- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Michigan Re-vote at Risk as Obama Withholds Support
March 18, 2008 10:45 PM
ABC News' Teddy Davis and Eloise Harper report: The Democratic National Committee (DNC) says a proposal to hold a privately-financed June 3 re-vote in Michigan appropriately complies with the Democratic Party's delegate selection rules for nominating events.
But the plan's fate is in serious jeopardy, in part, because of a wait-and-see tactic adopted by Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., the Democratic front-runner who has the most to lose from allowing a re-vote to go forward.
Michigan state legislative leaders have indicated that Obama needs to agree to a repeat election before it will pass legislation.
But the Obama campaign has suggested that it is waiting on the Michigan legislature before signing off on a re-vote.
Chief among the Obama campaign's concerns are:
(1) whether people who voted in Michigan's Republican primary would be eligible to participate in the re-vote (the Obama campaign thinks that some of its supporters participated in the Michigan's GOP primary in January because Obama's name was not on the Democratic ballot).
(2) the reliance on private funding (which Michigan's Democratic governor and legislators of both parties insist on).
(3) whether local election officials will have time to discharge their responsibilities (state election officials have indicated that they need 60-70 days to prepare for an election).
Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor alluded to these three concerns in a statement issued Tuesday evening, adding that "we're waiting to see if these issues can be resolved by the legislature."
Current DNC rules prohibit a voter from participating in a Democratic nominating contest if he or she has voted earlier in the year in a Republican nominating contest. The Michigan re-vote proposal currently under consideration complies with the DNC's rule in this area.
But given the unusual circumstances facing Michigan, a DNC official said a special appeal could be made to the rules committee to waive this rule.
A re-vote proposal is under serious time pressure: the Michigan legislature is currently scheduled to go on a two-week Easter recess at the end of business on Thursday. Holding another primary also faces considerable political pressure: the Michigan state Senate is controlled by Republicans who want to make sure that the private financing is money-in-the-bank and not simply an IOU.
In addition, re-vote legislation faces a procedural hurdle: a two-thirds vote would be needed in order for a June 3 primary to happen.
If legislation is passed by the Michigan legislature, the Michigan Democratic Party would then have to draft a plan which would have to be available for public comment for 30 days before it is taken up by the DNC's rules and by-laws committee.
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., is headed to Detroit, Mich., on Wednesday in order to step up pressure on Obama.
"The people of Michigan should not be disenfranchised, and snubbing Michigan will hurt Democrats in the general election," said Clinton spokesman Mo Elleithee. "We have an opportunity to prevent that from happening and Sen. Obama is standing in the way of that opportunity. Clinton wants to go to Michigan to press that case herself."
Clinton's Wednesday push for a re-vote in Michigan comes two days after the Florida Democratic Party declared dead their plans to hold a do-over primary election in the Sunshine State.
Michigan and Florida Democrats have found themselves weighing re-vote proposals because both states were stripped of their delegates to the Democratic National Convention when they violated DNC rules by holding their contests before Feb. 5.
March 18, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (103)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Hillary and the other candidates agreed last year that the Michigan and Florida primaries would not count. Now that she is down to holding on by a thread, she changes her stance and decries voter disenfranchisement. If she really thought that it was voter disenfranchisement, then why did she agree to it last year? Is she a flip-flopper or is it sour grapes?
Posted by: gail | Mar 19, 2008 12:17:07 AM
If the DNC has a provision in its rules for states to make a request to have their delegates seated (which was also outlined in the rules at the time they stripped MI of their delegates) and a state has appropriately complied with those rules by putting forth a new plan for a re-vote, then all candidates should respect the wishes of the state.
Since the Obama campaign continues to point out ALL of the time that they are ahead in delegate count, states and popular vote, what are they afraid of? Have they paused to consider that they might actually do well? That was the claim for Florida--he didn't get to campaign there because if he had, he would undoubtedly done better in the primary. So, does this logic not apply for Michigan?
What Michigan has put forth is legitimate and complies with the rules set forth at the onset of this campaign. I don't see how denying Michigan their vote is a good political move. I think there would be greater consequences than a few delegates.
Posted by: LOM | Mar 19, 2008 12:19:23 AM
Gail-Do you really want to disenfranchise two huge states, FL and MI? Do you want to give those two states to the republicans even before the general begins? Heck if you do, I'd be interested in your version of how any democrat can win the White House. Please explain.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 19, 2008 12:21:39 AM
DCVoter: funny you should say that, especially when Hillary Clinton has been trying just these past few days to impose her own delaying tactics on the Texas caucus for her own benefit - honest or not. Barack Obama's concerns are perfectly legitimate. It is so easy to criticize when you are not faced with the same dilemma. Put yourself in his shoes for just a minute or two and see if you would not do the same thing to make sure that you are not disadvantaged. As an outsider watching the presidential campaign, the hypocrisy by many is just breathtaking and if there is one thing that is becoming clear about the man in the street, it is that it is especially the ignorant, the envious, the cowardly and those who have a guilty conscience who doth protest too much. They are busy making a lot of useless, hysterical noise because they are too afraid to look at the facts in the face, and most of all because they are too afraid to face what those facts will reveal about their own character; about who they are as human beings; about how much of their ideological security blankets they will have to chuck and how much outside of their comfort zones they will have to step in order to face the truth, accept it and then develop new attitudes. America has lost the credibility, respect and the admiration of the world today because she continues to ignore the past, pretends about the present and doesn't really give a damn about the world's future. It is already sounding the death knell when a nation continues to see others only in economic terms - sources of cheap labour, sources of raw materials, markets for your products, playgrounds for you to test your military and warfare inventions and keep the status quo to make life comfortable for only you. When a nation wants to whitewash its history and totally pretend that things that were and are, never were and are, or that some are better than others and so their wrong-doing can be excused, accommodated and even admired whilst others are crucified for the same thing or less, then you can rest assured that such a nation can forget about regaining its former status in the world. That era is well and truly over. This presidential campaign has lost its wonderful and awesome joy and become bitter, hypocritical and twisted. But should we be surprised? Maybe not – because, after all, that is how many outsiders now see America because that is the image she projects.
Posted by: sarasoon | Mar 19, 2008 12:29:18 AM
DCVoter: funny you should say that, especially when Hillary Clinton has been trying just these past few days to impose her own delaying tactics on the Texas caucus for her own benefit - honest or not. Barack Obama's concerns are perfectly legitimate. It is so easy to criticize when you are not faced with the same dilemma. Put yourself in his shoes for just a minute or two and see if you would not do the same thing to make sure that you are not disadvantaged. As an outsider watching the presidential campaign, the hypocrisy by many is just breathtaking and if there is one thing that is becoming clear about the man in the street, it is that it is especially the ignorant, the envious, the cowardly and those who have a guilty conscience who doth protest too much. They are busy making a lot of useless, hysterical noise because they are too afraid to look at the facts in the face, and most of all because they are too afraid to face what those facts will reveal about their own character; about who they are as human beings; about how much of their ideological security blankets they will have to chuck and how much outside of their comfort zones they will have to step in order to face the truth, accept it and then develop new attitudes. America has lost the credibility, respect and the admiration of the world today because she continues to ignore the past, pretends about the present and doesn't really give a damn about the world's future. It is already sounding the death knell when a nation continues to see others only in economic terms - sources of cheap labour, sources of raw materials, markets for your products, playgrounds for you to test your military and warfare inventions and keep the status quo to make life comfortable for only you. When a nation wants to whitewash its history and totally pretend that things that were and are, never were and are, or that some are better than others and so their wrong-doing can be excused, accommodated and even admired whilst others are crucified for the same thing or less, then you can rest assured that such a nation can forget about regaining its former status in the world. That era is well and truly over. This presidential campaign has lost its wonderful and awesome joy and become bitter, hypocritical and twisted. But should we be surprised? Maybe not – because, after all, that is how many outsiders now see America because that is the image she projects.
Posted by: sarasoon | Mar 19, 2008 12:29:30 AM
Sarasoon-Obama was the first guy who demanded Imus be fired and this is what he said: "I am a constitutional lawyer and strongly believe in free speech, but as a culture, we really have to do some soul-searching to think about what kind of toxic information are we feeding our kids," he concluded.
That was before we learned Obama brought his kids to listen to Reverend Wright and we all know how that turned out.
Now, Obama demanded that of a shock jock, Don Imus. Surely we can demand no less of a presidential candidate.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 19, 2008 12:36:25 AM
he won't distance himself from his racist minister
BUT
he's more than happy to disenfranchise the vote of TWO STATES?
What kind of a president would he make if he can't even uphold the Constitution?
Posted by: QUESTIONER | Mar 19, 2008 12:46:30 AM
I think Obama should just agree to allowing all citizens to be allowed to participate in this election. That is all of our right as citizen.
If Obama had been truthful and let the public know about his 20 years asssociation with this anti-American pastor, he wouldn't be in the running now. Now he along with the media is trying to spin it into being just a racial thing. This is about him sitting in that church and listening to his close friend, advisor, mentor and pastor spew hate for this Country and most of the citizens. He can never unite anything by waring two faces. In his personal life he is clapping and amening the hate spewing pastor and in his speeches (very few are his own) he is talking about bringing us all together, etc. When he and his supporters weren't calling anyone who opened their mouth about him a racist. Now is turns out that he and the Rev. are racist. For 20 years he has attended an all black church, listened to hate for this Country and all races except blacks and now because people are finding something wrong with that, we are racist. People can attack people but they can't damn the Country or anyone who sits and listens to and admires anyone who damns the Country will get my vote. I will not betray my Country for the party. He has made some terrible choices.
Posted by: Mickey | Mar 19, 2008 12:49:20 AM
This revote isn't fair. 32 percent of the voters in the republican primary were democrats and independents.
They were mostly Obama supporters who were told the Michigan primary wouldn't count. Dailykos encouraged readers to vote for Romney.
Telling all these Obama supporters they can't vote in the democratic primary now is wrong. That is disenfranchisement.
Hillary in October in New hampshire on NPR said Michigan vote wouldn't be counted. Hillary said it didn't make a difference if she kept her name on the ballot or not.
Governor Granholm is a huge Clinton supporter. She wants the primary on June 3 when all the colleges are on summer break. They can't even vote by absentee if you are a first time voter.
Granholm originally moved Michigan up so New Hampshire would have their primary so early college students were on break.
The original Michigan and Florida primaries were fraudulent. They were the only primaries were the gop turnout was higher than the dems. Loads of Obama supporters stayed home thinking the vote wouldn't count.
Clinton has mislead the voters of Michigan. First in New Hampshire saying it wouldn't count now saying it should count.
Now Clinton wants a new primary where all the dems and independent Obama supporters who voted in the republican primary because Obama wasn't on the ballot, now they can't vote.
The Obama supporters who now can't vote because they voted in the republican primary to pick the weakest gop candidate because they were told the dem primary was meaningless. To have a vote where they can't vote is an outrage.
Add in the fact that Hillary wants this primary when all the college campuses are empty. Not only will University of Michigan and Michigan State be empty of students on june 3rd but it will be empty of support staff, professors. These university towns are crucial to Obama.
Hillary wants a new election without Obama democrats and independents being allowed to vote and with college campuses empty.
Hillary is the one that isn't being honest and holding up a fair election.
Let Obama's supporters who voted in the gop primary vote and have the election when colleges are still in session.
Posted by: Steve | Mar 19, 2008 12:49:22 AM
sarasoon - you are misinformed... Clinton made a request to audit the caucuses and she has every right to do so considering all the evidence and reports of wrong doing by the voters as well as the improbable result... i wont bother arguing the point just thought i might inform you of the real truth instead of Obama camp or RNC spin
Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 19, 2008 12:51:39 AM
From what I read on the TX case, the state is refusing to reveal the tallies... ie. they wont let her verify the caucus votes were valid... i have no doubt that there will be lawsuits filed by citizens and organizations... could she file one? certainly... we are a nation of laws... refusing to allow a candidate to examine the caucus results is the same as refusing a convicted person the right to poll the jury
Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 19, 2008 12:54:00 AM
Clinton is the one playing unfair.
Clinton wants this decided by superdelegates.
Clinton says superdelegates should be able to overturn the will of the people.
Clinton says she can go after Obama's pledged elected delegates. Then her aides deny and Clinton still repeated the assertion the next day which the media didn't pick up.
Hillary in October on NPR in New Hampshire said Michigan's delegates wouldn't be seated and it didn't make a difference whether she kept her name on the ballot.
Hillary thought it would be over on super tuesday. Then later after the fake elections in michigan and florida she calls them fair votes.
Hillary is an outright liar. She flip flops so much she has shown she is incapable of making decisions. Look at how she has managed her campaign she is no manager.
Posted by: steve | Mar 19, 2008 12:54:18 AM
Steve-I beg to differ. Obama isn't doing so good lately. I guess we're going to have to go all the way now, don't you think? And I would add that super delegates, as much as I truly hate this democrat stupidly that should go by way of the dinosaurs, are a set of rules belonging to the dark ages. Yet we're stuck with them. Only democrats can create a mess like this. "We can't even run a decent primary. How can we possibly run a nation?" I heard on Fox tonight.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 19, 2008 1:00:47 AM
KP-How is DCVoter splitting the dems? What vicious posts? I'm curious?
Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 19, 2008 1:02:42 AM
What a selfish man.
He knew he is going to lose in MI & FL.
Now,,,FL already rejected.
He always asks for help. Pelosi is doing it now.
Sound like mafia to me.
Posted by: crisis08 | Mar 19, 2008 1:05:09 AM
KP,
Somehow you seem to think that disenfranchisng Florida and Michigan will be perfectly OK in the world of Democratic politics. It doesn't work quite so fairy-tale like my friend. I guarantee you if the Democratic Party chooses to ignore my Democratic vote then I will not hesitate to switch to a different party so my vote will count. The Republicans can only hope that the Democrats are that stupid.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Mar 19, 2008 1:05:53 AM
Obama wants us to understand the good reverend but not the wishes of the voters in FL and MI? What double standard are you talking about?
Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 19, 2008 1:08:13 AM
Irma-You mean everyone else is mean but not the good reverend? We didn't befriend the guy, Obama did. We didn't say G D America Obama's spiritual adviser did. We didn't put Obama in this position he now finds himself in, Obama did.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 19, 2008 1:12:31 AM
Senator Obama is not disenfranchising any voter. Florida and Michigan voted. The voters understood it would not be counted so many of them voted in the Republican primary or did not vote at all.
Again, this is the states that made the decision on behalf of their voters not to change the primary dates when they were told their votes would not count. They were told they would be stripped of their delegate voting rights. How much plainer can the language be???
You know I always wondered about how good citizens could become vigilante mobs. This forum shows how perfectly. You take a few full-time rabble rousers and let them work up those who have a problem thinking for themselves but no problem repeating wrong information and then call the other bunch un-american or whatever name is needed and then keep it up until the crowd becomes a lynch mob.
That is the ugliness many of you people project. Then you have the gall to judge Reverend Wright or anyone else? You wonder why we have problems in this country? Look in the mirror.
Posted by: Chip | Mar 19, 2008 1:13:20 AM
Steve,
I'm ROFL. We should not do a Michigan re-vote because Daily Kos was so stupid as to tell people to vote for Romney? What kind of Democrat tells people to vote for a Republican? That is a pathetic thing to do, no intentional offense directed at our wayward friends the Republicans (this time only).
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Mar 19, 2008 1:13:57 AM
Post a comment



