Help me understand what’s going on.
Am I right in understanding that Hillary could still get the Democratic nomination?
Am I right in understanding that Obama is allowng this situation out of the goodness of his heart?
Or is this something else?
Sure. So could you and so could I. (Assuming that you’re a constitutionally eligible American.) All it would require is that hundreds of people enthusiastic enough about Obama to run and get elected as Obama-pledged delegates suddenly change their mind for no apparent reason.
What “situation”, exactly? If you’re referring to her apparent desire to have a nominating speech on her behalf, then no, she has more than enough delegates to achieve that on her own.
Perhaps the OP is thinking about Obama’s recent pledge to Hillary to agree to have her name be entered into nomination at the convention. Here’s one news link: Hillary Clinton’s name to be placed in nomination at convention
Obama’s motives are doubtless multiple: While there’s undeniably an element of genuine good will on his part (I mean, he could have been a prick about it), the decision is also very pragmatic in political terms, which I would suspect is the stronger motive. He needs Hillary’s supporters to see him pay her the respect that they feel are her due, and that’s both a gracious and a smart way to do it.
But while technically the convention hasn’t officially chosen a nominee yet (and thus Hillary could conceivably get it), the probability of that is so remote it is essentially zero.
It should be noted that, according to the customary practice at past conventions, the winning candidate doesn’t need to “agree” to allow losing candidates to be entered into nomination. Every convention writes its own rules, and practice has varied over time, but the usual arrangement has been that any candidate with a minimum number of pledged delegates (sometimes as few as one) or a minimum number of signatures on a petition can be entered into nomination.
Since every convention writes its own rules, and since Obama controls a majority of delegates, he could in theory arrange the rules this year so as to preclude competing nominations. However, that would be a departure from historic practice.
Modern conventions are tightly scripted affairs, and as the article notes, the exact circumstances of the speech-making (including Hillary’s appearance on an earlier night) are subject to “negotiation”. The principle of a competing nomination, however, would not have been questioned in prior years.
But if I’m not mistaken, Obama hasn’t won since his pledged delegates does not put him over the top. He won’t win until the superdelegates vote.
I’m sure that this decision is not Obama being generous. Could he honestly say as the LEADING candidate not to allow anyone else to be nominated. Would it even be legal by DNC rules?