April 4th, 2008
02:05 PM ET
6 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. Jerry in Boston

    Obama could probably have pulled off a narrow overall victory even if Florida and Michigan had been allowed to revote. That way, his victory would have been totally legitimate, and the healing process in the Dem party would have been swift and painless.

    However, by appearing to have blocked revotes purely for his own political advantage, he has undermined the central plank of his "new politics" platform and left an indelible stain on any victory.

    This will come back to haunt him in November when Clinton supporters who feel cheated either don't vote or worse, vote for McCain.

    April 4, 2008 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  2. Mary, MN

    It is such a joke for Hillary to be in Memphis honoring Dr. King. She only uses minorities for photo opportunities, and votes. Look what she did in South Carolina. Hispanics and Asians should be aware of this; she will throw you under the bus as well.

    I hope the folks in Memphis will fumigate the stage after she leaves.

    April 4, 2008 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  3. Hillary Supporter

    Well, now we need to seat the delegates, so that the people who voted will have a voice. If Obama really had ‘good judgment’ then why did he take his name off the ballot?

    April 4, 2008 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  4. Carrie PA

    Lets get this straight people:

    Last year, Hillary Clinton said that Michigan and Florida vote will not count. She agreed to this. Every Democratic candidate, agreed to this. It wasn't until Hillary realized that she couldn't win, she started to cared about the Michigan and Flordia voters. Don't let Hillary fool you, you are smarter then that.

    April 4, 2008 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  5. Juan

    Thank you. You broke the rules back then and you knew the consequences. Hillary and her gang have been making a fuss about it since she is losing all of a sudden. But thanks finally put this matter to rest. In 2012 this goes to all states to stop being mavericks!!!

    April 4, 2008 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  6. JOHN A TAYLOR

    The proplem with any formula's that you use keep inmind that the DNC says that the candidates can not win from any advantage gain from Michigan or Florida.

    April 4, 2008 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  7. breanna

    "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!"

    I agree 100 % obama is certainly not entitled to half because how do we know that some of those uncommitted votes didnt go to edwards and the other people who names werent on the ballot? hillary gets her 55% plus half of the uncommitted votes. If obama doesnt like it then maybe the rest of the country will finally see what kind of a man he really is. he needs to stand up and say that these voters DO COUNT and agree to the terms set forth as mentioned here. no other way is fair and it will look like the dnc gaver into obama . hes such a whiney baby.

    April 4, 2008 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
  8. Belle

    The real Truth....

    The AGREEMENT with the DNC was to NOT CAMPAIGN. Clinton NEVER agreed the vote should not count...in fact she emphatically stated it SHOULD count.

    Just ANOTHER Obama twist of words....but for a man that could ONLY win the State Senate Seat in Illinois by Challenging EVERY SINGLE VOTING Petition of Senator Palmer's...why am I not surprised. He lost his bid for State Congress by a landslide in Illinois.

    April 4, 2008 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
  9. Tim

    NOW, LET'S MOVE ON TO PA, INDIANA AND NC. enough already.

    April 4, 2008 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
  10. Chris

    OMG!!! Don't go blaming Obama you idiots!!
    It was the Michigan Legislature that signed off on this crap knowing they were breaking the DNC rules!!
    They broke the rules and they have to pay for it.
    All of you whinning HRC supporters know we wouldn't be having this conversation if she was in the lead!!!
    The best thing they could do now is split them down the middle and be done with it!! Jeez go some where and sit down!!!

    April 4, 2008 02:23 pm at 2:23 pm |
  11. To Matthew

    You said: "Michigan voters disenfranchised...courtesy of Barack Obama'!

    Why didn't you explain yourself??? I'll tell you why... BECAUSE YOU CAN'T! People like you are the biggest problem our society has (get an education). Last I checked Obama isn't a member of the ruling Democratic committee in Michigan.
    And furthermore... if the people of Michigan decided to vote for McCain instead of Obama, they'll rightfully deserve more forclosures and job losses. Frankly speaking that decision would be stupid... just like your comment.

    April 4, 2008 02:23 pm at 2:23 pm |
  12. Debbie,NJ

    Everybody pulled their names off out of obedience to their leaders (DNC). You know having a president who is always dividing and doing the opposite of the party is not good for this country. Hillary should have run as an independent. That's what she acts like. She's always trying to change the rules especially if they're not in her favor. She not only changes the rules, she lies, threatens, have temper tandrums and cheats. ANd yeah, Obama has so much power he can stop people from voting. He can even override the DNC.

    April 4, 2008 02:23 pm at 2:23 pm |
  13. Rosemary

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

    no courtesy of those Michigan voters put into office.
    I know it is frustrating for HC supporters but we teach our children from a very young age: if you break the rules there are consequences.
    Any parent who rewards their child for misbehavior needs a tutorial in parenting.

    April 4, 2008 02:23 pm at 2:23 pm |
  14. Jeanne

    Those Dems sure do know how to organize an election! Are you sure you want them running the country?

    April 4, 2008 02:23 pm at 2:23 pm |
  15. Give us a break

    They wouldn't have to worry about a re-vote if the followed the rules to begin with. I do believe they know what would happen if they went on with their planned early vote? It is nice to see someone hold someone else to the punishment that was expressed before the "bad act" occurred. If more parents did that we might not have so many problem kids. But that is a different topic.

    Way to go Mr. Dean!

    April 4, 2008 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
  16. Chris

    It is not Hillary or Obama's fault that Michigan and Florida don't count at the moment. It is the fault of the legislators in Michigan and Florida who voted to move the primaries up against the rules of the national party. They were warned of the consequences and went ahead with the plan.

    They are now trying to blame the national party for not bending to the will of the voters. Sorry, if you want to compete in a contest, you have to play by the rules. Michigan and Florida voters should focus their blame where it is due – their state government.

    April 4, 2008 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
  17. suzy

    Of COURSE THEY MADE THIS DECISION....
    OPERATIVE WORD HERE IS "THEY"....

    I saw the interview with two members of the legislature there who were very active in NOT having a re-vote...and guess what – they were both Obama supporters.
    And what really p....d me off was they were very very smug about it with
    "Na Na Na Na Na" grins on their faces. Talk about "rules"???
    They even said, "it's a good thing Obama is in the lead" ..
    Is this even legal?????
    So, the moral of this story is – Obama will do ANYTHING to win this nomination – even plot behind the scenes......he is NO different from any other politician and for those who think otherwise – does the wool itch over your eyes?????

    April 4, 2008 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
  18. Leah DiMarco, TX

    Obama and Clinton have nothing to do with what the STATES decide. Stop trying to put the blame on the candidates. It was Michigan and Florida that decided to break the rules when they full well knew what the rules were. Now Michigan has decided no re-do. That also is not the candidates fault.

    Everyone should also stop listening to all the SPIN coming out of the Clinton camp – it is very divisive.

    April 4, 2008 02:25 pm at 2:25 pm |
  19. Alex H

    Jaymes Spiekerman April 4th, 2008 2:06 pm ET

    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!

    That's stupid... if the uncommitted vote wanted to vote for Hillary, they would've checked her name, not uncommitted. Nice try, but that's a very dirty, Clintonian tactic that I don't want to see in the White House.

    April 4, 2008 02:25 pm at 2:25 pm |
  20. honkey white guy from cali

    i agree with the current proposal on the table that being she would get to keep the percentage of delegates she won and the other would be split based on the nation vote. the 50/50 split i think is fair also but either way we need to seat these delegates regardless of who or whom may have been at fault the voters certainly were not at fault and I think the Obama camp and the DNC need to stand up and take a true leadership in this to make sure those seats do not go empty.

    Go Obama 08

    April 4, 2008 02:25 pm at 2:25 pm |
  21. LifeLongDemocrat

    Everyone seems to forget that Obama removed himself from the Michigan ballot to concentrate on Iowa. He did it...admit it!

    Count the votes as is...he could have stayed on the ballot.

    April 4, 2008 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  22. Mike H.

    Obama's people in the state legisature actively worked againt the revote fearing that it would result in a Clinton victory. Obama, who professes to be the man to lead us into a bright tomorrow, is an undemocratic fraud.

    April 4, 2008 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  23. RFB

    It is amazing how often obamaites say "rules are rules." It is like a broken record. If obama had won those states instead of Hillary, they would be "crying" foul play, foul play, and stomping their feet and pounding the ground with their fists.

    April 4, 2008 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  24. Jared

    Obama had nothing to do with any of the mess – the rightful blame goes to Michigan's governor...period. Split the delegates 50/50 and be done with it...they're practically tied in support in Michigan anyway. The original results are meaningless as no one but Clinton appeared on the ballot and it isn't a stretch to believe that the vast majority of Obama and Edwards supporters stayed home. Had both of them been on the ballot, I doubt Hillary would even have won. The nomination process is done anyway – she's welcome to stay in, but it's kinda like watching Evander Holyfield's career – no idea when to give up.

    April 4, 2008 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  25. Jennifer

    Therefore, Hillary Clinton should get 55% of the delegates. Period and Barack Obama can have the 40%.

    April 4, 2008 02:27 pm at 2:27 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15