Some angry comments from Michiganders...Michigan blog..

[SaveElmer]

Linked at Mydd

http://www.michiganliberal.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=10332

First of all, the DNC can bite me. If they don't want my vote, they're not getting my money. I will be spending all of my money and all of my volunteer hours elsewhere.

Second of all, if Hillary stays in she's automatically won my vote, even though she's third on my list.

...

Do you want a small number of people in Iowa and New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada, to select the Democratic Party's candidate for president? Do you believe manufacturing states such as Michigan should have a voice in the process? Or do you accept the status quo?

The DNC clearly does not believe in democracy, or it would advocate a more inclusive process, not fight Florida and Michigan for wanting a say in the future of our country. Stick to your guns, Michigan and Florida --our votes won't count this year (but they wouldn't anyway), but we will force the DNC to change its process next time around, (assuming the Republicans still allow the Democrats to hold primaries in 4-5 more years).

And please don't send money to political candidates who shun Michigan -- that's sending the wrong message.

...

I agree with you 1000% Betsy. If Edwards and Obama are so busy "respecting" the states of Iowa and New Hampshire, by a process of elimination, they are obviously disrespecting the state of Michigan.

I will not vote nor send money to any political candidate that does not respect - and campaign for - MY VOTE!!!

I was sitting on the fence until today. But I am so insulted, upset and outraged that there is no way that I will vote for anyone but Hillary Clinton.

A candidate strong enough to stand on principle and not kowtow to Dean and the democratic power-brokers is the kind of Leader I would trust in the White House.

...

I sent Edwards a check earlier this week . . . the last one until he changes his decision to shit on MI. The math is simple: a Democratic nominee can lose NH and IA, but MI is a MUST WIN. We have more electoral votes than IA and NH combined -- which one would you rather dis?

...

We have Dodd, Clinton, Kucinich and Gravel. Pick one and show the rest we in Michigan are not to be taken for granted.
Unsubscribe from all the emails from the candidates who tokk their names off, send a message!

...

I just heard the news. Are they trying to just hand the state to Hillary? Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and we will not go ahead with this ridiculous primary plan. It's backfired big time.

...

With all the problems Michigan is coping with, the Presidential candidates are wrong to take their names off our ballot.
I am reminded of the old Kenny Roger's song, "You picked a fine time to leave me Lucille". As the Republican's will be "Dancing in the Streets" (Martha and the Vandella's) we will feel the pain of not having a meaningful caucus or primary. I am sorry but I hope Howard Dean (who I poured all my energy into his Primary race) will hear plenty of complaints when he comes to Oakland County.
We have a lot of work to do here in Michigan, I won't pay the Presidential candidates a bit of attention and hopefully everyone unsubscribe from their email lists.
That should alert them that they may be making a big mistake. To have thousands of people unsubscribe within a few days may get their attenetion.

...

They don't want to come - they don't get my vote. Had interest in Obama, skeptical of Edwards already.

I now throw my support behind Hillary. It is over. And none of these desparate losers are worthy of the VP either.

They have sealed their fate.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

1. edit and thanks for link.

:think:

MKJ

[SaveElmer]

2. Was an accident...

Also, actually is a Michigan blog linked at MyDD...

http://www.michiganliberal.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=10332

Not sure of the point in the backhanded insult...bring it to my attention that I had neglected to include the link would have sufficed...

[madfloridian]

3. Ironic and strange....the committee was formed because of Michigan.

Primary problem

"Expletives were flying. The head of the Democratic National Committee was having it out with Sen. Carl Levin because Michigan wanted to crash the rarefied club of early presidential primary states.

Move your primary too early, Terry McAuliffe warned, and Michigan will lose half its delegates to the 2004 Democratic convention.

"The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television," McAuliffe vowed. "I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules."

Did you know Terry and Carl Levin made a deal? If Levin backed off, Terry would form a commission. He did that. These rules are the result of the commission.

The deal between McAuliffe and Levin

"The panel, which carried the unwieldy name of Commission on Presidential Nomination Timing and Scheduling, made two sets of recommendations, one dealing with the opening phase of the nominating calendar and the other with the later phases.

The commission came into existence as part of a bargain between former DNC chairman Terence R. McAuliffe and Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.). Levin has long agitated against what he calls the privileged position of Iowa and New Hampshire, which hold the first caucus and first primary every four years. During the 2004 presidential campaign cycle, McAuliffe bought peace with Levin by promising to appoint a commission after the election if the senator would agree not to try to blow up the calendar for that year.

..."The commission's final recommendation was a classic compromise. Seeking to avoid angering Iowa and New Hampshire voters, the panel reaffirmed Iowa's status as the first state to hold a caucus and New Hampshire's as the first to hold a primary. Seeking to mollify the critics of those two states, the commission proposed inserting one or two caucuses between Iowa and New Hampshire in mid-January 2008 and then adding one or two primaries shortly after the Granite State's primary. No other states would be authorized to hold contests before Feb. 5, 2008."

Ironic a little, isn't it? Rules made by a committee formed by a deal with Levin are causing MI to say FU to Dean.

Strange world.

[dsc]

4. Michigan ran a third world election last time

frankly they have no business running an early primary after the fiasco they ran in 2004.

[ncabot22]

5. From your link

It looks like it is going to be an interesting primary! :)

Hillary should withdraw (0.00 / 0)
As I could have noted in my own diary: Hillary should withdraw her name too now, or risk looking like
1) a person comfortable with rulebreaking and defying the DNC, and

2) somebody dumb enough to be trapped in a Michigan "show primary" with jokey opposition like Kucinich and Gravel. Ouch!


I care a lot about Michigan (4.00 / 1)
In fact, I care so much about the state I love that I'm willing to forgive Obama or Edwards or anyone else and find a way to show my support, because I want the president who will help this state the most. Michigan isn't in bad shape right now because a few politicians aren't going to be on the ballot. It's in bad shape because of trade policies (enacted under a Clinton) and economic policies (enacted under Republicans) that are sucking the life out of the state.

I love Michigan, but I'm willing to accept that sometimes, our collective political ego needs to take a back seat to what really matters-- electing leaders who will help this state and this country.

In the general election, I'm voting for the Democratic nominee, period. Anyone who wouldn't do that if it were Obama and Edwards just because of this really needs to refocus his priorities.


Kucinich/Gravel: super (0.00 / 0)
If you're concerned for Michigan, demand the MDP follow the rules and schedule a 2/5 or 2/9/07 caucus...


Rules? New Hampshire (0.00 / 0)
I guess it is okay for New Hampshire to break the rules without having any punishment! Just Michigan Dems! They were not coming to Michigan anyway, why not let us vote?



If Hillary stays in, (0.00 / 0)
I'm voting for Kucinich, otherwise I'm just not voting.
But lets be serious, there's going to be a primary/caucus in Michigan and everybody is going to be here. It's just a matter of when...

[LittleClarkie]

10. HOw does he reckon that NH is breaking the rules

I don't follow him. Anyone know what he's talking about?

[ncabot22]

12. I have no idea

I was hoping someone would explain it to me. :) I thought NH was staying with the 1/22 date.

[yewberry]

18. The MDP circulated that one.

As it was changing its primary date, the MDP tried to get the DNC to sanction NH even though NH hadn't changed its primary date.

Charming.

[madfloridian]

19. Exactly.

:hi:

[muntrv]

6. Edwards, Obama, Richardson, and Biden need to put aside their foolish

pride and just put their name on the MI ballot. Otherwise, they better not bitch about MI going to the GOP.

[Terri S]

7. Kucinich took his name off the ballot too. Dodd is keeping his name on.

They all said they would abide by the DNC rules. Now Hillary and Dodd want to have it both ways. The time for you to be angry was when they made the decision to folow the rules in the first place. Now, you're just falling for the fact that they (Clinton and Dodd) want to have it both ways.

I live in FL. I'm pissed too -- but I'm more pissed at the Florida Democratic Party. They voted for the rules to begin with, then they decided they didn't like it and pushed the primary date up in the middle of campaign season. Michigan did too. This country has been in dire need of election reform since at least 2000. What has the Michigan Democratic leadership, the Florida Dem leadership or the DNC done in all this time? NADA! The DNC could have handled the whole thing better, but FL and MI had a chance to vote against the rules when they were first adopted and they didn't.

The only winners in this whole situation are Republicans. The real losers are the voters. But you can't blame Edwards, Obama, Richardson, Biden and Kucinich for abiding by rules that all the states originally agreed to. And I really can't understand giving any kind of kudos to Hillary or Dodd for trying to play all sides.

[SaveElmer]

8. I don't believe the pledge require they not appear on the ballot...

Only that they do not campaign there...

As far as I know both Hillary and Dodd have pledged not to campaign in Michigan...

[rinsd]

16. Um the pledge had nothing to do with having names on the ballot.

This was a candidate stampede of 'me too!" after an interesting political move by the Richardson campaign.

The pledge has to do with campaigning and spending money in states that do not abide by the DNC rules.

But you're right, the real losers are the voters.

[ripple]

9. And some less angry comments from the same link

As I could have noted in my own diary: Hillary should withdraw her name too now, or risk looking like
1) a person comfortable with rulebreaking and defying the DNC, and
2) somebody dumb enough to be trapped in a Michigan "show primary" with jokey opposition like Kucinich and Gravel. Ouch!



I care a lot about Michigan
In fact, I care so much about the state I love that I'm willing to forgive Obama or Edwards or anyone else and find a way to show my support, because I want the president who will help this state the most.
Michigan isn't in bad shape right now because a few politicians aren't going to be on the ballot. It's in bad shape because of trade policies (enacted under a Clinton) and economic policies (enacted under Republicans) that are sucking the life out of the state.
I love Michigan, but I'm willing to accept that sometimes, our collective political ego needs to take a back seat to what really matters-- electing leaders who will help this state and this country.
In the general election, I'm voting for the Democratic nominee, period. Anyone who wouldn't do that if it were Obama and Edwards just because of this really needs to refocus his priorities.

[SaveElmer]

11. More angry than not...nt

[ncabot22]

13. But still some aren't too upset

The important thing is they support the Dem candidate in the GE.

[Capn Sunshine]

15. and I'm sure no one stacked that blog with comments

why, that would be .....unethical!
:rofl:

[ripple]

17. Agreed, but it doesn't seem like a very active blog at all

so the sampling is pretty small. I'm guessing that people are more likely to post on timely topics when they're pissed off, rather than when they're not. Relative to the number of registered dems in Michigan, I'm not seeing all that many pissed off people on that blog.

[ShaneGR]

14. So who is gonna move their primary up to December next time

What, do rules not matter anymore?

[yewberry]

20. Hell, why not everyone?

That way, the field will already be narrowed down to the mega-rich and we can skip the primary process altogether and go with the one that can afford a national campaign.

Great plan!

[lyonn]

21. Got it figured out

We all vote on the same day.....make it in the spring with better weather.

I know, nothing can be that simple with governments.

Just like continuing to use the Electoral College rather than a popular vote.

Edit: I suspect most States that have primaries and caucuses late feel that way, like our vote doesn't count.

[yewberry]

22. Uh, you'll price out all the less-funded candidates that way.

That's the whole reason behind the small-state strategy in the first place.

No Kucinich, no Gravel, no Richardson could compete on the national level.

[lyonn]

23. Probably right, but it looks like Iowa, New Hampshire and

North or South Carolina, (shows my ignorance of the order of States after Iowa & NH) pretty much decides the candidate. Biden is my choice yet if he fails in those two States he is out of the running. Only the top 3 have any Real money.

Most people are not political junkies (nuts) like DUers. They never get to know the candidates names. People in Iowa & NH probably know what kind of shampoo they use, not the rest of the country.

Edit: Geez tofunut, truly didn't intend to dis you with the (nut) comment. Just noticed your name and am embarrassed.

[yewberry]

24. *snort*

I probably wouldn't have noticed the 'nut' thing had you not said something.

As it is, the Dem calendar is currently IA, MI:puke:, NV, NH, SC/FL.

And yeah, you're right. IA and NH voters are incredibly devoted to the process. I guess I don't completely understand the argument that "IA and NH decide the nominees"--I mean, isn't that only true to the extent that candidates who don't perform well or cannot afford to continue drop out? Would unpublished results from early primaries (in whichever state they might take place in) make a difference?

At this point, I'm hoping very much for real changes in the primary calendar (providing FL and MI are last in future primaries) but at the same time, I'll support early small states as an attempt to give less-funded candidates more equal footing. At least, that is, until we get serious about publicly funded elections.

(I'm not holding my breath.)

[lyonn]

25. One thing for sure is that you can never be sure about

which way Iowa will go. That gives all of us hope our candidate can succeed. Ha

Just (sorta) watched the repub debate and lordy any one of our Dem candidates is a Star in comparison.

[yewberry]

26. I guess you can never be sure about how any state will go.

(Okay, not MA. That's generally a pretty easy call.)

I couldn't sit through the (R) debate--those folks are nuts. Kudos to you for taking one for the team!