RezkoWatch Electability 2008: Obama's Superdelegate Bamboozle (Updated)

There's something quite ironic about those who call themselves "Big Tent Democrats" and the most famous big tent of them all, P.T. Barnum's 19th century mammoth tent that housed his menagerie and exhibits.

The political "big tent" philosophy, coined by Republican operative Lee Atwater to make conservatism all inclusive, has been evident in the political campaign of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), which has worked overtime to encourage Republicans and Independents to crossover and vote for him in caucuses and primaries. Likened to Barnum's temporary "big tent", anchored only by poles and tied down with ropes, Obama's campaign will be only as enduring as the electorate allows.

Barnum could only pack the big tent as long as he put on a good show complete with animal acts, performing clowns, highwire artists, and a big parade, all certain to bamboozle the audience just long enough to relieve it of its hard-earned dollars before the circus packed up and moved on to the next town. It appears that, for Sen. Obama and his handlers, the promise of the "big tent" may not be quite enough to ensure victory but they think they have found the perfect way to not only pack the tent with superdelegates but to also bamboozle them long enough to help him keep his circus on the road.

As Jonathan Alter wrote in the May 19, 2008, issue of Newsweek, it's the "Benjamins".

For all the talk of numbers, there's one that will be most important for superdelegates: 1.5 million. That reflects the 1.5 million names of donors that the Obama campaign has on file. Because no contribution below $200 is publicly reported, the vast majority of those names are in Obama's exclusive possession, to be shared as he wishes. As Graham Richard, the longtime mayor of Fort Wayne, Ind., explained it to me last week, it's all about the Benjamins. Local officials (that's who most superdelegates are) need the tens of thousands of Democratic donors on that list who come from their states. Their re-election depends on successful fund-raising. No Obama at the top of the ticket, no list. No list, and you may be back selling insurance after November."

Michael Begala, guest blogging May 12, 2008, at the Liberal Rapture blog, responded

You read it right. This, in effect, is threatening to cripple the fundraising ability of the Democratic party if Obama is not given the nomination. He is telling superdelegates, "give me the nomination or risk losing your office for lack of campaign funds."

The unmitigated gall of this man. Threatening to weaken the party and cost the Democrats offices, all if he doesn't get the nomination he feels so entitled to. Clinton supporters are lectured about unquestioning support of the party, yet Obama threatens to cripple Democratic fundraising efforts if he doesn't get his way. It's this type of arrogance, greed, and entitlement that are turning so many people off. Some party man.

But is this really true? Does Sen. Obama hold within his grasp the power to truly blackmail his fellow Democrats into supporting him?

Although he may have a huge database at his disposal of low-dollar contributors, what every candidate has available—should they want to access them—are huge databases of contributors who have donated more than $200 to any candidate which are available straight out of public records held by the IRS. Every campaign has to file those records quarterly and finalize them within 30 days of the end of the calendar year.

A second available source to every candidate are voter registration records that can be purchased from each state's Democratic Party, which presidential candidates do.

Besides, what keeps any candidate from doing the same thing Sen. Obama and others have done, use the internet and events to create his or her own local database? At every event, meet and greet, every local candidate has the ability to compile a hugh database of his or her constituents. Conducting a GOTV campaign is something every candidate should be doing regardless.

Lastly, should anyone buy into the idea that Sen. Obama's campaign singlehandedly has compiled the biggest Rolodex of supporters available to downticket candidates, it should be pointed out that Sen. Obama did not compile his list of contributors totally on his own.

Has everyone already forgotten that Sens. Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, among many other members of the Democratic elite hustling Sen. Obama towards the White House, have put their vast resources—including lists of supporters and contributors—at his disposal?

Has everyone already forgotten that Sen. Obama currently has 361 bundlers—those who have raised in excess of $50,000, $100,000 and $200,000 each for Obama's campaign—have collectively raised more than $233,823,000 to date and that 14 of them are registered lobbyists? Who would be naive enough to believe that they are collecting contributions in amounts less than $200?

Has everyone forgotten that it was former Vermont Governor Howard Dean who built the first major online database of contributors and supporters back in 2003 and early 2004 before he dropped out of the presidential race?

Has everyone forgotten that it was Howard Dean who threw his newly-minted post-campaign organization Democracy for America behind senatorial candidate Barack Obama whom he handpicked as one of the "Dean Dozen"? So where is that database now? In mothballs?

Shame on every single superdelegate who falls for this P.T. Barnum-sized bamboozle.

Return to TOP of the Page