January 15th, 2008
09:50 PM ET
11 years ago

Clinton campaign manager: Michigan vote sent message

(CNN) - Hillary Clinton's campaign said Michigan's Democratic primary vote for the New York senator sent a clear message - despite the fact that she was the only major presidential candidate on the ballot.

“Tonight Michigan Democrats spoke loudly for a new beginning," said campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle in a statement sent to reporters shortly after the polls closed in the state. "You spoke out for an economy that would honor the middle class, not punish it. You spoke out for a president who will fight to create good paying jobs at a time when so many families are struggling to make ends meet.

"You spoke out for an end to the war in Iraq. You spoke out for a quality, affordable health care system that works for all Americans. For that, we thank you. Your voices matter. And as president, Hillary Clinton will not only keep listening, but will make sure your voice is always heard."

The other major Democratic contenders pulled their names from consideration in Michigan, and none have campaigned there, following the national party’s decision to penalize the state for defying its instructions not to hold its primary in January.

–CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand


Filed under: Michigan
soundoff (187 Responses)
  1. Mike T

    ..And what does it say that Bush's VP isn't running??

    January 16, 2008 02:16 pm at 2:16 pm |
  2. Disabled Veteran

    3 yr+ "Combat Vietnam Veteran Disabled" : We whom "Honorably served our country. And the "Brothers" on the Wall, Do not need "Draft Dodger Bill", Nor "Billary", who showed the U.S.A. that "Womanizing" is the thing to do!, Screwed up "Healthcare", I am not against "Race, Gender", But the sorry, sick, and "Selfish Clintons" want for their own personal gains!, Like their land deal in Arkansas, and "Bills" failed attempts with "Military" responses that had to be abandoned, Now U. want his wife?? "Chelsea next? Give me a break! "Progress, not Regress"!! If "Hillary" has any, ANY, ANY respect? for our military personel? now it doesn`t show in her past!! "Hippie". I wish no "Harm"!! But when I eat at my table, "H-"Billary" would never be invited to step foot on my property. "COMBAT" was a VACATION!, COMPARED to being DEPRIVED of our RIGHTS for serving our country for their 8 years, Not to mention losses one goes thru to obtain their "Rights"! "WAKE UP AMERICA"!! I proudly served my fellow Americans! "Bless our Troops today"!! America needs a good President!, not someone on a personal vendeta.! I know "Sex, Racisom, Religion, have no question of "Presidency". Best advise= "Get an Iron", Keep ur husband satisified! Retire, you got your money.

    January 16, 2008 02:16 pm at 2:16 pm |
  3. Mike T

    Sick of distortions – I am also sick of distortions. So what percentage of the votes in MI were counted on DIEBOLD machines??

    January 16, 2008 02:56 pm at 2:56 pm |
  4. Nando, Florida

    AND WHAT DID SHE GET BEHIND DOOR NUMBER ONE? NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!BECAUSE IT DOES NOT COUNT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    January 16, 2008 03:01 pm at 3:01 pm |
  5. Penny Leonard

    Make Clinton disclose who her special interest sponsors are. Notice how whe never talks about special interest and Obama does? She dodged a bullit last nites question from Edwards regarding sponsors. Obama answered honestly and you could see her facial expression at not having to answeer it.....AMAZING to be fair CNN needs to publically ask her about her special interest sponsors and with all her "experience" she knows she will OWE them on day one of the job and America will loose and business as usual will occur. Obama's enthusiasm and honesty and inexperience will serve him well as President and he will wipe out the debt owing to special interest groups that have profited over the blue collar workers.....Please notice how she never talks about special interest groups very much ...only once did I hear her ....she dodges it because she needs their money to continue her campaign.......CNN ask her who has been sponsoring her campaign??????

    January 16, 2008 03:21 pm at 3:21 pm |
  6. Steven

    This is as clear as a fog! As it sits, no delegates. The DNC placed party above the people! For the people? By the people? Not in Michigan, not in Florida! Not in the DNC! Sad! Really Sad!

    January 16, 2008 05:14 pm at 5:14 pm |
  7. Carole Ca

    I hope CNN will ask Clinton about her donors after they have looked into why Obama's New Hampshire Campaign Chair is a lobbyist for the pharmeceutical industry, into the money he's received from special interests, into his connection with Exelon (which owns all the nuclear energy plants in Illinois), into the favors he's received from and given to his long-time friend, Tony Rezko, an indicted Chicago slum lord, and into why he has 3 lobbyists on his campaign payroll, (Lobbyists who represent several corporations including Walmart, Lockheed-Martin, and British Petroleum.) Yes, I think it would be good for the entire Democratic process to ask Hillary about her donors as well as Obama about his.

    January 16, 2008 07:21 pm at 7:21 pm |
  8. Bethy

    LOL

    I am from Michigan and I am an independent voter. Since it is an "open primary", I know many democratic voters who voted Republican (because they could not stand a vote that was meaningless–since Demos got No delegates in Mich)...so the numbers are just off. We have no idea what the results would have been. I personally voted McCain, but would have considered Obama if his name were on the ticket and if the votes actually counted. I also know many who just didn't vote at all. From many in Michigan, It is laughable that Hillary's campaign even pretended to have "won".

    January 16, 2008 07:53 pm at 7:53 pm |
  9. proud florida democrat

    James watch cspan. Then you will see Hillary is the only one talking about ALL THE ISSUES important to the party and how we will proceed as a country. Obama just give speeches on the problems, he never answers tough questions on HOW!!!!

    Michigan knew what uncommitted meant. Obama and Edwards both poured resources to make people know.

    As far as floida and campaigning

    First you are allowed to have fundraisers, as a fundraiser it is something i follow just a bit. For the record I have attended an Obama rally in Miami and know of one in Tampa.

    Furthermore, as I understand it Obama cares very much about voters rights. WHY IS HE NOT TAKING A STAND FOR FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN? His campaign has said that our states our not important. Note more people voted in Michigan than NH and Iowa combined, Florida will dwarf Nevada, SC, NH, and Iowa.

    in 2000 a large portion of our electorate was denied the right to voice their opinion for president. I never heard obama say anything about that. Now that he cant win hes made a POLITICAL move (so much for ideals) to ignore millions of americans on january 29th. This guy is such a hypocrit

    January 16, 2008 07:59 pm at 7:59 pm |
  10. Independent Marcus Moore

    Look at the exit polls for Michigan people.... it breaks it down pretty clear....

    Hillary won – who cares if no delegates were awarded.... Michigan voted - well at least those who cared enough to be heard / involved in the process...and the exit polls showed where people's votes went.... not to mention that the number of people that voted for her was pretty similar to the GOP Michigan winner, Romney (around 320k voters).

    people saying that if Edwards and Obama were on the ballot, it would have went differently? Not really...once again look at the exit polls. And for those that didn't show up to vote, it just shows that "change" does not matter to them.... the people that care showed up, either to oppose Clinton or to support her.

    uncommitted votes were in the 200k's and that shows that they were expressing that Clinton was not their candidate and that they wanted delegates to go to Obama and Edwards if they are allowed.... the who would have voted for who was broken down in the exit polls ....

    Take into account the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary... how many uncommitted votes were made in those states.... not many at all...

    so to say that the uncommitted votes were not made by Obama and Edwards supporters, makes no sense....

    "uncommitted" does not mean "nobody" it means Edwards and Obama followers that decided to come out and vote and show that they want someone else than Clinton.

    obviously not enough Clinton opposition came out to vote uncommitted and since the results were not favorable to Obama or Edwards, they are now being dismissed as meaningless.... that makes a lot of sense... that's like saying that the votes made by people who cared enough to voice their opinion / vote in Michigan, regardless of delegates, are meaningless... that's just wrong.

    I mean Edwards and Obama could have easily allowed themselves to be written in by their devoted followers...or they could have left their names on the ballot just like the other democrats did...there was nothing wrong with that....but they chose not to because they were going to lose anyway...and they knew that and they stayed off the ballot completely to avoid the shame...and now we know that because of the exit polls.

    To silence a whole state's democratic voice because of some party rule is nonsense. Robbing Michigan Democrats of their voice is inconceivable... and obviously CLINTON was the only frontrunner to see this.

    January 16, 2008 08:30 pm at 8:30 pm |
  11. Scott Gifford

    A few comments on the above.

    First, as a Michigander and usually a Democrat I find it insulting that Clinton's people, after refusing to campaign in Michigan or speak out against the Democratic decision to ignore Michigan's votes, would try to use her hollow victory here to push their cause. If they're going to ignore Michigan, they should ignore it altogether.

    That said, I see a lot of people criticizing Clinton for leaving her name on the ballot as somehow "disloyal". As far as I know, none of the candidates were asked to remove their names from the ballot, but only not to campaign here. When the other candidates agreed not to run, they also removed their names from the ballot, presumably because early polling favored Clinton and they did not think they could change that without campaigning in the state. While Clinton did very little for Michigan voters in this primary, she did do more than the other candidates.

    Finally, as some previous posters have said, I am very surprised that this complete disenfranchisement of Michigan's primary voters is getting so little coverage. I'm very angry about it, and many Democrats I've talked to are angry about it as well. We will see what impact it has on Democratic fundraising in the coming months, and if it has any impact in November. If you think this primary was a fiasco that should never happen again, you can learn more about how we got into this mess and what you can do to make your voice heard at http://WhoStoleMiVote.org/

    January 16, 2008 11:59 pm at 11:59 pm |
  12. pgul

    Hillary by herself got more votes than the Republicans and the other Demoicrats!
    Hillary directly to the White House!
    NV will continue today!

    January 19, 2008 02:02 pm at 2:02 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8