The threshold numbers are set for a reason and if any candidate reached the threshold without 'super' delegates, game over.

Once it requires 'super' delegates, there are no restrictions on them, and they can only vote how they decide to vote.

Maybe Dean has fallen a little out of love with Obama and is signaling to the SDs that it's okay with him if they fall a little out of love, too?  

There are so many scenarios where being too stubborn about the principle of superdelegates going along with the popular vote or pledged delegate leader is a DANGEROUS ROAD.

But you know what, maybe in this Democratic Party that is no longer a problem when we have a group of leaders who seem perfectly willing to lose on purpose as long as they can push aside the Clinton family.

1. Counting Florida is easy.  Both were on the ballot, Obama had nationwide ads running.

2. Michigan. Yes, I know Obama chose not to be on the ballot because, I suspect, he knew he would lose. (The primary equivalent of his Illinois "present" votes.  This guy really is a coward at times.)

But, at bottom, there doesn't appear to be a universally accepted or even a generally accepted way to count the Michigan votes without a revote.

So, Michigan alone makes any attempt to call the popular vote decisive troublesome.

3. The caucus states.
In a lot of blogs, esp. the pro-Obama ones, there are various ways of allocating the popular vote to the caucus votes.  Given the very low turnout in caucus states vs. the inherent unfairness of caucuses, I don't know how we come up with a generally accepted method of counting votes in these states.  (It seems equally unfair to me to deny these states any role at all in the selection.)

I'm not happy about the idea of the SDs choosing the winner on electability since, no matter how one calculates chances, it is inevitably little more that a gut guess.

And now, of course, we have Obama funding the DNC which sorta, kinda, looks like bribery.

To sum it up, Harry sees that Hillary is gaining credibility among the electorate and her senate colleagues as being a preferable nominee and he has enough clout to push more superdelegates in this direction if Pelosi and Dean don't back off and let the primaries finish.  To make sure they know he's serious, he convinces Dean to put out this statement.  

I think the race is going to come down to the perception in the last six or eight races of who the best opponent for McCain will be.

The PA exit polls have made Obama into McGovern -- he got NOBODY but the college people, the AAs, and the wealthy.  He outspent her, he campaigned hard, he got laughed at for trying to bowl, and he got caught being dismissive.

Add to that the wild spinning that seems to be coming out of the Obama camp on the very issue of electability.  I don't take the need to spin like crazy as a sign things are going well in a campaign.  Since Tuesday:

 The Obama campaign has sent out this pathetic cherry picked polling memo to SDs;

David Axelrod has claimed inaccurately that white working class democrats haven't voted Democratic going back to the nineties (one Democratic presidential candidate won the working class vote, here's a hint, he goes by the handle Mr. President);

Obama lied about his success with white blue collar voters;

And Obama campaign manager David Plouffe downplayed the impact Obama's race will have on any November match-up, saying "the vast, vast majority of voters who would not vote for Barack Obama in November based on race are probably firmly in John McCain's camp already."  This from the Transcendent One Who Is Supposed To Win Over Republicans and Independents (or as Aeryl at Corrente said "I just find it funny that this is excuse has been used to explain why Obama can't win over Democrats, and before he evens closes the Democratic nomination, he is out explaining why he won't close with Republicans either.")

Plus, in the middle of primaries they need to win and while they are spending like drunken sailors to do so, they suddenly decide to start up a national voter registration drive.  I can't believe they wouldn't rather wait until June to do this.  But suddenly it has to be done now.

I suspect there are some super-dels, quieter low-profile ones perhaps, who have indicated privately they will stand with Hillary, win or lose, but prefer to wait until the Convention, or at least after the primaries are completed.
Maybe Dean's private number-crunching is showing a largeish number of these types.

Anglachel, made an interesting alternate view of Dean's motivation, in suggesting that Dean might be signalling for these super-dels to come out for Hillary earlier, so that he can more easily and legitimately have a reason to allow the resolution of Michigan and Florida before the end of the primaries.

He's correct that the last few races are terribly important.  It indicates the summation of over a year of getting to know the candidates.  Momentum in the early months is great, but not unless you also have a good momentum in the end.  In short, if Obama peaked in Wisconsin.....he's not likely going to win the nomination.

Whether it's he's got 100 more delegates or so or she's got more popular vote.....just cancels each other out.  That only means:  We're split.

So electability will be a huge factor.

That's how I'm reading it.

I agree with BTD that if there IS a clear sense of the will of the people, then the SD's will obviously not buck that.

As for Obama having every SD just waiting in the wings, he's BSing through the rumor mill on that one.

That's such a misleading term for a short-score.

Neither one has a clear victory by the rules, while one will lead in one or the other or both.  LEADING by a percentage point or so does not mean that "the will of the people" is that this particular person (whether Barack or Hillary) be the nominee.  

  The Will of Half the People at one time or another over half a year ... that might be what we can get.  But it'll be hard to know with caucus votes that are countable for 'popular' vote purposes don't even exist in 3 of the states.

(1)  Who helps them -- politically, personally and locally -- the most?

(2) Who wins the most delegates?

(3) Who wins the popular vote (this will take on various shades of grey depending on how you count it)?

(4) Who stands the best chance of winning vs. McCain (#2 and especially #3 will help inform this)?

(5)  Which would make the best POTUS?

Plus, because the system includes so many caucus results, the true will of the people was not heard.      Caucuses are democratic but unrepresentative.  People might vote much differently.

That is why I agree with Dean.  Until the problems are worked out by the Party, the nomination will not be legitimated.

So, unless there is unexpected blowout somewhere along the way, the final vote count is going to be straddles across those 15 scenarios.

Making measuring popular vote, dicey.  Both camps will most likely have a popular vote argument to make to the supers, and to make to the general public.

Only one candidate will have a pledged delegate argument.

And then there are various electability arguments.  Which again, super-delegates, buy into,  based a lot on their already existing preferences.

One thing - I do hope that the super-delegates just fricking DECIDE en mass, right after the last primary.

some kind of really intelligent analysis.

Bush and RayGun got elected for f#$%s sake!!

ANYONE is electable

IF you are willing to do what needs to be done to get elected!

(oops, and you can pay for it ... well, you can pay cuz you got rich people backing you ... well, they're paying you cuz you're willing to do whatever they want!!!! )

the current rules of 'electable' are written by, nurtured by, and pushed by the fascists, with unwitting assistance from people on the Dem side who think they're smart (and intentional assistance from sell outs)!

I love how people push their analysis as 'reality', like, only my analysis is reality and therefore your analysis isn't reality ...

I've been sick of hillary for losing since 1993, and I've really despised the clintons since gore v. bush ... oh, and by the way, and I couldn't give a crap about gore, for losing to that drunken coke snorting frat boy.

that said, I've felt that hillary would stand a great chance at getting elected cuz she'd fight them slimebags at their game ... well, except it is and it was time to change the game!

she is still hanging in there, unfortuneately, and barack isn't closing the deal, changing the rules enough, or beating the rules enough ...

c'mon everyone - I watched that moron RayGun lie his way into office when I was 20 28 years ago ---
and look at McCain's zombie act! back from the dead!

anyone is electable!

rmm.