Dickerson identifies two important arguments Clinton will and must make to superdelegates: Clinton wins the big battle-ground states and she wins among core blue-collar Democrats.

But there are other factors that superdelegates need to consider.

Foremost, is Barack Obama the "best" nominee? His U.S. Senate record is thin, in spite of several noteworthy accomplishments. He has not been a U.S. Senator long enough to have worked with others "across the aisle" nor does he have the legislative accomplishments that answer this concern.Additionally, Obama has one of the highest missed voting records of any U.S. Senator. While some of this can be attributed to his presidential run, Sen. Clinton has made votes during the same period that he has not. And he has not proved himself yet on the Foreign Affairs Committee, where he chairs the subcommittee on NATO and Europe.

Sen. Clinton has proved herself on the Armed Services Committee. Sen. Clinton's record includes impressive accomplishments for her constituents in New York, as well as achievements for the greater good toward health and safety, military families, U.S. troops' health care, and higher education.

The second concern involves the so-called "will of the people" argument. Sen. Obama can certainly argue that he has won more states than Sen. Clinton. I am not convinced, however, that he can argue, in good faith, the "will of the people", particularly not in caucus states. Tempting though it is to use caucus states as representative of the greater will of Democratic voters, this is simply not the case. Caucuses represent only 2 percent of a state's voters at the low end and just 10 percent of voters at the high end. Primaries are much more representative of the "people's will".

Finally, if we are "hiring" somebody for this position, as Sen. Clinton states, superdelegates should look at a "seniority-like" factor. Seniority is a tried-and-true union contract provision that has helped women and minorities over the years, especially in situations (workplaces) where the "inside track" often kept them off the fast track. This factor, in concert with experience, is a powerful and positive tool that actually depersonalizes and de-politicizes it.

These are several additional arguments that superdelegates need to weigh as this process goes forward. However -- and I have posted this elsewhere -- superdelegates need to put the braks on their decision until voters have their say. Once this process is complete, superdelegates can and should take their leadership role without being excessively emotional.