The Wall St. Journal has an informative article today (with a chart!) about Obama being poised to surpass Hillary Clinton in superdelegate endorsements sooner than later:
When the year began, about 200 of the superdelegates had taken sides, most for Sen. Clinton. Her campaign, including Mr. Clinton, had quickly signed up Clinton-administration veterans, others on the DNC and elected officials in Arkansas and New York, so that she initially led Sen. Obama by more than 100.
But the Obama campaign correctly figured that she had gotten the easy pickings and that the rest were up for grabs. Once he began winning more states than she did, her endorsements slowed to a trickle, and her lead eroded to less than two dozen now.
Clinton or Obama partisans are quick to point out that a superdelegate endorsement is non-binding, and they can change their mind at the convention. About 200 endorsed Hillary right away, but after that she picked up new superdelegates only slowly. Obama, meanwhile, has picked up endorsement after endorsement and now is only 20 behind Clinton. If superdelegates are going to suddenly jump ship, they're not likely to do so en masse unless there actually is a "superdelegate convention" that compels them to.
Since Clinton was only able to increase her super count by about 25 percent since January, I find it unlikely that the remaining undeclared supers are suddenly going to endorse her as a group. And since being in the lead doesn't seem to have much of an effect, I find it just as unlikely that supers will go over to Obama as a group. In short, there's no compelling reason to see superdelegates ending the contest decisively before the convention because they appear structurally incapable of making a mass decision unless there actually is concerted effort on their behalf to choose. Until then it's just a slow bleed until Denver.
--Mori Dinauer
