Hillary and the super delegate saga

So Hillary is knee deep in super delegate drama in the past few days. Let me pick apart the major points as I see them.

1. Hillary wants to use the term 'automatic delegates' instead of 'super delegates' because super delegate makes it sound like they have "super influence when they don't". Hmmm, actually they do. Consider this: California had 370 pledged delegates up for grabs and more than 4 million people voted. That's over 10,000 people per delegate. California senator not only can vote in that primary but is a super delegate so her vote has the influence of more than 10,000 voters. That's pretty super influence.

2. Hillary has no moral problem with the idea of winning the nomination while losing the popular vote and pledged delegates. Pledged delegates...sure, but she would be fine even if she didn't win the popular vote (she is currently losing it even with Michigan and Florida)? That seems, oh I don't know, like something Bush would do. Somewhere Al Gore is seething with rage.

3. And in other news, the super delegates who support Clinton are already starting to switch to Obama. Even though this is only one I thought that this would happen if/when Hillary loses Ohio, Texas, or Pennsylvania. If she loses Ohio or Texas I think the avalanche begins and she will be pressured to drop out.

Oh, and if the first two points didn't make you think Hillary doesn't really care much about voters at all Mark Penn said "Could we possibly have a nominee who hasn't won any of the significant states -- outside of Illinois?" Of the top delegate states that have voted so far Hillary has won 4 of the top 5 (California, New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts) but Obama has won 6 of the top 10 (Illinois, Georgia, Virginia, Washington, Minnesota, Missouri). Isn't it nice to know that you're 'not significant'?