This expands on a comment I made on the article about Dean saying Superdelegates can vote however they see fit.

Fair disclosure: I'm an Obama supporter.

I don't have any problem with the SD's voting according to their "best judgement" or their conscience. I'm confident they will make the best decision when the time comes.  We should also all face facts: Superdelegates will decide the nomination.  Neither candidate can gain enough pledged delegates to win the nomination outright.  

My fellow Obama supporters - I think we should all calm down a little on the superdelegate question for reasons I outline below.

Superdelegates have their own role, and they shouldn't be bound to vote the way their state or their district does.  At the same time, they shouldn't be bound to vote by electoral college, popular vote or pledged delegates.  They should vote the way the party planned - for the good of the party.

What I find amusing/disturbing is how Clinton supporters automatically assume that SD's will vote for Clinton if they are "free" to vote their conscience or based upon their independent judgement.  I just don't think that's the case, especially since we have seen the SDs breaking for Obama in large numbers since Super Tuesday. 

I think that SD's will look at the state of the race at the end of the primaries and make a decision - and I'm confident that decision will be for Obama.

Why? Let's remember there are two kinds of SD's - elected officials and party officials.

Elected officials will go for Obama because they want coattails. They don't want to be perceived as "going against the voters". And they have already seen how Obama's grass roots organizing can help them on the ground - See Bill Foster in Illinois (Denny Hastert's seat) and Donna Edwards in MD (beating out incumbent Al Wynn) - so they will look at that as helping them in November. (Not to mention the recent press about the Clinton supporter who would be "stunned" if Obama isn't the nominee and the next president).  This sort of grass roots organizing power is bread and butter for Congressional races - particularly House races, state legislature races, gubenatorial elections, etc.  Not to mention the fundraising power.  Elected officials are looking at Obama's unprecedented ability to raise funds, and hoping to tap into that for their next election.  The see the voter registration and turnout numbers and think "coattails".  With Obama at the top of the ticket, many elected officials (or challengers) will hope to see their chance improve as well.  Many of these same elected officials haven't forgotten how the Clinton administration ended up losing in the midterm elections.  While I agree this was not entirely the administrations fault, it still happened on their watch.  They also will remember that Hillary Clinton didn't do a lot of campaigning (other than her own) during either the 2004 or 2006 cycles.  Obama did - even going to help in other states when he was running for senator in IL.  Not to mention helping Bill Foster this year - while he's running for President.  (Any other examples folks?)

Party officials will go for Obama because they want to build the party for the long term. This means young people. Think of the incredible energy that college students and even some high schoolers (like Casey Knowles) are showing on behalf of Obama. Think of the high turnout, the voter registration drives, the party switching going on. This are the metrics that the party looks at.  In addition, the party is interested in recruiting new faces to run for elected office.  Some of the younger people may become the next group of leaders.  In 2012, we may see an Obama precinct captain running for state legislature. (or more than one).  The experience that these volunteers are gaining in how to run a campaign is crucial - building networks, understanding how fundraising works, learning how to put on an event.  All of this is critical to building for the future.

These are all reasons why I've never had a problem with the super delegates. After all, they will make their decision based on self interest. And, I think they will see that their interests are best served by Obama as the nominee.  Some people commented when I posted before that the Superdelegates have been corrupted/coerced by the Clinton machine.  I think Carville killed that single-handedly when he called Richardson "Judas".  In private - sure - no problem.  But you don't go on TV, calling a senior member of your party a traitor, since he picked the other candidate.  And you certainly don't keep defending it.

So - relax Obama supporters.  The superdelegates are watching, and we will prevail.