Now
Fair
51°
High
61°
Low
40°

Superdelegate juggles candidates, morning sickness

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

BY DON WALTON / Lincoln Journal Star

Wednesday, Apr 02, 2008 - 12:50:52 am CDT

CRETE — Surreal.

That’s the word Audra Ostergard kept choosing as she tried to describe her life as an uncommitted Democratic superdelegate in an election year like no other.

Ostergard was dealing with morning sickness from her pregnancy when Hillary Clinton called.

Story Photo
Audra Ostergard

Since then, she’s been playing phone tag with a former president, the other Clinton, and fielded a 20-minute phone call from Hollywood celeb Rob Reiner last week.

And there was that long phone conversation initiated by Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of state, and the meeting with Barack Obama in Omaha and the call from Michelle.

And the other word is quandary.

“I’m in a quandary,” Ostergard told 100 students Tuesday at Doane College.

“But it’s a fun quandary.”

Ostergard, 41, is a publishing representative who lives in Lincoln. She graduated from Doane in 1988.

When she was elected first associate chairwoman of Nebraska’s Democratic Party in 2004, her motivation was to help elect Democratic candidates. She viewed the accompanying status as a superdelegate simply as “a pass to the national convention.”

This year it’s much more.

Democrats are about to write history by choosing either a black or female presidential nominee and they are locked in a tight struggle that threatens to go into June or well beyond.

In the end, it’s almost certain the votes of uncommitted Democratic superdelegates will be needed to name the winner.

Not what Ostergard had in mind.

“I don’t feel my vote should be more important than (that of) the caucus voter,” she said.

“I shouldn’t count any more than you.”

But, Ostergard said, she recognizes that “neither candidate can get there” without superdelegates pushing one or the other over the top, and eventually she’ll need to weigh in.

Ostergard said she plans to wait until the end of the long march of presidential primaries and caucuses in June.

“I’m holding out to see who is going to be at the top,” she said.

“Eventually, I will have to say here’s who I want.”

Ostergard is one of two uncommitted superdelegates from Nebraska. Also waiting is State Chairman Steve Achelpohl of Omaha.

Nebraska’s other four superdelegates have committed their support to Obama, a landslide winner over Clinton in Nebraska’s Feb. 9 caucuses.

While Obama supporters suggest she should vote for the caucus winner, Ostergard said, Clinton supporters can argue that two superdelegate votes for Clinton would match the proportionate allocation of delegates determined by the caucus results.

Obama won two of every three caucus votes and a proportionate number of congressional district delegate slots.

Chelsea Clinton was the first to  place a phone call to Ostergard.

“Oh my gosh,” Ostergard remembers thinking as the wooing began with Clinton’s daughter.

When the Obama campaign called to tell her the Illinois senator would like to meet her, she thought: “This is so weird.”

For a young girl who grew up in a poor family in Sidney, it was all a little bizarre.

“I’ve seen these people on TV and they’re talking to me,” she kept thinking.

“Where are my loyalties?” she wondered. “I felt torn. I’ll just wait and hear what they all have to say.”

The superdelegates committed to Obama are Sen. Ben Nelson, National Committeeman Vince Powers of Lincoln, National Committeewoman Kathleen Fahey of Omaha and Frank LaMere of South Sioux City, who represents Native tribes as a member of the Democratic national committee.

Reach Don Walton at 473-7248 or dwalton@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Molecular Theory wrote on April 2, 2008 3:04 am:
" Hi Don, could you or someone else who reads this explain to me have the existence of superdelegates doesn't completely subvert the democratic process. Unless I'm mistaken, this sort of representation can only be possible in a true oligarchy. Representative Democracy, in theory, means that all of our votes are equal. If these people are given special voting rights that enable them to directly change the results of an election- against the wishes of the electorate- hasn't "democracy" effectively been dismantled?? Just curious, thanks. "

aeminnesota wrote on April 2, 2008 7:32 am:
" Go for Clinton. She will do more for this country than either of the other canidates! Obama blows a lot of wind. Clinton is one of the strongest people in our nation! "

SandieSue wrote on April 2, 2008 8:18 am:
" Molecular Theory- I agree with you. I simply do not understand why a super-delegate exists, but since they do, how can they not support the vote of the majority? How can this woman be undecided when the rest of the caucus goers made it pretty clear who NE Democrats wanted? "

MarkyMark wrote on April 2, 2008 8:46 am:
" I think all of this circumvents the Democratic vote. All Superdelegates and even the delgates need to be done away with.....then....No Caucuses and a national primary day...its that simple. "

representative wrote on April 2, 2008 8:58 am:
" I don't see it as any desicion for her, She need to to represent the voters choice. If she truely represents the votes, she needs to cast her vote for who won the Caucus.

A side point. Hillary lets her daughter do all her dirty work, she can't call Audra herself? Also Hillary made no attempt to come to Nebraska, she sent Chelsey, and why you ask, well it is none of you business. "

Jalengrma wrote on April 2, 2008 9:02 am:
" I think the process should be changed. In fact, Ms Ostergard's votes DOES count more than mine or yours. She gets to make the final say and why? Because she is a Democratic party official? "

M wrote on April 2, 2008 9:03 am:
" While I voted (in the caucus) for Obama, she should vote for Clinton. That is what the people want. I think that she and Steve just want the attention. "

Hawthorne wrote on April 2, 2008 9:23 am:
" Super Delagates could be the bottom of the barrel if they do not choose to support the vote of the people. Looks like some of them think that they can be bought!!!!! (another Clinton thing, kind of like "I did not have sex with that woman, heh heh?) "

In Iowa wrote on April 2, 2008 12:03 pm:
" I feel bad for her. She's got such a Catch-22 going on. If she chooses Obama, she goes with the winner of the caucus but then our superdelegates don't match the results of the caucus. If she chooses Clinton it's proportionate, but then all the Obama people will cry foul since she didn't support the winner. I don't envy her that choice at all. "

kykp wrote on April 2, 2008 12:45 pm:
" The thing is she really has to vote for what she believes is best for the people she represents. Just because the people want something it's not always the best thing for them. Hard position, hard decision to make, but the desire of the masses is only part of her decision not the whole decision. "

Luke Peterson wrote on April 2, 2008 1:47 pm:
" I've meet Mrs. Ostergard personally numerous times and Mr. Walton did a great job emphasizing her experiences in her role as Vice Chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party as well as her life experiences as a common, ordinary Nebraskan. If any of you have the pleasure to meet her, you'll find that she is the most humble, gracious and kind-hearted person who really has benefited a lot from the Democratic Party policies. She is a poster child for what good the party that I belong to can do. I would like to believe that I am like that too. I'm so pleased to have her as my Vice Chair and I only wish her the best with her upcoming child. As far as her super delegate status, I only care if she picks a candidate that will help more local Democrats get elected this election cycle in Nebraska! "

Theory wrote on April 2, 2008 2:02 pm:
" Representative Democracy does not mean "all or our votes are equal." You are mistaking the concept with Direct Democracy. Just as the US has chosen an indirect style of representation, the Democratic Party has chosen one. Most superdelegates are elected public officials or party officials, so in a manner of speaking they are also democratically chosen. I'll agree with you that the Party's system is not purely democratic, but then, neither is any nation in the entire world. "

MarkyMark wrote on April 2, 2008 2:11 pm:
" How can you discredit Super Delegates, but talk about a Caucus like they are a Democratic thing? We have to get back to a vote. Caucuses are not representative. "

Don't vote for! wrote on April 2, 2008 2:24 pm:
" If super delegates are not to be public officials, they why are their some Now.
I do believe it is in the Constitution that no public officials can elect people to office. So why is their Super delegates then?. I guess you will never know why, if these don't do the job will they invent SUPER DUPER DELEGATES.

All I can say is it stinks to high heaven and it seems we do not have a voice in the matter, Why all the calling?.

would it be off base to think Money could be a factor in their decision?
Money NO WAY!!!

What a Joke the Democratic Party has become. "

Del wrote on April 2, 2008 3:02 pm:
" Surreal means having the intense irrational reliabilty of a dream. Here is the fact before you, the democrats on whatever level in the party can't make their minds up--do you want that for a president? "

JR wrote on April 2, 2008 10:10 pm:
" Ahh Del, don't you see? That is the beauty of it all. While you sit there and see indecision, the rest of us see a wealth of talent. With all three candidates, we have a very good choice for President. No matter who we choose, it will be so much better then what we have had to live with the last eight years. If you have already made up your mind, and you truly made that decision with no regard for party politics, then good for you. But if you made your decision because he has an R behind his name, then shame on you. That is the same sloppy decision making process that got us into this mess. "

George Washington Stalin wrote on April 3, 2008 8:02 am:
" Her vote as a superdelegate equates to approximately 9,500 votes of us serfs. Now that's "democracy" in the tried and true tradition of the U.S.S.R. (and it is written that "all animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others" "

smith wrote on April 3, 2008 8:13 am:
" I'd like to hear Ostergard's opinion of Hillary's concocting the fantasy adventure of dodging snipers and ducking for cover in Bosnia "

ADAMS wrote on April 25, 2008 4:11 pm:
" Superdelegates,

Do you support the statement "... Goddamn the United States of America"?

When a thing seems to be too good to be true, it probably is. Obama seems to be too good to be true. Are the same fools who reelected Bush going to fall for Obama's line?

Obama is the greatest threat this country has faced yet - even worse than Bush. No one knows what he will do as president. With our cowardly congress and the terrible precedent they let Bush establish, Obama could become a true dictator.

Do you want change? Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

"