger impact on the outcome of the race than all the votes that everyone who responds to this post will ever cast, combined, for the rest of our lives.
Brevity issues notwithstanding (and I am someone who can't clear my throat without at least 1400 words and two or three paranthetical phrase)(see?), that sentence alone made me ill. That is a truly excellent summation of the mind-blowing, hyper-irritating process. Good lord, it made me need a drink.
Luckily, I already have one.
David Holmes, thanks for this. I don't like the idea, but they are in place, and, if you have ever read Talkback before, you are brave to put yourself out there. I disagree with you about Hillary, but I appreciate the writing.
rehashed talking points + talkback = oceans of bitchiness
rehashed talking points + talkback = oceans of bitchiness
I should probably say something nice, but insted I wont say anything at all.
I should probably say something nice, but insted I wont say anything at all.
This thread addresses two distinct topics: the legitimacy of super-delegates and Hillary's tactics in wooing them. As Holmes pointed out, the rules were defined before the campaign so complaining now is pointless (and somewhat pathetic).
As someone who has always had qualms about the conversion of the primary process into state-by-state open primaries (the so-called "reforms"), I am comforted by the notion of super-delegates. I believe in elites and am, in fact, nostalgic for the smoke-filled rooms of yesteryear.
As for Hillary's chances in the general election, I'm not so pessimistic as others. I remember well a televised interview of Dick Armey after HRC's p ... view full comment
This thread addresses two distinct topics: the legitimacy of super-delegates and Hillary's tactics in wooing them. As Holmes pointed out, the rules were defined before the campaign so complaining now is pointless (and somewhat pathetic).
As someone who has always had qualms about the conversion of the primary process into state-by-state open primaries (the so-called "reforms"), I am comforted by the notion of super-delegates. I believe in elites and am, in fact, nostalgic for the smoke-filled rooms of yesteryear.
As for Hillary's chances in the general election, I'm not so pessimistic as others. I remember well a televised interview of Dick Armey after HRC's post-health care debacle testimony before his committee where he praised her performance and said how impressed he was -- this from a highly partisan conservative.
I voted for Obama in the NJ primary - right now I think I'd like to change my vote. I agree with this fellow that he ought to vote as he sees fit - why make up new rules that tie the hands of these super/automatic delegates? Because it would be good for Obama?
Really - many in the Obama "movement" are incredibly obnoxious. I thought all the true-believer crap would have died with the political life of George W. Bush, but it seems to have a life of its own.
This superdelegate from Texas offers a window into the process that will determine the nominee of our party. I'll be interested in reading more, even if I disagree with him in the end.
Neil
I voted for Obama in the NJ primary - right now I think I'd like to change my vote. I agree with this fellow that he ought to vote as he sees fit - why make up new rules that tie the hands of these super/automatic delegates? Because it would be good for Obama?
Really - many in the Obama "movement" are incredibly obnoxious. I thought all the true-believer crap would have died with the political life of George W. Bush, but it seems to have a life of its own.
This superdelegate from Texas offers a window into the process that will determine the nominee of our party. I'll be interested in reading more, even if I disagree with him in the end.
Neil
Neil,
I know a lot of people here regard Obama supporters as obnoxious punks. But the plain fact is that in state after state, exit polling has shown Hillary supporters to be more opposed to Obama's nomination than are Obama's supporters to a Hillary nomination.
So please don't take the obnoxiousness of Obama supporters here as a representative sample. Out there in the real world, the evidence is clear: Hillary's supporters are actually more obnoxious. Slightly. On average.
Anyway, as a fiercely anti-Hillary Democrat who's come around to supporting Obama, I hope any obnoxiousness on my part is not held against Obama. See, like Hillary, my greatest flaw is that sometimes I just get impatient wh ... view full comment
Neil,
I know a lot of people here regard Obama supporters as obnoxious punks. But the plain fact is that in state after state, exit polling has shown Hillary supporters to be more opposed to Obama's nomination than are Obama's supporters to a Hillary nomination.
So please don't take the obnoxiousness of Obama supporters here as a representative sample. Out there in the real world, the evidence is clear: Hillary's supporters are actually more obnoxious. Slightly. On average.
Anyway, as a fiercely anti-Hillary Democrat who's come around to supporting Obama, I hope any obnoxiousness on my part is not held against Obama. See, like Hillary, my greatest flaw is that sometimes I just get impatient when people are slow to realize the many ways in which Hillary Clinton would be a terrible candidate and an even worse president for advancing liberal goals. On the other hand, I also have a messy desk.
David - I like your writing and the diary idea is a good one - we do need ot know what the heck is going on.
I also have no problem with your age and as a matter of fact, find the ageism disgusting. Since when do the older generations around here have the market cornered on good decision making? Global warming? Iraq everything? Zillions in public debt? A poisoned political culture? George Bush??! Please! I'm GLAD people your age are in positions of power. Maybe you can help clean up the mess we've left you.
But your bias is so obvious, I felt embarrassed for you. You "prefer" to be called an automatic delegate, hmm? Gee, I wonder why?
I have ... view full comment
David - I like your writing and the diary idea is a good one - we do need ot know what the heck is going on.
I also have no problem with your age and as a matter of fact, find the ageism disgusting. Since when do the older generations around here have the market cornered on good decision making? Global warming? Iraq everything? Zillions in public debt? A poisoned political culture? George Bush??! Please! I'm GLAD people your age are in positions of power. Maybe you can help clean up the mess we've left you.
But your bias is so obvious, I felt embarrassed for you. You "prefer" to be called an automatic delegate, hmm? Gee, I wonder why?
I have no problem with bias at all, make your case. Your candidate is an excellent one with a good story to tell. What I do have a problem with is your wide-eyed act at being confused or objective. Just say: The Clinton campaign came up with this concept, and I believe it and prefer to follow it. Or something like that.
Just be honest - there is not a thing wrong with that and most people long for it. Otherwise, you sound exactly like the most irritating aspects of your candidate: incapable of being straightforward or to cease manuevering and calculating for one second.
As smart as you are and your candidate, this quallty makes it impossible for millions of us out here to trust you OR her.
Come out of the closet Dude! Live free and people will respec you much more.
If all this new found fawning and attention these super...oops automatic delegates are getting is any indication, expect the number of supe..sorry, sorry automatic delegates to double the next election cycle because ultimately the only thing these people care about is their moment in the sun, so that when they are old and gray they can watch themselves and say to their grandchildren look, look that is me at the convention. I met Bill Clinton twice, he even knew my name. You remember Bill Clinton, the last Democratic President that we had about 50 years ago, don't you?
I predict by 2020 all of the delegates will be automatic except for 50, one in each state, so there will be a least some reaso ... view full comment
If all this new found fawning and attention these super...oops automatic delegates are getting is any indication, expect the number of supe..sorry, sorry automatic delegates to double the next election cycle because ultimately the only thing these people care about is their moment in the sun, so that when they are old and gray they can watch themselves and say to their grandchildren look, look that is me at the convention. I met Bill Clinton twice, he even knew my name. You remember Bill Clinton, the last Democratic President that we had about 50 years ago, don't you?
I predict by 2020 all of the delegates will be automatic except for 50, one in each state, so there will be a least some reason for an election.
I don't have any problem with David Holmes writing the diary. The fault is with TNR for not finding an impartial SD.
The "automatic delegates" thing has been pretty well worked over, but I also liked how he was able to work in lines touting Hillary's "experience" and "strength" and questioning Obama's substance. Bonus points for the flattering little details about Bill's campaign stop - the overflowing crowds, not wanting people to be "left out in the cold," the pick-up truck, etc.
I mean it when I say that I admire Holmes's skill in writing a piece that promotes Hillary while seeming neutral. It's a lot more subtle than most of the campaign's other effo ... view full comment
I don't have any problem with David Holmes writing the diary. The fault is with TNR for not finding an impartial SD.
The "automatic delegates" thing has been pretty well worked over, but I also liked how he was able to work in lines touting Hillary's "experience" and "strength" and questioning Obama's substance. Bonus points for the flattering little details about Bill's campaign stop - the overflowing crowds, not wanting people to be "left out in the cold," the pick-up truck, etc.
I mean it when I say that I admire Holmes's skill in writing a piece that promotes Hillary while seeming neutral. It's a lot more subtle than most of the campaign's other efforts. But seriously, this is the best TNR could do?