Hillary's anti-democratic agenda II

As much as I hate how Team Hil' is handling this primary election, I will say that it is really helping to expose some traditionally backstage activities during the election. Case in point is the news that a group of 21 big donors to the Democratic Party/Team Hil' recently sent a letter to House Speaker Pelosi. I figured they probably just sent a letter to the highest ranking House democrat to reassure her that they will do whatever they can to help get the democratic nominee in the White House, no matter who it is. Well, it turns out I'm an idiot. The letter says, in part:

During your appearance, you suggested super-delegates have an obligation to support the candidate who leads in the pledged delegate count as of June 3rd , whether that lead be by 500 delegates or 2. This is an untenable position that runs counter to the party’s intent in establishing super-delegates in 1984 as well as your own comments recorded in The Hill ten days earlier:

"I believe super-delegates have to use their own judgment and there will be many equities that they have to weigh when they make the decision. Their own belief and who they think will be the best president, who they think can win, how their own region voted, and their own responsibility.’”

...

We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August. We appreciate your activities in support of the Democratic Party and your leadership role in the Party and hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters.

That last line is a keeper. "We ... hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters." I love the respect for democracy that these people have. "Look, we're rich, so you should do things our way."

To clarify, Pelosi wasn't saying that Clinton shouldn't keep campaigning (although she shouldn't), she was just saying that the superdelegates should not decide the nomination in a way counter to the will of the voters. Sounds like a pretty simple proposition. I like it because she acknowledges a shortcoming of the system in an attempt to fix it and make the system more democratic. You could also view it as pragmatic because, as Pelosi's representative states, "it would do great harm to the Democratic Party if superdelegates are perceived to overturn the will of the voters." Makes sense. But apparently 20 rich people disagree.

Of course, I'm sure that this kind of thing has happened in every democracy without publicly funded elections. But what I love about today is that the internet is changing things. Barack Obama is burying Team Hil' when it comes to fundraising and he's not relying on a small group of wealthy donors to do it. It seems like Pelosi is aware of this trend and is not backing down. And I bet that someone working with Pelosi leaked this letter as a not-so-subtle "F*ck you" to the authors. This will likely generate a nice bump in grassroots fundraising from democrats who want to take their party back. MoveOn has already circulated a petition supporting Pelosi.

Overall, this is encouraging. It seems like Team Hil' is getting more desperate and that leading democrats are willing to embrace the new age of grassroots fundraising and leave behind the days when large donors could control everything. It's a sign of progress. Now we just have to hope that Clinton doesn't try to completely destroy Barack or the party in her last ditch effort to win the nomination. Unless she's trying to help McCain to win, there should be a concession speech in the works. I'm hopeful, but not going to hold my breath.