BREAKING: Michigan Democrats officially have declared they won't hold a do-over presidential primary

[ericgtr]

Just breaking on CNN (top banner) more info to follow.. keep this kicked
http://www.cnn.com/

Edit additional information as promised:

<snip>

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/04/michigan-dems-rule-out-new-vote/
(CNN) – Michigan Democrats have decided not to hold a new presidential vote in their quest to seat their state's delegation at the party's nominating convention this summer.

“We have concluded that it is not practical to conduct such a primary or caucus,” says a statement to be released by the state party's executive committee Friday afternoon. But they pledge to continue to work with the Democratic National Committee and elected officials to ensure that the state is represented in Denver this August.

Hillary Clinton was the only major Democratic candidate to appear on the state's primary ballot this January. She won that contest with 55 percent of the vote, though she was awarded no delegates because Michigan had scheduled its primary in January, in violation of party instructions. Forty percent of the state's primary voters chose the "uncommitted" option.

<snip>

[Debi]

1. Granholm, Levin and Brewer must be so proud

They really showed the DNC didn't they?

[easy_b94]

2. Well thats that.....;)

[Bullet1987]

3. As if we didn't know this...Michigan and Florida were Hillary's last

real shots of overtaking him in the pledged delegates and popular vote. Now, she's running on bullshit really.

[ericgtr]

5. Put simply, you can't break the rules and expect to determine the outcome of a race

this should have never been an issue. Had they let FLA and MI get by with this it would never be enforceable again.

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. I count her Florida totals toward the popular vote tally

All the candidates were on the ballot in the Florida Primary, and although the DNC rules say no delegates could be seated from that primary outcome, the voters did vote and those votes were counted. Popular vote is unofficial anyway, there is not rule broken by including the tally of 1.7 million Floridian Demorats voting in tha popular vote count. Clinton would have won more popular votes in Michigan also in a revote.

[MadBadger]

13. I disagree with you about a Michigan revote. I think Obama would have won there.

[krispos42]

14. Nothing can be counted

No campaign was conducted in either state by any candidate, so the vote totals are meaningless and non-representative.

The only way to fairly include the votes of Florida and Michigan would be to have another vote after sufficient time has elapsed for all candidates to campaign.

:shrug: But that's not going to happen now. The state budgets for primary elections have been spent, and no money is forthcoming unless Obama and Clinton want to split the costs 50/50 and pay out of their own coffers, or some other financial backer steps up to the plate.

Frankly, this is yet another excellent reason to throw out the Republicans in the Florida Congress. They made real voting-law improvements (a good, noble goal) dependents on dismissing 50% of Republican and 100% of Democratic delegates (an asinine, partisan goal).

[MadBadger]

16. And you know the trend, Obama campaigns in a state and the lead closes

This has happened basically everywhere. Florida would have closed as well.

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. It didn't happen in California and Massachusetts

Clinton won by double digits in both of those States less than a week after the FL primary. Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama right before the FL primary and for the week leading up to Super Tuesday Obama had massive positive press and even had a surprise endorsement from the wife of CA's Gov (A Kennedy of course). There was a large Latino vote in Florida, just like in CA. No way Obama would have closed on Clinton.

[MadBadger]

22. It did close actually, though Florida is different than MA

Florida had its own primary, while MA and CA were among 21 other states or so. Obama could have spent plenty of time in that state, especially with his large lead in SC. He was in MA for one day. The pre super tuesday polling had him down 30 and he lost by half that. In CA he was down around 15-20 points and closed it to and 8-9 point gap.

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. If you go back far enough Clinton was ahead in every State

It is a little misleading to cite poll numbers from 2007 and call them "pre Super Tuesday". In the last days before CA's vote Clinton reversed gains Obama has been making there.

[MadBadger]

24. I cited polls in January of 2008 actually and specifically a MA SUSA Poll from Jan 16th

It had him down 33.

[Tom Rinaldo]

28. OK, but he still tied Clinton overall on Super Tuesday which means he lost some

Some states were good for him, some for her. Obama didn't start his real winning streqk until after then, it wasn't like he won everywhere he campaigned. Florida, like California, was a State that Hillar would have won even if both candidates campaigned there

[MadBadger]

31. She would have won, probably by 7-11 points.

[wileedog]

26. There is also a large Latino pop in Texas

Where he closed the margin considerably.

The point is we don't know for certain what would have happened. Which is why you can't jsut count a non-vote as is.

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. That was after Obama won 14 in a row though

They tied in delegates on Super Tuesday and Clinton won quite a few states that day, which was only a few days after Florida. Florida, like California, would have gone to Clinton even if both candidates campaigned there.

[stahbrett]

19. That seems perfectly fine to me

You acknowledge that the popular vote is unofficial (aren't there a few caucus states who haven't even announced their official vote totals?), and hopefully you also acknowledge that this nomination process is about delegates, not popular votes. The folks who seem to want to focus on popular votes are sort of like football fans who have a team that they like that loses the game by scoring fewer points than the other team, but talk on and on about how many yards their team racked up.

[Pirate Smile]

27. Or they count only the score from touchdowns and ignore the field-goals.

We were tied 14-14 when one team's actual score is 20-14 (two field-goals).

We count primaries but not caucuses; blue states but not red states; there can't be too many black people in the state (Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia) but there can't be too few either (Utah, Iowa, Idaho, Maine, etc.).

[Pirate Smile]

25. Obama could have not campaigned anywhere and lost by twenty points in every state.

He moves up when he campaigns. The Florida numbers are bogus but I know you'll count it anyway and Obama will win anyway.

[GarbagemanLB]

4. Thank you, Michigan! Go Obama!

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Will be interesting to see what happens now. n/t

[tokenlib]

8. As a Michigander--I am very relieved...

January was bad enough. But to compound it with another "unfair" revote (--they were going to disenfranchise all the dems who crossed over to the GOP slate and not let them revote)would have been shameful.

Granholm, Stabenow, and Levin in their desire to help grease the skids for Hillary screwed it all up enough.

For this year, the delegates from other states can vote on our behalf.

[quantass]

9. k&r

[ericgtr]

10. Thanks.. You Canadian?

Just wondering, I am thinking of moving there if we have another four years of Bush policies :rofl:

[TahitiNut]

11. If McCain has Romney on the ticket, this state will be VERY interesting in November.

The Democrats have essentially thrown the unemployed and foreclosed in Michigan under the "Who cares about you? What're ya gonna do, vote Republican?" bus.

If, as expected, Obama wins the nomination ... the Hillarites will stay home in droves - or vote for McCain in an encore of the 'Reagan Democrats' of 1980 in Macomb County.

Never misunderestimate how an angry Michigander will cut off his nose to spite someone else's face.

[tekisui]

18. We'll have to work harder there, and not count on it when drawing the

GE map. It is too bad the state reps messed it up so badly. Time to move forward.

[Ian_rd]

32. Their spiting their OWN face too

And I agree with you. This whole MI and FL fiasco could cost the Democrats a LOT of votes in November. I think the states did it to themselves when they, like everyone else, didn't anticipate how important their votes would be. The irony is painful - they moved up their primaries in order to be more powerful players in the campaign, and it turns out that if they had stayed right where they were, then they would have been exactly that. But instead, they totally tossed themselves out of the equation.

As far as Hillary supporters staying home, I'm trying to be optimistic and think that there's plenty of time for the bitterness to die down from the party fight and make them realize that our nation cannot afford for them to sit this one out.

[MichiganVote]

35. In Michigan...Hillary Clinton is the least of your problems when if comes to Mi votes.

[bigbrother05]

12. K and R

[SoCalDem]

15. There is an easy solution..

When all the primaries are over, each candidate gets the same percentage of MI delegates (what they have at that point...no plurality votes..only delegates)..BUT....NO SUPER DELEGATES.. *they caused this whole mess and should not benefit from it..

If HRH gets pissy, just give her the damned percentage she claimed she won in the "election" where she was the only (viable) candidate on the ballot.. If she wants them that badly..just give them to her so she won't throw another toddler-tantrum

same for FL..

[Purveyor]

17. From the AP wires...

LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- Michigan Democrats officially have declared they won't hold a do-over presidential primary.

Members of the state party's executive committee issued a statement Friday saying "we have concluded that it is not practical" to conduct a party-run primary or caucus as a way to get the state's Democratic National Convention delegates seated.

Michigan and Florida were stripped of their convention delegates for moving up their primaries in defiance of party rules.

Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton won the Jan. 15 Michigan primary. Rival Barack Obama had pulled his name from the ballot.

State Democrats now hope the two campaigns can agree on a way to split Michigan's pledged delegates so they can be seated at the Aug. 25-28 convention.

http://www.wilx.com/news/headlines/17299919.html

[AX10]

20. See.

the Dems are no better than the Pugs on this matter.
At least we don't have to listen to the crap from Randi's mouth these days.

[Barack_America]

30. Their first primary was declared unconstitutional.

So they will have difficulty requesting that the results of an essentially illegal election be honored.

This is going to remain a complicated issue.

[MichiganVote]

34. No it wasn't. The party cannot declare a state primary unconsitutional.

They can declare it null and void according to the party "rules" but they cannot declare a state primary unconstitutional.

[Barack_America]

36. Um yes it was, by a District Court Judge.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/27/michigan-january-15-prima_n_93679.html

A while ago, actually.

[MichiganVote]

37. Moving the date was declared unconstitutional, not the date that the primary was held.

There has been no court ruling on the date the primary was held.

[Barack_America]

38. Please read the article. The primary WAS declared unconstitutional...

...due to third party candidates being denied access to voter lists.

[spooky3]

39. no, the article you're citing said that the LAW was declared unconstitutional

The title of the article is sloppy wording (the article was written by a college student).

It's unfortunate that the state will be unable to hold another primary.

Here's a link to other articles:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032708C.shtml
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080326/METRO/803260443

[MichiganVote]

40. darling I read the article when it came out and for you today...

You need to consider the distinction that is being made for you.

[Scurrilous]

33. K & R

:thumbsup: