April 4th, 2008
02:05 PM ET
10 years ago

Michigan Dems rule out new vote

Michigan voters participated in the states primary on January 15.

Michigan voters participated in the states primary on January 15.

(CNN) - Michigan Democrats will not to go to the polls again to choose a presidential nominee, even though the national party has refused to recognize the results of their vote in January, the party announced Friday.

"We have concluded that it is not practical to conduct such a primary or caucus," the state party's executive committee said in a written statement. But they added they will continue to work with the Democratic National Committee and elected officials to ensure that the state is represented at the party convention in Denver this August.

Michigan Democrats held their primary earlier than national party rules allowed. The Democratic Party responded by refusing to seat Michigan’s delegates at the convention.

Many Democratic candidates, including Sen. Barack Obama, removed their names from the Michigan ballot after the DNC’s decision, leaving Sen. Hillary Clinton as the only major contender in the state.

Clinton got 55 percent, while 40 percent of the state's voters opted for "uncommitted.”

Clinton said Friday the party had to find a way to avoid “disenfranchising” 600,000 Michigan voters. “Those votes have been cast…. So the Democratic party is going to have to come to grips with whether or not we want to be like the Republicans and disenfranchise people or whether we will stay true to the voting-rights record of this party.”

Filed under: Michigan
soundoff (358 Responses)
  1. Justin from West Haven, CT

    Good, now maybe we can stop talking about this.

    April 4, 2008 02:02 pm at 2:02 pm |
  2. JohnS

    The right thing to do.

    Now Hillary should really concede.

    OBAMA '08 & '12

    April 4, 2008 02:03 pm at 2:03 pm |
  3. ann

    Why would they give up? Have they already cut a deal with the DNC?

    I hope something works out.....otherwise the Republicans are going to win the election.

    April 4, 2008 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  4. Jenn

    It's such a shame that they couldn't have simply followed the rules and not moved up their vote in the first place.

    I was a Hillary supporter at the time of the Michigan vote, and I was taken aback that she would leave her name on the ballot when all other candidates took theirs off out of respect for the DNC rules. It was the first nail in the coffin of me deciding she was not the best candidate after all.

    April 4, 2008 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  5. Carl

    I'm sorry, but HRC was funny on Leno last night until Jay brought up this possibilty. All she did was blame Republicans when they had nothing to do with Michigan. Last I checked, a democrat Governor signed off, allowing it to happen.

    I'm sick of the ignorance of BLAME. A ton of things are wrong, but blaming an entity or group or company is ridiculous when it's not even their doing....

    April 4, 2008 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  6. vince - phoenix


    April 4, 2008 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  7. Michael

    So, even though Obama wasn't on the ballot...there won't be anything done about that?

    April 4, 2008 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  8. John

    The only way these delegates should be seated is if they are split 50/50. Nothing else would be fair.

    April 4, 2008 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  9. Matthew

    Michigan voters disenfranchised....courtesy of Barack Obama!

    April 4, 2008 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  10. Jaymes Spiekerman

    Give Hillary her 55 percent! and I guess, even though it was his choice to pull his name off the ballott, they can split the uncommitted vote!!! He should feel pretty stupid for pulling his name off the ballot!

    Clinton as my commander in chief!
    21 year old male voter!

    April 4, 2008 02:06 pm at 2:06 pm |
  11. S.B. Stein E.B. NJ

    If the percentages were to be kept in Michigan, then the uncommitted votes should count for Obama. I would submit that since neither he nor Edwards were on the ballot the first time around, then they should get the uncommitted since there is no way to get them back on the ballot before the election since time travel is not currently possible. Currently, only Obama is running still and Edwards is not; since that is the case, give the uncomitted to Obama.

    April 4, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  12. jj

    yea, how can they give all of the uncommitted to Obama, Edwards would have had some of those votes.

    April 4, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  13. Praetorian, Fort Myers

    I bet there will be a lot more than 40% voting independant in the November election. Thanks Mr. Dean and the DNC–again you've reminded us of how ill-prepared the Democratic party is to lead our nation.

    April 4, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  14. Madison , PA

    This is a fair decision...KUDO MICHIGAN... Let the Clinton know.

    April 4, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  15. April in Texas

    Curious as I would like to know how many votes were thrown out due to writing a name in? I heard many were thrown out because of this. IMO this should be also a factor if you want to truely call anything fair. I feel bad for MI and even FL but rules are rules and so why reward those that did just that and broke the rules.

    Obama 08

    April 4, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |

    Is there anyone that thinks that if Clinton doesn't win in delegates or popular votes that she will say that the race was fair?

    April 4, 2008 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  17. NickNas

    It is great to see the people of MI taking resposibitiy for their own actions and putting this thing to rest. Billary can whine all she wants but getting credit for a victory where she was the only player is a ploy that even 5 year old children understand is not right.

    Funny thing is she only got 55% of the and she was ALONE on the Ballot! How pitiful is that??

    April 4, 2008 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  18. Liberty

    The Governor of Michigan and the state legislators should all lose their jobs for breaking party rules, causing havoc, and disenfranchising their own citizens.

    Anyone who doesn't like Democratic Party rules are free to start their own party. They could call it the anarchy party, since they don't believe rules matter.

    April 4, 2008 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  19. Ivey League

    He can't win, Bill. He can't win...

    That's President Obama to you.

    April 4, 2008 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  20. Don't Trust Obama

    Well there goes Hillary chance for the nom...

    April 4, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  21. Mike

    Finally. You should never be rewarded for not playing by the rules. 50/50 split, the only way to go.

    OBAMA 08

    April 4, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  22. FEDUP

    Obama campaigned for the Un-commited vote, let him have them. Give Hillary the ones she got.

    April 4, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  23. Jenn

    Matthew said: "Michigan voters disenfranchised….courtesy of Barack Obama!"

    How in the world is it his fault that the Michigan powers that be decided to change their date in defiance of DNC policy, and that Obama acquiesced with DNC rules and had his name taken off the ballot? How can you be so blind to the truth?

    April 4, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  24. Debby

    Sounds like this will be a rigged election by the DNC. They want their Obama boy in there and they will plow over Clinton to do it. Well looks like the general will be a piece of cake for McCain and you can thank the Dumbocrates for that.

    April 4, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
  25. Sean

    Jaymes: The fair thing is to not count any votes. They broke the rules. Surely at 21 you understand rules, and more importantly, the consequences of breaking rules. If a team was told that a game was forfeited and therefore didn't play, but later the league wanted to count the game, would you think it was fair?

    April 4, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15