They are (apparently) Picking the one that they THINK will be mostly likely to win. Or possilby simply just jumping on a bandwagon or trying to avoid a longer primary. Remember superdelgedates aren't possessed with special powers that enable them to pick presidential winners correctly. THey gave us Mondale in 84, for example. Many of them are the same people from back then too.
since they haven't rushed en masse to Barack, giving him a certain victory, what do you think they're waiting for? Many who haven't endorsed are in congress, and they want to win their seats back. many of their small town constituents voted for hillary and poll far less favorably for Barack. Are they supposed to turn against their own voters to go for a guy who is less prepared, and has a reduced chance of winning the GE? Well, it's rhetorical, we'll all see soon enough. How long until Denver? In this case the Dem's have an advantage over pug districts, they've been elected by Democrats and they represent Democrats, not indies or left-leaning libertarians. She's got the Reagan Dem's with her, that's a big loss for him, he praised Reagan and wrongly predicted they'd go with him in a landslide that would give him a mandate. he's already proven wrong, how much wronger does he need to prove himself to be?
Sorry, but do you ever stop and read what you're writing. Half the time I don't even understand what you're wrighting. Take a breath before you start, already.
stop the charm, I'm getting pulled to Barack by the force of your charm.
I don't think you understand what a "reagan democrat is". At least judging by your last statement, and a rather silly statement you made before that Hillary Clinton had won Reagan democrats - a feat that "not even Bill Clinton" had done.
Here: "Reagan democrats" are what the media likes to call ethnic working class whites. It's not an ideology - it's a demographic.
