March 14th, 2008
01:18 PM ET
7 years ago

Kilpatrick wants June 3 primary

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Michigan, told CNN that she is continuing to work with Michigan Democratic leaders and the Clinton and Obama campaigns on a plan for another vote to ensure that all of Michigan’s 156 delegates get seated at the convention.

“We are trying to get there. It’s not a done deal yet,” Kilpatrick said in a brief interview just outside the House chamber.

Congresswoman Kilpatrick says she has participated in several conference calls with “high level campaign officials,” but has not talked directly to the candidates about the proposal to hold a new primary on June 3rd.

Rep Kilpatrick described three options that have been on the table . The first idea is a “redo” that the state will pay for. The second idea is a mail-in primary which she said “was too hard to do.” The third option, was to “have the two candidates get together” and agree to a way to apportion the delegates.

A spokeswoman for the congresswoman said Kilpatrick is working with three other Michigan Democrats – Sen. Carl Levin, D-Michigan, Super delegate and Democratic National Committee member Debbie Dingell and United Auto Workers' President Ron Gettelfinger.

Kilpatrick said they are scheduled to talk again to the campaigns later this afternoon about the details on June 3 proposal, but added, “the DNC will make the final decision.”

Rep Kilpatrick, who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus, has not endorsed a candidate yet.

– CNN's Deirdre Walsh


Filed under: Uncategorized
soundoff (33 Responses)
  1. Edgardo

    Well, Let it be! June 3rd then! Let us fight to the finish! HILLARY already won in FL & MI but for the sake of democracy, let us have it again!!!! HILLARY WILL WIN PA, FL & MI! She will win this nomination big time!!! I want this to be over so HILLARY can campaign against MC Cain now

    March 14, 2008 03:00 pm at 3:00 pm |
  2. Jed in Texas

    I will write in John Edwards rather than vote for one of the Three stooges.

    March 14, 2008 03:02 pm at 3:02 pm |
  3. karen hussein

    I agree that the politicians of Michigan & FL have messed it up for the public. The public should not vote for these people again they screwed up everything. Who knows what that FL republican governor is up to

    March 14, 2008 03:04 pm at 3:04 pm |
  4. Joe

    I belong to no organized party. I 'm a Democrat

    Old Man Will Rogers was definitely right

    March 14, 2008 03:06 pm at 3:06 pm |
  5. SUE, Michigan

    The "candidates work together". There's a novel idea-why don't we let them do that? Hillary won 55%; give Barack the remainder. In Florida, she won with all the names-let her have the delegates. I don't think this gives her a huge lead; it just brings them closer. So it will be a super-delegate decision anyway.
    I did hear about an interesting possibility emerging from the smoke-filled room . What if the supers come out and announce they have chosen Al Gore as the party's nominee, with Hillary as his running mate? Or Obama as the running mate, and Hill for Attorney General? Could we get behind Gore this time over McCain. I bet we could!!!

    March 14, 2008 03:09 pm at 3:09 pm |
  6. Angie

    So they still get more political leverage by being the kingmakers AFTER they broke the rules? Unbelievable. What is wrong with the Democratic party?

    March 14, 2008 03:09 pm at 3:09 pm |
  7. LaLa in KCMO

    While I think that all votes should count – still rules are rules and both FL and MI (and the candidates) KNEW what was going on when they both moved up their primaries.

    If FL and MI had been patient then they would have seen that their primaries WERE going to be extremely important regardless of the dates on which they fell. Look at PA.

    If they want to change the rules, they can't expect to do it in the middle of the game. It came as no surprise this election that their primaries were falling when the fell.

    March 14, 2008 03:10 pm at 3:10 pm |
  8. Robert B

    I have an idea:

    1. Have the candidates agree on 3 or more outside polling companies.
    2. Have the candidates agree on which parts of the state(s) are polled.
    3. Take the average of the polling results and disperse the delegates accordingly.

    If the candidates agree on all of the above, no one can complain afterwards. This is probably the most cost effective way to do this.

    What does everyone think?

    March 14, 2008 03:10 pm at 3:10 pm |
1 2