January 15th, 2008
09:00 PM ET
6 years ago

Potentially troubling news for Clinton in Michigan 'win'

(CNN) - Hillary Clinton faced a grim statistic in Michigan tonight, despite her primary "win" there: results revealed that she may have reason to worry about her grasp on the African-American vote.

The Michigan primary vote was essentially meaningless: the national party stripped the state of its delegates because it held its contest too early in the election season, and Clinton was the only major Democratic contender whose name appeared on the ballot.

Read full story here

soundoff (373 Responses)
  1. Jacob, Des Moines Iowa

    To all of those who are supporting hillary and saying things along the lines of
    'hillary beat edwards and obama combined...'

    let us not forget that THE DEMOCRATS ARENT ACCEPTING ANY DELEGATES FROM THIS STATE.

    HILLARY WAS THE ONLY MAJOR CANDIDATE ON THE BALLOT

    DEMOCRATS DIDNT REALLY VOTE IN THIS PRIMARY

    and losing 70% of African-American votes is something to worry about

    she should have never campaigned in iowa

    now that she has and got a 3rd place finish there...her candidacy and her "clinton machine" is in jepordy

    of course the clintons were going to win NH

    do you honestly think the clintons would a been defeated so easily

    (if hillary lost both IA and NH, it isnt that the clinton machine would have been defeated so much as it wouldnt be able to stop Obama)

    January 16, 2008 01:39 am at 1:39 am |
  2. Debbie

    She did win the majority of votes. The census indicates that there are 14% African Americans in the state of Michigan. 70% of registered votes in the African American community were uncommitted. Let's be realistic about statistics. And remember John Edwards is in the race as well. So it wasn't really a defeat for Hillary. She won over 55%. Not a bad showing. Let's forget race and gender and really read what the candidates are supporting and what they will do for this country. Vote for the best. Don't divide the party. I would also like to see more accurate reporting. Statistics and words taken out of context can be massaged whatever way the media wants.

    January 16, 2008 01:40 am at 1:40 am |
  3. mickey

    dumb people: johnathan

    come on... obama didn't even show up. why was time in talking about 'how' the votes turned out?? let's talk about the votes at hand. let's be progressive people.

    issues, votes, and dates.

    we need to help others be more informed on these things.

    let's all do our part.

    January 16, 2008 01:42 am at 1:42 am |
  4. Judith

    CNN has been unfairly biased towards Obama and against Hillary. I think your reporting of Hillary has been disgusting and very unprofessional. With every twist and turn of this campaign you have been pumping up Obama and consistently bashing Hillary. Even Hillary's win in Michigan tonight for 55% of the vote you twist around to look like a defeat by citing that 73% of the Black vote would go to Obama skirting the fact that that is only the Black vote and still not beating Hillary's 55% of the entore voting population. This is where freedom of speech has been abused to create false impressions. Did you reporters not learn your lesson last week by trying to create an assumed win for Obama by all of your hyped up energy for him only to be proven wrong by the Hillary win? Thank God that there are intelligent people in our country who make their own decision regardless of your
    commentators who try to cite their biased and false opinions as facts.
    I personally, along with many others, have lost all respect for CNN political reporting and no longer consider your reporting credible when it comes to your very unfair coverage of Hillary.

    January 16, 2008 01:42 am at 1:42 am |
  5. Derek, Walpole NH

    As New Hampshire showed this country...polls mean nothing. The purpose of polls is to create hype and interest in all us folks so that we tune into CNN or check this website as consistently as we do....but let's be realistic...no "facts" can come from a vote on which no significance was held. No delegates mean who knows what motivated folks to get out to the polls on the Dem side...the only fact that remains is South Carolina is up for grabs...as is the rest of the country.

    And no, HRC's "oh so racist" remarks were hardly that. If anyone actually watched the discussion, her tone of voice showed a lot of sincerity and admiration for MLK.. Anyone who thinks otherwise more likely than not has trouble viewing politics through an unbiased lens. And the abundance of comments on how Obama should win because he is "nice" and "sincere" and "yes we can yes we can..."....they lack substance, and the vote in the nice guy mentality is what gave us 8 years of the Bush administration. As usual, history may repeat itself.

    January 16, 2008 01:43 am at 1:43 am |
  6. G. R., Atlanta Georgia

    I know many African Americans who proudly support Senator Clinton. This story is so vague and based on random exit polls. Well, ...we all know how accurate exit polls are...NOT! I believe it would be in the best interest of the media to stop speculating and guessing and just stick to results and facts.

    January 16, 2008 01:44 am at 1:44 am |
  7. aware

    I'm committed to a president who is ready on day one. It will be Hillary this time, but Barack would make a good VP for now. :)

    Stop with the spin and negativity already! This was a good day, a good debate and good results! The media reps lost this debate. They could not get the candidates to bite and fight.

    January 16, 2008 01:46 am at 1:46 am |
  8. Angela

    Hillary won 60% of the total votes and only 39% has to be split between Obama and Edwards.

    You can slice the 39% anyway you wish, but it won't change Hillary's 60%

    Fact: Hillary won Michigan.

    Anyone who can't comprehend this must be have "Fuzzy math syndrome"
    Don't feel bad though Bush gave it us during the election of 2000.
    Anyone remember that one??
    What a zinger.!

    GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!

    January 16, 2008 01:49 am at 1:49 am |
  9. Tom Jones

    First, I think it's ridiculous that Michigan was stripped of their delegates. The only way the primaries are ever going to mean anything and get rid of all this political crap is to spread them all out over a week. People want change in politics but we put up with this lame system of month after month of states voting. The states at the end don't even matter cause half the candidates have given up. The only reason they keep it the way they do is cause Iowa and NH don't want to lose the money. The same reason the NCAA will never go to a playoff system.

    Second, I don't see why Hilary has to get the black vote to win the election. One angle nobody seems to pickup on is this. Obama is from Il, Iowa and Michigan happen to be neighboring states you don't think that plays into peoples minds. Bill Clinton was gov of Arkansas you don't think that helped him with the Southern AA vote? Hilary is a senator from NY people don't see her the same way.

    Obama for change HA. Yeah thats what we need 4 years of 'uncommitted' and 'present'.

    January 16, 2008 01:51 am at 1:51 am |
  10. realworld

    For a long time, I have wondered if there is a real journalist out there and recently I found that answer in Tim Russert. you definately have my award as the best journalist we have seen for some time now. yeah, you practise real journalism. Thank you once again for always practising your profession unlike the rest of journalist we have seen out there.

    January 16, 2008 01:53 am at 1:53 am |
  11. Michael Mends

    How is it that when you win with 56% of the total vote there are troubling signs for you? Because nearly 70% of blacks voted for someone (Obama) other than Hillary? How twisted is this logic?
    After the media's anti-Clinton rhetoric about race is it any wonder that 70% of black people would choose a black man instead of a white woman? Black people have been marginalized to a color. It was not like this until the media set in. Clinton was doing much better among blacks over Obama until both Clintons words were twisted to mean they were anti-black. Blacks were not viewed then as enamored with race as they can choose a white woman over a black man.
    As a black man I feel really sad as the same media is now poised to turn around to criticise blacks as only concerned with their race when they vote overwhelmingly for Obama in S.C.

    January 16, 2008 01:54 am at 1:54 am |
  12. JIS

    Why is there rarely any conversation about sexism and the fact that Hillary is courageously running as the first woman president? It shows the growth of this country that the two front runners in the democratic party are an African American Man and a Woman(of any race). But just as there are ways in which racism can be subtely implied, so are there ways that sexism can be implied. There needs to be more awareness about the still existing ways in which women are not considered viable leaders in our country and how this affects our every day thinking. We need to look at the ways we continue to sustain this cultural pattern. When women and men of any race cast their vote, it would be good for them to consider, along with who they believe most qualified, the issue of gender balance in our government and how promoting this, in itself, can create positive social change. Clinton has worked incredibley hard to get where she is, against many obstacles and has still consistently stood up for what she believes in and fought for progressive social reform. She has earned her position by her merit and successes and deserves to at least be respected for this, regardless of who you cast your vote for. To slam any candidate is not a vote in anyone's good favor. Whether or not Obama or Hillary is elected, we will have a shift in our perception of who can be a strong leader for the people of our country.

    January 16, 2008 01:55 am at 1:55 am |
  13. concerned citizen

    I am a grad student in Berkeley in political science, how does cnn put something as a postive victory for Clinton to a negative victory. This amazes me, I was always under the assumption that Fox nes would be doing this sort of reporting but wow CNN just finding every negative thing about Clinton. The 40% that was uncommitted meant that hillary still beats Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards combined. Does that mean anything to this Best Political Team in the country. My god!!!!, CNNN you are destroying your credibility, I wonder how much the Obama campaign is paying you...lol

    CAPT D.
    US. Army

    January 16, 2008 01:56 am at 1:56 am |
  14. Djackson

    Barack Obama was not on the ballot, but Michigan still showed its support for him. Just imagine what would have happened if he were on the ballot.

    So where does that leave us? Since we reached the 15% minimum "uncommitted" vote we can now be assigned delegates through congressional district meetings that will be held on March 29th. Think of it this way. 40% of the vote went "uncommitted" and 40% of the delegates from MI can potentially go to Barack.

    Do the math: not on the ballot + Michiganders for Obama = 40% of the delegates. Congrats Michiganders, but we've much work left to be done.

    The larger issue for me is that with a confusing primary that was rushed to be put in place, that was ruled unconstitutional and then ruled constitutional then candidates pulled off then state legislators tried to make changes then clerks were required to do a two month job in a two week period. With all of that and with all of the confusion 45% of Democrats showed up to vote against Hillary. Voter turnout was low without all candidates on the ballot and yet they turned out to vote against Her.

    Take note Nevada. Be ready South Carolina. Fire it up Super Tuesday states. If we can get delegates without Barack being on the ballot then we should clean house in those places where people can actually cast a vote for him.

    January 16, 2008 01:56 am at 1:56 am |
  15. Carl L.

    Vote ABC!

    Smart people vote for Change!

    January 16, 2008 01:57 am at 1:57 am |
  16. What really matters

    I did the math for you...MICHIGAN RESULTS...100% counted...

    Uncommitted......236,723
    Kucinich............... 21,708
    Dodd........................3,853
    Total....................262,285 45% Hillary...............328,151 55%

    Difference of 65,866 10%

    What color do you think the other 65,866 are? It doesn't matter.!!!! SHE WON !!! WITH MORE VOTES THAN ALL OF THEM PUT TOGETHER. Analize it all you want the numbers speak for themselves. Like it or not.

    January 16, 2008 01:58 am at 1:58 am |
  17. Paul Aninyei

    It seems to me the mainstream media have vested interest in fanning embers of racism in order to keep their ratings high. Hillary didn't start this "race" war. Any right thinking person who listened to her speech understood perfectly well what she was talking about. But the media characteristically mis characterized what she and her husband actually said.

    January 16, 2008 01:59 am at 1:59 am |
  18. IHNCNH

    That's whats up mannnnn!!!! GO OBAMA!

    January 16, 2008 02:00 am at 2:00 am |
  19. PW Va

    Well, Hillary...gues since you're the "smartest woman in the world" you can figure this one out: THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN VOTE SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN FOR GRANTED!

    And all of this is due to the nasty little plan you and your hubby concocted which is now beginning to backfire all over the place. Like they say, Hillary...Life is a female dog!!!!

    January 16, 2008 02:01 am at 2:01 am |
  20. Disgusting

    Dear CNN,

    OK, WE GET IT: you want Obama to win and are trying to influence your viewers to feel the same. Good god, just look at all the misleading and inflaming articles you have posted on this blog just in the last couple weeks alone!!! Just when I think you might put a stop to it, along comes another one.

    Having been a loyal CNN supporter for years, I am very disappointed in the turn your news has taken. You are practicing very poor journalism and should be held accountable for failing to present a fully accurate picture to the public. You are embarrassing yourselves and alienating your readers and I have had enough.

    With disappointment,

    A former fan

    January 16, 2008 02:02 am at 2:02 am |
  21. Ted

    Can Hillary supporters think about this. For the first time since the nomination process began. Republicans actually got more total votes than the democrats with Hillary name being the only one on the list. This should sent a message to all democrats for November.

    Go Obama.

    January 16, 2008 02:03 am at 2:03 am |
  22. Nancy, Dallas TX

    Residents of Detroit overwhelmingly support Hillary Clinton, as reported by poster Farah who lives and works there. Thankfully Farah has given us an accurate report which CNN has failed AGAIN to do. CNN is shameless.

    Campaign coverage has so far been disgraceful, dumbed down and an insult to intelligent voters. Most people are trying to become informed about the candidates and enlightened about the issues. Yet CNN, Fox and much of the media insist on presenting things with conjured drama and a soap opera-ish quality. There just has to be a better source!

    January 16, 2008 02:03 am at 2:03 am |
  23. ConfusedNYinFL

    Stats:

    70% of african americans didn't vote for Hillary in Michigan
    13.4% of american citizens are african american.

    Roughly:

    300 million us Citizens
    40.2 million US citizens are african american
    of these about 30 million legally can roughly vote
    of these maybe 20-25 million are registered to vote
    of these 10-15 million will actually vote on election day
    of these how whats the samll numbeer in michigan

    Michigan:
    Hillary had 328,151 votes
    uncommited had 236,723 votes

    even if all those went to Obama, which clearly Edwards would have gotten some it stil would be 55% to 40% (not even statistically close)

    so why is this trouble im missing the point cnn?????
    your own exit poll shows that HIllary would win 46% to Obama's 35% if all candidates were on the ballot... where is the huge downfall.....

    January 16, 2008 02:04 am at 2:04 am |
  24. jason

    Obama is clearly the best choice for president. i was considering clinton but after further looking deeper into the candidates, i have come to believe that Obama can really help create change with all of us. Clinton has been around way too long, and she has no reason to change anything if she gets the Presidency. GOD HELP US ALL IF SHE WINS.

    January 16, 2008 02:04 am at 2:04 am |
  25. butcher_boy

    blacks are now the 2nd largest minority. Clinton should care about the Latin vote. I don't know why blacks vote for democrats its republicans that get the things done for their race. :P

    January 16, 2008 02:06 am at 2:06 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.