May 8, 2008
Posted: May 8th, 2008 08:17 AM ET

From
Michigan Democrats have accepted a new compromise.
Michigan Democrats have accepted a new compromise.

(CNN) – Michigan’s Democrats have accepted a compromise proposal in their latest attempt to ensure their state will be represented at this summer’s Democratic National Convention, CNN has confirmed.

The state party has voted to sign on to a plan devised a week-and-a-half ago by the working group seeking ways to end the impasse, including Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, Sen. Carl Levin, Democratic National Committee Member Debbie Dingell and United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger.

The group urged the Democratic National Committee to seat the Michigan delegation under a formula that would give a 10-delegate edge to Hillary Clinton, and allow all 157 delegates and superdelegates to be seated this summer.

Clinton was the only major candidate to appear on the ballot in the state’s January contest, which she won with 55 percent of the vote. No delegates were awarded because of national party penalties on Michigan Democrats for moving up their primary date. Forty percent of January’s primary voters chose the “uncommitted” option on the ballot; a majority of those “uncommitted” delegates are backing Barack Obama.

Clinton’s campaign has said that the results of the January vote – which would give her an 18-delegate edge, 73-55 – should count. Obama’s campaign had said the delegates should be split evenly, 64-64. Another compromise plan submitted by DNC member Joel Ferguson – which would have given half a vote to each pledged delegate, and a full vote to each superdelegate – had been opposed by the Michigan working group.

Under the latest proposal adopted by the state party, which splits the difference between the Obama and Clinton proposals, the state’s 128 pledged delegates would be split 69-59, with the majority going to Hillary Clinton. Michigan Democrats has asked the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee – which meets at the end of the month – to consider the plan.

If both campaigns do not agree on the compromise, the issue will head to the DNC’s Credentials Committee for a resolution.

Filed under: Michigan


MIke   May 8th, 2008 1:31 pm ET

Had the situation been reversed the Hillary supporters would never be pushing for Michigan and Florida delegate inclusion.
Obama would have been drummed out a long time ago for party unity.

A 50/50 split will allow the delegates from two important states to be seated, a still penalize them for going early.

Rules were signed of on by all of the candidates.

62 year old white woman   May 8th, 2008 1:25 pm ET

I have a message for "fred" and "darrell"........you both should be ashamed of yourselves! Fred, it sounds like you are "anti-American"...by writing such bigoted trash. I am a white woman and an Obama supporter, and after reading your message, I am sure that I am MUCH brighter than you. As for you Darrell, you too sound very anti-American. I know you are disappointed that Hillary's not doing as well as you would like, but saying that McCain is "closer to her thinking than Obama" is really eye-opening! Maybe Hillary should switch parties and join the Republicans?!!! So, Darrell & Fred, maybe you two should "open your eyes and wake up". Get your facts straight before you go spouting hate!

Dennis F   May 8th, 2008 1:24 pm ET

The way the DNC and Dean has managed the Primaries is an absolute national disgrace.

Voters in Florida and Michigan have been disenfranchised from their right to vote for their nominee in the national elections. The voters in these 2 states did not cause this problem. The state governments and the DNC did that and it would seem that Florida's Republican government created this situation intentionally.

So now in a Democratic Republic, voters have lost their rights. This is a debacle. Bad enough that we have a President who was crowned in 2000 because of the Florida election mess, now this.

Of course everyone knows that the simple and fair solution, is to organize re-run Primaries. This would address fairness to both candidates and more importantly re-establish the rights of almost 3 million citizens.

Even the cost issue has been addressed but Obama refuses because this could possibly compromise his lead, never mind that it is only right. What happened to the great democrat who wants to bring everyone together, you know unite people. Or the concept of doing things differently in Washington by doing away with the old style Washington politics 2 step. What BS, Obama’s no different. He just babbles out all of those sanctimonious platitudes.

The candidates are not the main issue when it comes to Michigan and Florida, the issue is that America is a democracy where all its citizens have a right to vote. If anyone is against this principle of democracy then I cannot vote for that person. Obama has vetoed this solution. Obama (who was listed on the Florida Primary) was the only candidate that in fact, broke the rules by advertizing in the Florida Primary and he is against having the Florida Delegates seated because he lost.

I believe it is within the DNC's powers to force the issues and set up the re-run but it does not want to upset African Americans or Obama because he is black. If there were 2 white candidates this issue would have been resolved. This is the truth but nobody dares to admit it publically.

If after all votes (Superdelegates and Primary and Caucus voters from the 50 states plus the territories) are counted and Hillary loses because the count goes in favor of Obama then so be it. But America cannot have another election 2000 where some of its citizens are disenfranchised from their rights to vote. PERIOD!!!

Nunya   May 8th, 2008 1:23 pm ET

When only some candidates are on the ballot the results of an election are invalid.

When only some people bother to vote because they've been told the election is invalid, the results of that election are invalid.

The results of the Michigan and Florida primaries as they stand from January do not reflect accurately the opinions of the states voters because of these reasons.

The people who actually went to vote at that time can scream about feeling disenfranchised if the results are not counted. But guess what, you're not the only ones who feel disenfranchised. The people who didn't vote (because the rules said the vote was invalid) or couldn't vote as they wanted (due to candidate not being on the ballot) have just as much basis on which to scream disenfranchisement if the results *are* counted as they stand.

ATLian   May 8th, 2008 1:22 pm ET

Isn't Florida a Republican state anyway. Didn't they help steal the election from Al Gore? Who cares? Give her the delegates. It won't matter. Barack will still be ahead.

georgia   May 8th, 2008 1:21 pm ET

I empathize w/ the voters however it's their state officials who goofed & should take the flack This is how we learn the best lessons . What's the use of making rules if they're not to be followed by all.
48 states could go by the rules & the 2 that chose not to should be rewarded ??? That certainly is not democratic. Furthur , I can't help but believe if the Clintons were ahead it definitely would not be an issue. Is this what you want your children to emulate about rules & repercussions ??

gerald strother   May 8th, 2008 1:21 pm ET

Limbaugh: today said he could not keep back the info of cliniton was the ones that gave the TAPE OF Rev. Wright TO RUN ON TV AGAIN CLINITON HAS NO SHAME

Rayshaun, New York   May 8th, 2008 1:20 pm ET

I have a suggestion of my own, why don't we use the American Idol Votes as the tie breaker in Michigan, lol, The notion that Clinton should get a majority of votes from a contest that had only one person competing is absurd.

Fredi   May 8th, 2008 1:19 pm ET

If we go by the RULES – THESE VOTES WILL NOT COUNT.
If we go by HILLARY's WORD – THESE VOTES WILL NOT COUNT.
If we go by FAIRNESS – THESE VOTES WILL NOT COUNT.
But there is something called GRACE and MERCY and the GREATER GOOD – I recommend Obama agree to the 69/59 split – NOT because Hillary DESERVES it – but because his vision for America is so MUCH GREATER than all these fights – let the HEALING begin.

maricon   May 8th, 2008 1:19 pm ET

QUE HIJA DE PUTA ESTA HUEVONA .

QUE ES LO QUE PASA?

Bearcat   May 8th, 2008 1:19 pm ET

Let me get this straight..

So by simply leaving her name on the ballet in Michigan when all the candidates were encouraged to take their name off, Hillary gains more delegates. How is anything other than 50-50 fair?

NObama   May 8th, 2008 1:18 pm ET

Sure, this is a country of 48 states, right?

Were it up to Obama supporters, we would alienate millions of Democrats that will be needed int he fall.

Hillary is a fighter.. everyone knows that now.

But sure, let's go w/ the American Idol voters and pick someone who will just be run over in the general election.

HILLARY 2008!

Phil   May 8th, 2008 1:18 pm ET

Fred: You sound a little Bitter, No on really gives a @#$* if you vote for him or not . Looser

NEVER AN OBAMAPHILE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   May 8th, 2008 1:16 pm ET

WELL LET'S JUST CONTINUE TO DISENFRANCHISE VOTERS BECAUSE OBAMA IS AFRAID!!!!!!!!!!!!! HE IS A SHAMELESS HYPOCRITE AND SO ARE ALL OF HIS OBAMAPHILE SUPPORTERS.

THE PEOPLE OF FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN WILL REMEMBER THE WAY OBAMA RELENTLESSLY FOUGHT TO HAVE THEIR VOICES SILENCED FOR HIS OWN POLITICAL SECURITY–AND HE CANNOT WIN IN THE GENERAL ELECTION WITHOUT EITHER STATE!!!!!!!!!!!

DIRTY ROTTEN OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DIRTY ROTTEN HYPOCRITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OBAMA'S NASTY LITTLE STUNTS WILL COME BACK TO HAUNT HIM IN NOVEMBER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OBAMA'S CHICKENS ARE COMING HOME TO ROOST IN NOVEMBER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ross in MD   May 8th, 2008 1:16 pm ET

I'd think the Michigan delegates should be split in proportion to the national delegate split. That is, it should be 55-45 Obama to Clinton.

Why should they split Michigan delegates 50-50 when Clinton hasn't been winning delegates at that pace?

Staci, LA   May 8th, 2008 1:15 pm ET

I can not believe some of the logic on this board from Clinton supporters. "Obama was stupid to remove his name...oh well". No wonder she gets the uneducated votes. Obama followed the rules that both he and HILLARY agreed to, and he should loose votes?

matt   May 8th, 2008 1:14 pm ET

Hopefully these votes count, because Im not going to vote Democratic if Obama wins PEriod.

and out of everything people call me and many more a racist.. because we dont like him..

Its not because hes friends with terrorists.. Or goes to a Cult church.. Or even NO EXPERIENCE AT ALL THAT WE DONT LIKE

a vote for obama is a vote for mccain 08

HIllary all the way

Aren't you tired of it too?   May 8th, 2008 1:13 pm ET

Not a good plan. This was not just about HRC and Obama...the full field of democratic contenders agreed to the situation back then. But being the dirty fighter she is she agreed to the terms back then and somehow conveniently left her name on the ballot.

HRC will be remember for being negative, divisive and truly mean spirited. Her commnets today makes me want to gag!

Everyone who removed their names were not fools and suckers, they HONORED an agreement.

Sharnie   May 8th, 2008 1:11 pm ET

Regardless of the final decision on seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan, don't punish the voters, punish the leaders who thought up this lame brain idea of moving the primary dates. If the delegation is seated make sure the super delegates are not. The leaders broke the rules they need to pay the consequences.

Independant for Obama   May 8th, 2008 1:10 pm ET

I prefer my proposal:

Split the pledged delegates 65-63 for Clinton. It would have been a much closer race if Obama was actually on the ballot.

Then make them all half votes as punishment like the RNC did. Bill Clinton has brought up how he liked how the RNC ran things, so this seems fitting.

Finally, strip them of all superdelegate votes. It was these superdelegates that should have done something to prevent this mess from happening, not the voters, not the candidates, and not the DNC.

Something similar could be done in Florida, but give Hillary a bigger portion of the pledged delegates, since both their names were on the ballot there.

Joyce   May 8th, 2008 1:10 pm ET

I don't get these Obama supporters at all.

One posted bluntly that Hilary supporters voting for McCain instead will be replaced by cross over Repubs and independents anyway, so screw them.

Then there's this post about how Rush Limbaugh should be arrested for influencing Florida repubs into voting for Hilary (another baseless accusation). Isn't that contradictory? I thought you guys had it that they will cross over to your candidate and Hilary's supporters don't matter anyway?...

One thing that truly worked for Obama are all these payed bloggers maligning and spreading lies and throwing vile remaks towards Hilary. Kids, like it or not Hilary's support and supporters are needed to win if he gets nominated – understood?! We're talking about millions of people, she's not that far behind in delegates nor popular votes. Imagine if half of that went the other way.

So don't get cocky, childish mistake. He might win the battle but not the war.

McCain isn't a bad candidate at all, he is playing party politics right now but he is not a stupid Bush by any stretch of the imagination. He could win this against Barrack if Obama's supporters continue to tick Hilary's supporters.

Then again, she could get the nomination then we won't have to worry about winning Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

I sure hope this gets posted.

A New Mexican   May 8th, 2008 1:09 pm ET

We all want the candidate who we think is the best to win... but come on... if we are all truly Democrats or at least sick of the republicans lets unite and put whichever candidate gets the nomination in the white house. I will vote for either Hillary or Obama. Either Democrat in the white house is better than a republican. If people are truly behind the ideals of their candidate then they should vote democrat in the general election.

mitchell from arkansaw   May 8th, 2008 1:09 pm ET

SPLIT THE DELEGATES EVENLY,AND LET THE SUPERS VOTE HOW THEY WANT!anything else is unfair to obama.

Oregon has Hope and wants change   May 8th, 2008 1:08 pm ET

Hillary Huckabee is really going to try and steal this election…..

You guys are out of your mind if you think the the one state that screwed it up for the democrats in 2000 should be the deciders in this race????

Come on ……

No one got to campaign in Florida, Hill did break the rules on that one too, they said she was there……………………….

Maybe even Edwards would have done better if he was able to campaign there, and I know Obama would have done better as well.

Michigan had people not even bother voting since the state we'll just call the democratic election here a beauty contest, and Obama was not even on the ballot…….

If the DNC does this, There will be a lot of Americans who will protest…

Michigan Voter   May 8th, 2008 1:04 pm ET

Has anyone asked the residents of the state of Michigan what they want to do? I for one think you either spit it 50/50 or nothing. Why should Hillary get 10 more simply because her name was on the ballot. Many people did not even vote because they figured there was not point, I mean it wasn't going to count, right?
It's seems funny that the people that screwed this thing up in the first place and the ones that get to try to fix it. The residents of Michigan should be the ones that decide how this ends.

BCNU purple state, usa   May 8th, 2008 1:01 pm ET

Hillary's next attempt at mathematics will include a formula to recalculate delegates based on black voters ballots only counting as 3/5 of a vote.

Watch for it.

Mary   May 8th, 2008 1:01 pm ET

This is America. We beleive that we all have the right to vote and have it count as you inteded. It is that simple. By the way 55% is 86 delegates.

Alley   May 8th, 2008 1:00 pm ET

Why not seat the delegates of both states in an uncommitted status & let them vote however they decide, and then take away the superdelegates that caused this mess in the first place? Then the two state are represented, the idiots that started the mess are punished, and no one candidate is unfairly favored by the way they are seated.

A white woman for Obama   May 8th, 2008 1:00 pm ET

IA, NE, MO, NDak are only a few of the long list of states won by Obama.
Surprisingly states with young, older, white, black, hispanic, asian, across the board voters. Dare I say these states have a higher white & rural population, but yet Obama still won.

This is blantent denial on Hillary's part. While Hillary is raising her fists about FL and MI, let's not forget the other states she counts out, because she lost.
Caucus states matter, small states matter, all states matter.
Count FL and MI – of course. Obama still wins in the end.

Meg   May 8th, 2008 1:00 pm ET

Before the Florida and Michigan primaries, Hillary Clinton agreed that neither state's delegates would be counted. Now she is jumping up and down like a two year old saying they should be counted. Someone please get the hook – the party needs her to go home ASAP!
Oh, and by the way, I am a 68 year old white woman with a doctorate: I am for Obama. All my women friends are for Obama. Who are these mysterious older white women Clinton claims support her?

Nick - Astoria, NY   May 8th, 2008 12:59 pm ET

Citizens from Florida and Michigan should've written to their respective State authorities that they were against breaking the DNC rules. Furthermore, what business did the Republican Governor of Florida have sticking his nose in DNC affairs?

Regardless, the rules were broken; consequences must follow. What good are rules and regulations if States think they can break them at a whim?

LYNETTE IN CA   May 8th, 2008 12:58 pm ET

50 / 50 – There's no other way! That goes for Florida too!

MM   May 8th, 2008 12:57 pm ET

Why are people saying that Hillary should get an edge? I just don't get it why the Clinton people don't GET IT. It wasn't supposed to count. She agreed to it not counting. Leaving her name on the ballot had NOTHING to do with wanting to help Michigan. She left it there so she could play it both ways. It was neither Clinton or Obama's fault that Michigan is not being seated. Neither campaigned there. Neither made the rules. Clinton's suggestions for a re-vote were to be based upon private money - definitely a problem with that! The delagates should be split 50-50. Now let's move on and stop discussing this!

close hi lies piehole   May 8th, 2008 12:57 pm ET

Carol They never tell the complete details about the Michigan,Florida as you have printed them on here.

They just tell what they want to so it will make Obama look bad when the truth is they leave half of it out as they are Hillary fallowers.

stacy   May 8th, 2008 12:56 pm ET

Perhaps Hillary Clinton will reposture and run on Independent
ticket and all those who want a real president can vote for her outside
youth, African Americans and elitest no matter the race, there is at
least 45% plus who have already expressed their choice in the primary.

joan from orlando   May 8th, 2008 12:56 pm ET

Whatever happened to, " We the PEOPLE?" In Florida, 3 million of us went to the polls. WE did not have a choice in the primary date. Both candidates were on the ballot and there was a record turnout due not only to the popularity of the candidates, but proposed drastic changes to our property owners taxes. (That REALLY got people out) The point is-we the PEOPLE exercised out mandate to vote on a day we had no control over. No matter what your political preference- don't the voices of those 3 million have a right to be heard.? Its not, "we the DNC!!"Its the voice of the PEOPLE that matter! I want my vote to count and not in some hairbrained scheme to dilute our choice. We can vote the legislature out next election, but to disenfranchise us from this important decision is FAR too heavy a price to pay for the foolishness of a few local politicians.

NEVER obama   May 8th, 2008 12:55 pm ET

You people are so stupid. Don't you know McCain would never beat Hillary Clinton.

wisconsin   May 8th, 2008 12:54 pm ET

Hillary sould drop out.

sharon from CT   May 8th, 2008 12:53 pm ET

great for michigan that they have proposed a plan.

however, who is to say that hillary would have won an extra 10 delegates?

it should be shared 50/50

An American in Canada   May 8th, 2008 12:53 pm ET

I HOPE THAT THEIR IS A REVOTE AND BECAUSE OF BARACK OBAMA'S FIGHT AGAINST THIS REVOTE THAT THE CITIZENS OF MICHIGAN COME OUT IN FORCE AND SUPPORT H.R. CLINTON IN THE 75 PERCENTILE.

OBAMA, I HAVE THE LEAD WE DO NOT NEED FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN HAVING THEIR SAY, I HAVE THE LEAD ALREADY...

48 STATES OUT OF 50 THAT IS ENOUGH PEOPLE THAT HAVE VOTED........................BARACK TURNED HIS BACK ON YOU AND CLINTON HAD TO FIGHT HARD TO GET YOU BACK INTO THE FOLD, TO BE COUNTED AS AMERICANS WITH A RIGHT TO VOTE!

H.R. CLINTON PRESIDENT 2009

Dem in Florida   May 8th, 2008 12:50 pm ET

I am from Florida and I voted, but I went in doing it symbolically knowing my vote wouldn't count. I am fine with that. I will actually be more upset with the Democratic Party if they try to finagle a way to seat the MI and FL delegations.

If my parents had changed their mind everytime they disciplined me as a child, just because I said it wasn't fair, I would have less respect for them. This is the same thing I feel about the Democratic Party. The rules were set by the DNC, rules were broken by FL & MI, disciplinary action was taken, and we should accept our punishment with grace.

If we, as FL & MI voters, should be mad at anyone, it should be our local state officials. We should focus our anger at them, and vote THEM out of office next time, but we should not focus our ire on either of these fine candidates (Clinton or Obama) or the DNC for this mess.

ps   May 8th, 2008 12:49 pm ET

Darrell WROTE May 8th, 2008 12:18 pm ET

"I am from Florida I voted I want my votes to count we have 50 states last time I looked not 48 if the DNC dose not allow us to vote and count our votes then we will vote Republican"

Darrell, Florida ruined the chance for the DNC to win in 2000 " Hanging chads", and it is doing it again. When is FL going to grow up. Remember it is one of 50 states and it is going GOP anyway in November.

Dal   May 8th, 2008 12:48 pm ET

Sorry but majority of Hillarys supporters are the ones who do not have education beyond the 12th grade. If only they could reason and understand what Hillary is doing they will leave her and support the other candidate BARACK OBAMA.

close hi lies piehole   May 8th, 2008 12:47 pm ET

Did you hear this comment when asked if Obama would pick Hillary as a V P ?
Answer
If Obama picked Hillary he would need a food taster .

John, Georgia   May 8th, 2008 12:46 pm ET

I'm not knowledgeable about how Michigan Democrats ended up with the too-early-to-count primary date. However, in Florida it was the REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE AND GOVERNOR who set the primary date too early per DNC rules. For at least Florida's delegates, the Democrats should not allow themselves to be hamstrung by more of the typical Republican dirty tricks. Let's count the Florida votes as the voters voted!!!
And if it's true that Obama pulled his name off the Michigan ballot, then let the non-Clinton delegates be seated as "undecided" but give Hillary the delegates that the Michigan voters awarded to her.

Dee   May 8th, 2008 12:42 pm ET

You know your a hillbilly if you're for Hillary :)

White, auto worker, non h.s., 56yr old, catholic from MI   May 8th, 2008 12:41 pm ET

White, auto worker, 56yr old, non h.s.,catholic from MI

Hillary needs to win by 65 – 35 in all the remaining elections.

She needs to win 60-40 (3 – 2) for super delegates.

Even I can figure out the math. I am supposed to be dumb as I am an old whitey with no education.

As far as MI and FL, it would be a different story if Obama was,
1.) On the ballot in MI
2.) If he campaigned in FL.
and
3.) If HRC had resisted the issue before the primary.

Hill: Drop out dear its not worth it.

Tim   May 8th, 2008 12:40 pm ET

Hillary didn't really seem to care about Michigan and Florida voters when she signed a pledge to not campaign there and agreed with the punishment laid out by the DNC. Why would anyone vote for a candidate who goes back on her promises and pledges? Most people knows she's not trustworthy, the polling data says as much. I think some of the die-hard Hillary supporters need to let go of the idea of her winning at all costs and do what's best for the party and the country.

Dee   May 8th, 2008 12:40 pm ET

People think the hillbilies won't try to hurt themselves in the pocket book instead of voting for someone that fundamentally agrees with them? They will. They don't like Obama's tan lol. However, if we can get enough of them to support Obama by doing this, maybe he can win.

Doyle - MI   May 8th, 2008 12:38 pm ET

'Rules are rules' they should not attempt to use the Michigan resulting vote counts 'in anyway shape or form.' Many of us did not vote because we were told the vote would not count. I also believe some of the voters that voted for Clinton would have voted for Edwards or Obama if their names were on the ballot.

If the proposal of splitting the delegates with Clinton getting ten more delegates than Obama was accepted, this is based on the election results. This would amount to the Democratic Party lying to the people on Michigan when they said the vote wouldn't count.

If they wish seat the Michigan or Florida delegates without having a new vote it should be a equal split of the delegates.

Dee   May 8th, 2008 12:38 pm ET

Obama is up by 160 votes. Counting Michigan and Florida would shut the hillbillies up and still give Obama the lead in pledged delegates, popular vote, and states won. Shut the hillbillies up, cause you know they'd never vote for Obama anyways lol. I still think he has a rough time in November due to the hillbillies. They don't like him in them dar parts lol. It would get rid of the nonsense being talked about though lol.

Jon McKinney   May 8th, 2008 12:36 pm ET

Voters from Michigan and Florida. Why did you wait till now to decide you wanted your votes counted. You could have stop the politicians that got you in this mess. You knew the rules, you knew the consequences. If you want your vote to count, vote out the politicians that broke the DNC rules and nullified your vote.

Bitter in Texas   May 8th, 2008 12:36 pm ET

Darrwll and all ya'll that want your votes to count...your state officials need to LEARN TO PLAY BY THE RULES....if you don't like the DNC rules, then by all means vote Republican! I'm oh so tired of your whinning!

LaMarr   May 8th, 2008 12:36 pm ET

if michigan and florida delgates don't count, then why does the nominee still need 2025 delegates? don't Obama already have the nomination won?

maya   May 8th, 2008 12:35 pm ET

US OF A 50 STATES, NOT 48 OBAMA CAN'T WIN.

tommy   May 8th, 2008 12:31 pm ET

"we play by the rules that were handed" He Can't be refering to Sen. Clinton.

obama 08

Jim from San Jose   May 8th, 2008 12:30 pm ET

Go ahead and seat the delegation with a 10 delegate advantage to Hillary. It won't make any difference. She's 160 delegates behind and fading fast. Another 10 won't stop the fall or change the race or alter the outcome of Barack Obama as the nominee. I can't wait for June 4th.

And now for Florida....

Suraj   May 8th, 2008 12:30 pm ET

This is not good.... they are trying to steal this election......if it was obama doing this to the democratic party......it would have been the last time a Black person running for president

If this is allowed the required # of deligates for the nomination will also be increased to the new clinton # and that will leave Obama at the hands of the Super...

God Bless America....

Darrell   May 8th, 2008 12:29 pm ET

Look at Obama he attended a White Hatting America Hatting Church for 20 years he rased his family in that chuch if he where white he would of been run out of town but becuse he is half black he will not be run out of town. Oh yes I mentioned half black he is not African American his mother was white and he went to that church now lets talk about family vaules

jimmy vekmen   May 8th, 2008 12:29 pm ET

22% APPROVAL RATING FOR PELOSI LED DEMOCRATIC
CONGRESS. THAT IS LOWER THAN THE APPROVAL RATING FOR PRESIDENT BUSH.

Kris   May 8th, 2008 12:28 pm ET

I also live in Florida and I want my vote to count. If the rule's hold, then why did they even open up voting in these two states? Why did I go to the polls to begin with?

Dee   May 8th, 2008 12:28 pm ET

I love this plan. Let her get the 10 delegate edge lol. I think its a great idea. We all know that many of Hillary's supporters won't support Obama for "reasons" that are just too plain. Whatever we can do to reach out to the rest of those poor "misguided" souls, I'm all for it.

Navy Vet.   May 8th, 2008 12:26 pm ET

You know, initially I was for 50/50 or a full revote, but as close as Sen. Obama is to winning this thing outright I'm good with 55/45. Considering Sen. Clinton would need to win all the other states by like 85/15, it merely ends this fiasco that much sooner and we can get on to McCain.

Obama '08

Yes We Can

Green   May 8th, 2008 12:26 pm ET

That would put Obama around 1904 delegates.... and if FL does something similar, he'll even be closer to the nomination... delegates from the remaining primaries and some of the remaining superdelegates will put him over the top. I say let Clinton shoot herself in the foot and let the MI and FL delegates get seated.

SOPHIA,23, FLORIDA VOTER   May 8th, 2008 12:25 pm ET

WHY IS THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN INSISTING THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE DELEGATES IN MICHIGAN SHOULD GO TO HER WHEN OBAMA'S NAME WASN'T EVEN ON THE BALLOT?

THE DNC SET UP RULES THAT SHOULD BE FOLLOWED AND CLINTON DIDN'T FIGHT FOR THEM UNTIL SHE REALIZED SHE WAS LOSING!

Darrell   May 8th, 2008 12:25 pm ET

Simple new elections in both states just do it

Martin Howell   May 8th, 2008 12:24 pm ET

I AM FROM MICHIGAN. Plain and simple my peers and I did not vote in the primary because it was literally impossible to vote for our candidate Barack Obama. Hillary makes no sense. Use logic people it's over.

Carol, WI   May 8th, 2008 12:24 pm ET

Well, a true re-vote would not conclude with a 10-delegate lead for Hillary as I believe the vote would be close due to the strong support Obama gets in the populated areas, but go ahead and give it to her. I am worn out with the FL/MI debate. Even though this still disinfranshises voters who would have voted for Obama, it will not make a difference anyway.

For those who say Obama is dividing the party by not allowing a re-vote earlier, it is simply not true. The re-vote proposal in MI was to only allow those who previously voted Democrat to vote again. There were many who either did not vote (there were no other measures on their ballot besides the presidential primary) or they voted Republican. This re-vote would still have disinfranchised voters, just not Hillary's voters. At this point, it just does not matter. Once the FL/MI argument is settled, I am sure there will be some other goalpost for Hillary to stay in the race. I guess she is taking the term 'race for the White House' literally.

Theresa   May 8th, 2008 12:23 pm ET

Do Whatever who care, Hillary knew that Flordia and Michigan was not gone to count in the beginning. When you are winning its okay when you are losing you want your votes.

JRC   May 8th, 2008 12:23 pm ET

Hey Darrell, did the Clintons tell you those fairytales? Instead of listening to them why don't you do some research on your own? Oh wait, you probably don't know how.

FreedomFromFear-Florida   May 8th, 2008 12:21 pm ET

I was very SAD that our votes would not count in FLORIDA. If I had voted for Hillary, I would have been ashamed and kicking myself ROYALLY! Thank God I did not! TO THINK – of the LIES and MANIPULATIONS OF TRUTH, the KITCHEN SINKS AND PANDERING, the ATTACKS and SHOTS UNDER THE BELTS, to say nothing of the closed meetings in which I am sure a good bit of ARM TWISTING of SUPERDELEGATES has gone on. Perhaps even with 3 am calls. .....yikes! This is definitely the biggest mistake I could have made. I must FORGIVE myself and HILLARY, maybe when she STOPS. .... Right, SHE IS STILL AT IT. Thank you reader for your "ear". NOW, LET's PRAY for the rest that seem to be as misled and DANGEROUS as I was! ONE SUGGESTION: Hillary could go run for GOVERNOR of NEW YORK, heard that there is need there and Bill would be in FAMILIAR COMPANY.

A Real Democrat   May 8th, 2008 12:20 pm ET

This should be simple; either give them half the delegates or don't seat the superdelegates because THEY are the ones who scerwed it up anyhow and just have the pledged delegates. Stop blaming Obama. He didn't make them move the dates up and mess up your chances. I would block a revote because they were going to make it a closed primary in MI (which it was open before) AND the people who voted before wouldn't be allowed to do it again, so they couldn't change their minds. In addition, you're right he did take his name off the ballot...so did EVERYONE ELSE BUT CLINTON. Now in FL, YOUR legislators said you couldn't do a mail in, its against the law AND they also said no machines would be available FOR a revote even if they wanted to do it. So I'm going to need you to get all the information before you argue its all his fault. Stop listening to Clinton and pay attention, as its obvious, she's not always totally honest about the whole situation. If she cared so much about your votes, she wouldn't have agreed to not have them count in the first place.

FactCheck   May 8th, 2008 12:19 pm ET

> I would vote for her and Millions of others! Obama would get his butt kicked!

Like he did in the primaries? Oh wait, that's right...

Darrell   May 8th, 2008 12:19 pm ET

Hey Idiots the people in Florida had no say in this so why are we being penalized we voted this is all slanted to elect a white hating president

PaJC   May 8th, 2008 12:19 pm ET

This seems a reasonable compromise. I wondered about having 1/2 the delegates seated to recognize 1) Michigan is a big state throwing its weight around, but 2) it did flout rules that everyone agreed to.

A 10 delegate advantage in MI gives 53.1% Clinton, 46.9% Obama. If Obama had been on the ballot or campaigned in the state the spread would probably be closer, since he has closed the gap in every other state. The 10 delegate advantage seems a fair representation of this.

JRC   May 8th, 2008 12:19 pm ET

All of you people that are saying you will write in Hillary or Hillary should run as an Independent might as well just be honest about it and vote for McCain. Your plan will benefit no one but the Republicans.

bonnie   May 8th, 2008 12:19 pm ET

the ones that decided on an early vote are in fact mostly republican , dont you get it . this was a plan all along. they knew it was the only way to take the votes away from clinton, so what better idea than to wipe out the whole state,they wanted obama, and the dnc let this happened. so now we will have a republican in the white house.i will vote for mccain over obama the democratic party will wish they handled it better for not letting those two states vote count.i guess you can call this pay back.

Darrell   May 8th, 2008 12:18 pm ET

I am from Florida I voted I want my votes to count we have 50 states last time I looked not 48 if the DNC dose not allow us to vote and count our votes then we will vote Republican

Heather in Ohio   May 8th, 2008 12:17 pm ET

Why should the deligates be counted for two states that decided to disregard what the DNC wanted? They knew what would happen if they held their elections early. If Michigan gets their way, will Florida be next? What will happen the next time during a primary year? How many states will do what they want because they know they wont be punished? You have rules for a reason. Everyone should play by them!

Darrell   May 8th, 2008 12:16 pm ET

I will never vote for the White Racist Obama who raised his family in a Church that hates America and Hates whites he is half white his mother was whiat I guess he was ashamed of that. He is freinds with Farakahn "The Black Muslum Nation" that hates whites and Jews. His wife hates America and she would be our first lady wake up America!!!

HH   May 8th, 2008 12:16 pm ET

Give her the 10 delagates so she shuts up.

Matter of fact give her both. That way she will still be behind, and easier to kick her out the door.

Xango   May 8th, 2008 12:16 pm ET

this is fair to w hom??
to clinton

the fair thting to do by the books and all is

50 and 50

why is she still here anyway, we have our nomineee
unless she decides to do something which she is now threatening to do with the October surprised..........

the clintons will do anything, so i say, I hope senator Obama gets all the secret service he can (just that have not worked for the clintons) and all security our country can afford them, sometimes the enemy is not far away.............

she is crazy

Tea Party   May 8th, 2008 12:13 pm ET

How about "no?" Does "no" work for you?

close hi lies piehole   May 8th, 2008 12:13 pm ET

Hillary knew exactly what transpired / rules in both Michigan and Florida they broke the rules ...............

Hillary wants to change all rules just to benefit her interests she don 't give a hoot about rules or anybody its her way or NO way.
Its screw you.
If all her actions dont wake you up to what type person she is what will it take to make you see her underhanded tactics. and lies.

South Carolina   May 8th, 2008 12:11 pm ET

Rules are rules and no one should break them. Hillary is a sore loser and a baby and needs to be in diapers.

Phoebe TN   May 8th, 2008 12:09 pm ET

I am so sick and tired of hearing about the Michigan and Florida delegates should be counted because they would be disenfranchising these voters. Did anyone think beyond MI and FL? Do these people think about how much the other states who followed these rules would be disenfranchised because others are trying to push their own agendas? This issue has nothing to do with making the voters voices heard. This is about a nominee who suffers from the entitlement syndrome. Clinton will do anything, no matter how devisive, to get in the White House. If there is a brokered convention then we Dems can hang up our chances of winning the WH. Too many other voters will not vote (I.E. blacks, young voters, etc.) because they will feel disenfrancised. See the bigger picture. The voice of the people has been heard and we want Obama! The sooner Clinton and her supports get that through their heads the quicker we can get down to the business of putting another Democrat in the White House and getting our country back on track.

sick of it , Georgia   May 8th, 2008 12:09 pm ET

I think that the DNC should not amend the rules to satify Hillary Clinton, the rules were broken and that's that, If Obama had broke the rules then he too, shouldnot be rewarded. Don't blame Obama for what happen, he followed the rules and Clinton didn't, is this the type of president we want one like Bush who can break the rules,and make up the rules as you go along,no, that why we are in the condition we are in today,nobody plays along with the rules. Hillary needs to give it up.

FreedomFromFear-Florida   May 8th, 2008 12:07 pm ET

I DO NOT WANT A PARTY THAT BREAKS OR BENDS THE RULES!
WHY SHOULD A CANDIDATE BE PUNISHED FOR FOLLOWING THE RULES? ... BUT... IF YOU ARE GOING TO BEND TO HILLARY'S DEMANDS/DESPERATION.... RETAIN SOME DIGNITY AND BE RESIDUALLY FAIR!!! ALLOCATE 50% TO EACH OR... AWARD EACH CANDIDATE, THE PERCENTAGE OF SUPER DELEGATES ACCORDING TO THE COLLECTIVE VOTES EACH HAS WON FROM THE DEMOCRATIC (NOT REPUBLICAN) VOTERS. FreedomFrom Fear-Florida

Allan-4-Obama   May 8th, 2008 12:06 pm ET

Nonsense!! 50-50 or NOTHING

marie   May 8th, 2008 12:04 pm ET

Hillary should not have to pay for bad judgement on the part of Obamas campaign–I will never vote for him-he does not care about Mich. If he is such a fair person, why did he leave his name on the ballot in Florida? This man can't seem to make a decision of any kind. He campaigned in ads in Florida illegally and should get none of the votes there either. Hillary did not campaign and still won. Let's be fair . The DNC should not pander to Obama.

Tim in NC   May 8th, 2008 12:04 pm ET

This is crap! Unless there are EXPLICIT instructions as to how the delegates will be voting and who they will be voting for, there is nothing saying they can't all vote for whoever they want (As Clinton pointed out last month).

They broke the rules, now they have to deal with it! If those state Democratic leaders still have their jobs next election cycle, then the people of Michigan are either gulible or naive. The blame rests squarely on the state leaders not the national ones.

Suck it up people!, its not going to happen, and this proposal is not even CLOSE to fair.

Terry in New York   May 8th, 2008 12:03 pm ET

if they want to be counted it should be a 50-50 split of the delegates because there's no way you can tell what the outcome would have been had real campaigns went on there.

Krissy--- Austin, TX   May 8th, 2008 12:01 pm ET

Just let her have the stupid 10 delegates so she'll stop whining about Michigan.
And give her the delegates (a compromise of delegates) in Florida too. maybe then she'll finally understand that no matter what math she uses SHE CAN'T WIN.
If she doesn't have Michigan and Florida to whine about, she has no argument to say that she should be allowed to stay in the race (what? so puerto rico can vote??)

David from Canada   May 8th, 2008 11:58 am ET

Not fair, pile of crap really. Should be 50/50 with no potential for any deligates to "switch sides" at the convention.

Janey for Hillary   May 8th, 2008 11:56 am ET

I think Hillary should be getting all of the delegates since she had the foresight to know that this might happen..just another example of Obama inexperience and not caring at all about the Mich voters because of their "red state" status. He should consider this a huge gift from the DNC.

William in California   May 8th, 2008 11:54 am ET

This solution doesn't make much sense. It's probably one of the fairest so far but a little arbitrary. I think that half delegate solution is better but whatever.

I'm for this solution as long as Hilary doesn't hold a parade for her "Big Win" in Michigan. That's my only issue.

I think it's silly to claim victory in these beauty contests when she has the name recognition.

Also Hilary supporters keep saying Obama campaigned in Florida and I have been watching a lot of CNN and have never heard that. It makes me wonder if this is a wonderful internet rumor started on the blogs.

Matt   May 8th, 2008 11:53 am ET

I don't see how Obama gets ANY of the delegates, seeing how know one actually voted for him. It was his decision to have his name removed from the ballot. Voting uncommitted doesn't automatically mean a vote for Obama. I would like to know how many people making this decision are actual Obama supporters as opposed to Clinton supporters.

therealist   May 8th, 2008 11:51 am ET

Michiagan plus Florida equals a Hillary win and the destruction of the DNC..., oh may!!!

Christo Saunders   May 8th, 2008 11:51 am ET

How do they say 50 plus 1 is a win?

She does not care if she only gain 2 more delegate votes from MI and FL in the end.

She wants to claim she win the states that counts according to her. And it’s not about how many states only the ones she wins counts? Makes you think….

How sad to think the rules might be broken for her sake. If it was the other way around she would have fight not to have it count because of the rules.

I think she’s only still in the race because of all her lies and people petty her.

Even if they say lets have them vote over she already portrayed Obama as the bad person that wanted to exclude the votes of millions in MI and FL. This would not be fair to Obama who only played by the rules in the first place.

If it’s that important to have them count then make it fair and split it 50/50 because 50 plus 1 is a win?

Well   May 8th, 2008 11:50 am ET

This is such a mess. Between MI, FL and the DNC committe, they have jacked this entire primary up. MI and FL clearly broke the rules but now they want their votes to count? C'mon..what's wrong with this picture???
If I were a resident of those two states, I would try my hardest to throw the DNC leaders out of their positions. They messed this up.
I don't blame Clinton not do I blame Obama. It was the leaders of those two states who decided to break the rules.

But in the end, if Clinton gets a 10 point delegate edge, will it really matter? Wouldn't she still be behind in the popular vote and pledged delegates?

Cheryll   May 8th, 2008 11:49 am ET

While I am for Obama and yes Hillary is on record saying that both of the those states did not count and she signed her name, at this point it does not matter. She has faught a long and yes sometimes dirty race but the race was for the presidency. I would say Obama needs to give the 10. It will show America what kind of person he really is. Then with Florida I would say split it. It is not the people's fault and if I was them I would be mad at the politicians that put them in the mess they are in. We have got to all come together here and we have got to keep McCain out. Women need to wake up and see that he is trying to squash Roe vs Wade so if Hillary is not going to be the Nominee you need to get with Obama or I am tellig you, you and the blue collars will be in trouble. Sometimes we have to open our eyes and realize where we are at in history and do the right thing for America and the world and put down our fears and predjudices. Obama, is a man that can see both worlds black and white, rich and poor because he is that, he is just not a black man we have a unique situation here are we going to ruin it?

Washington girl   May 8th, 2008 11:48 am ET

No way...I know 10 delegates won't help her, but if the DNC were to accept these terms for Michigan they would have to work a deal with Florida.

Those state leaders need to learn their lesson, and their constituents needs to show them they are not happy.

soy   May 8th, 2008 11:47 am ET

Either a revote is done with only registered democrats or thats it. The officials of this state broke the rules and thats it. The vote in Jan shouldn't count for anything. YES I SAID IT. It should count for nothing.

TF   May 8th, 2008 11:46 am ET

This is insane. She could barely beat NO ONE in a Soviet-style election, and now she wants to be rewarded for it.

THIS IS STILL AMERICA. WE DON'T COUNT ELECTIONS WITH ONLY ONE PERSON ON THE BALLOT.

It's amazing that Hillary supporters would throw our democratic principles, the very foundation of this country itself, in the garbage if it meant helping their candidate. How does this not bother you???

John Doe   May 8th, 2008 11:45 am ET

Divide the delegates 50/50 the rule is the rule. We can not be sending president Carter to other Countries to monitor elections then we do something so bad during our elections.SHAME SHAME SHAME.

Dave   May 8th, 2008 11:45 am ET

Fifty Fifty or Nothing at all! HilLIARy is just trying to get her way again.... give me MI and FL.... I DESERVE THEM both! Somebody needs to explain how "Rules" work! Lie, Cheat and Steal..... that's the way to win it HilLIARy!

Anna   May 8th, 2008 11:45 am ET

Why do I get the impression if Obama were Edwards and Edwards was this far ahead that the Clinton camp would have no argument. Edwards is white so of course he can win. Clinton is white so of course she can win.

My point is, the Clinton campaign is using the color of Obamas skin to bolster there arguments and it sounds really, really bad.

so ironic   May 8th, 2008 11:44 am ET

Look, the bottom line is that these contests were contested unfairly!!

Not to just the candidates but also the VOTERS TOO!!

No cadidates could actively campaign in the state and the results were not supposed to count. Some voters stayed home because they were told their cote will not count.

ONLY HILLARY wins in any scenario that counts these votes. Obama, Edwards ( who was still running at the time) and the voters who didn't vote, all get screwed here.

These were flawed contests that cannot be counted. MI and FL will vote in the General Election which is MORE IMPORTANT!

Tyler in Raleigh, NC   May 8th, 2008 11:43 am ET

So breaking rules, cheating, lying are all OK as long as you change the rules AFTER THE FACT to fit the situation??

Where do you stop..... theft? murder?

MI and FL (I am from FL) broke the rules. People learn to follow the rules because there are PENALTIES involved, if we let them have their votes... then why have rules?

Just let anarchy reign.... because even if you break rules there are no consequences!

Emit   May 8th, 2008 11:41 am ET

Well, who was still in the race when Michigan should have gone to the polls. Think it was down to either just the two of them, or maybe Edwards was still in. Not sure the date that the DNC wanted the primary.

That should factor into how to split up the votes, if that is how to properly do it.

Personally, after MI tried to do this in 2004, and then did it in 2008, they don't deserve to have their votes counted. The people need to elect new state representation that allowed for this situation to even come up. Bunch of stupid lawyers that can't follow rules.

Angela   May 8th, 2008 11:40 am ET

If Hillary get's awarded the proposed delegates from Michgan and from Florida , she wins the nomination and the majority vote. Like it or not Obama supporters, she is still, and will continue to be this country's choice of of Democratic candidates.

beekaboo   May 8th, 2008 11:40 am ET

Absolutely wrong to count the votes or split the votes.............no fair changing the rules "after the fact'. I agree with everyone who says that the DNC made the rules and they have to live with the effects of their decision..

Zack   May 8th, 2008 11:40 am ET

Uh... even if she gets a 10 delegate edge, the fact that Obama leads by more than 150 delegates makes that edge a moot point.

EDW   May 8th, 2008 11:40 am ET

Giving her an automatic 10 point lead? What did she devise this plan and then had Michigan submit it.
BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY – THE CLINTONS.

Rob K.   May 8th, 2008 11:40 am ET

There needs to be a penalty and a compromise. That solution doesn't sound like a penalty and no compromise. Cut the delegates in half and split them 50-50 is the only fair way. If not, then what is to stop them from doing it again.
This is Michigan's fault and not that of the DNC nor the responsible voter delegations of the other 48 states. I hope that they don't corrupt this process.

Richard   May 8th, 2008 11:39 am ET

This is stupid, stick to the rules... no rules = cheating and anarchy

Evie   May 8th, 2008 11:38 am ET

Don't you all know? Hillary, her majesty, is ABOVE the rules... they don't apply to her. So she can take anything she wants. At least that's the impression the DNC is giving her.

There are some pretty powerful people backing the Clintons, & the Clintons will OWE them, big time. Scary to think what will happen if she steals the election like Bush did.

Dylan   May 8th, 2008 11:38 am ET

Still not fair. I seriously doubt that, had there been a fair election in Michigan, that Hillary would have netted 10 delegates on Obama... especially in a midwestern state with a large black population and a lot of universities.

But maybe it's time to accept the proposal just to shut Hillary up. Even with Michigan and Florida Obama still has an insurmountable lead.

A CANUCK   May 8th, 2008 11:38 am ET

Clinton can't see "the writing on the wall"........Limbaugh is using reverse psychology on the super delegates.....the media won't inform the public about PAUL V. CLINTON.......WHAT A CIRCUS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hang in there Obama.....your the only sane one !!

Danny   May 8th, 2008 11:37 am ET

Who care about no name in ballot.....Obama the one pull out his name
if you real want to be President you have to put your name in every states.
All votes should to Hillary in Michigan and Florida.

Dave in Atlanta   May 8th, 2008 11:36 am ET

If I were Barack Obama I would urge acceptance of this proposal just to put Hillary on the spot. Carl Levin knows this proposal is unfair to Hillary even as he pushes it. 10 measley delegates? When she needs 150 just to catch up with Obama?

Obama 08

Johnny Be Good   May 8th, 2008 11:36 am ET

If I were Obama I would say no too because he is WINNING!!! DUH,
The same would be ture if the queen of america were in his shoes. THE STATES ARE THE ONES TO BLAME; not my candiate who decided to play by the rules. How can you people say that it is Obama fault. I mean, it will be his fault this time, but not when FL and MI decided to break the rules. I am done with this issue. Those states are the ones to blame and quit frankly HRC supporters are just beating a dead horse and need to get over it. Put yourself in his shoes people, would you do it? Nope, did'nt think so......what that word i'm looking for......double standard.

Bill-MIAMI BEACH   May 8th, 2008 11:36 am ET

I voted and i knew it wouldnt count-sorry hillary. Go OBAMA!

b   May 8th, 2008 11:35 am ET

It's subliminally obvious that CNN is pro-Hillary. It's similar to an issue about pride that they have with Hillary, and CNN can't hide it.

Serge the Dem   May 8th, 2008 11:34 am ET

Cheaters never prosper... neither do idiots who break their parties rules and then try to play along anyways...

Accept responsibility for letting your elected state representatives ruin your say in these primaries!

Cardinal   May 8th, 2008 11:32 am ET

It's time for America to tell Hillary "It's been a great run, but I have an early morning tomorrow and there's still a lot of cleaning to do. So...drive safely...and I'll call you..."

John   May 8th, 2008 11:32 am ET

The pundits want Hillary to step out? What is the hurry?Charles Rangel put it right.So a second in the contest should step out ,just because she cannot win.Who has the right to predict Obama is going to win? The pundits ofcourse.Most of them are job seekers!! Well my friends,you may be on the wrong ship on wrong direction with a wrong forcast.House speaker Nancy Pelosi is right when the said elections can change.Hillary as tough as she is,spends her own money for the campaign , How about Obama sponging on pensioners money,veterans,the poor who cannot afford.On top of it the pundit are shameless to bragg for Obama! This campaign still has several curves to negotiate. I don't think Obama is the right candidate,Hillary is.

LB   May 8th, 2008 11:31 am ET

Hillary is the one who is bringing MI and Fl up the most because she is behind. What a cheat!! If she was ahead she would be saying they broke the rules and don't count. She new this going into the race, but wants to change the rules to suit her. If the Dems lose the election this year and she runs again in 2012 she won't get my vote then. Kiss her chances goodbye!

dj   May 8th, 2008 11:31 am ET

No one is really paying attention to the fact that many of us Dems.
will not Vote for Obammmaaaa. If Hillary Clinton is not our Nominee.
A good lot of us are going to either not vote or vote Republican.
Myself included.
I' m not real sure why the media does not talk about this.
Also, The Media really seems to bash Hillary as often as they can.
The whole trught about Obamamamaaaa and his wife has not come out yet. Just wait..
You all who are for Obamamaaaa will kick yourself once everything comes out about him. And, it will.

Divanto   May 8th, 2008 11:31 am ET

All these problems could have been avoided if the DNC penalized Clinton by excluding her from participating in the primaries for breaking the DNC rules that required all the candidates to remove their names from the Michigan ballot.

Bill   May 8th, 2008 11:30 am ET

Hillary should leave the Democratic party and run as an independant. She has more real support than Obama, she wins BIG states and the DNC is alienating Florida and Michigan. She could probably win the presidency if not hamstrung by the stupid decisions of the DNC. She has had to run against Obama, the Democratic party leaders and the obviously biased Main stream media and she is still standing.

Greg Pa   May 8th, 2008 11:29 am ET

They should be split as the pole outcome states. Why should Hillary pay for Obama not putting his name on a ballot . This is just one more example of his bad judgment. Hillary should get 73 delegates and obama should get 0 .If he is really so dumb as to think MI would not be seated he doesn't live in the real world.

Tim Dunaway   May 8th, 2008 11:28 am ET

It seems to me that this could have all been avoided if Michigan and Florida played by the rules established by the DNC. I believe it was clear that if they (MI and FL) held their primaries earlier than the DNC approved date, their delegates would not count and they did so anyway. Rules are rules and they should apply to equally to every state. So, I am sorry but I do not feel that they have anything to complain about. If your voice in this election meant that much to you, then you should have complied with the rules. But then again, that is a concept that seems to be so 'old fashion' and superannuated these days.

Obama   May 8th, 2008 11:27 am ET

He would only care about this if the shoe were on the other foot. Obama is self centered and only cares about himself. He could care less about any ones votes not counting, unless of course it affected him.

JB   May 8th, 2008 11:27 am ET

BARACK WAS NOT IN THE TICKET PPL HELLO!!!!!!!

PD from CA   May 8th, 2008 11:27 am ET

Why would Michigan propose such a thing? That seems totally clueless on their part. Awarding Hillary 10 delegates more than Obama? In a primary that didn't have his name on the ballot because he abided by the rules the DNC established for Michigan but that Hillary ignored? What a joke.

JB   May 8th, 2008 11:26 am ET

The only person DIVIDING OUR PARTY IS HILLARY CLINTON!!!!!! Michigan and Florida broke the RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes, they should count their votes but in a fair way!!!
Obama all the way !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LT for Obama   May 8th, 2008 11:26 am ET

JIm said "Unfortunately, Obama made the poor decision to not put his name on the Mich. ballot. Isn't this just proving what opponents have been saying about him? Isn't this similar to voting absent? He's showing that he doesn't care about the Mich. and FL. voters. Why doesn't the public see this?!!"

Ummmm... Barack did not put his name on the ballot because HE was following the RULES. Can't fault him for doing what he was asked to do. You can fault Hillary for agreeing to the rules and then flip flopping and saying they do count after all.

FEDUP   May 8th, 2008 11:25 am ET

Obama was an Idiot to remove his name from the ballot in Michigan. Hillary did not break the rules by leaving her name on the ballot. Obama wised up and left it on in Florida. Obama campaigned in Michigan for people to vote non-committed. He was the only candidate to run ads in Florida, against the rules. He still lost..

Seth   May 8th, 2008 11:24 am ET

Any Clinton supporter who would vote for McCain was never a Democrat to begin with. The policy differences between Obama and McCain are enormous. You can tell all your friends that you are voting for McCain, but when you get in that booth you will now what the right decision is. Otherwise, you will be as much to blame for this country going down the tubes for 4 more years with McCain at the helm.

paul oregon   May 8th, 2008 11:23 am ET

if the rules are changed every time you dont like them why even have rules. i smell a rat. we dont have a dem party we have the clinton party .this is a frist the person winning has no say ??????
thats like this premiary election WHY ARE THE PEOPLE EVEN

VOTING WE HAVE NO SAY THE SUPER DELEGATES HINT HINT
AND THE CLINTON PARTY ARE ARE GOING TO TELL US DUMB
SHEEP WHATS BEST FOR US .

WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2muchHate   May 8th, 2008 11:23 am ET

I CAN NOT BELIEVE ALL THIS "HATE" THE HILLARY SUPPORTERS HAVE IN THEIR HEARTS.

DID EVERYONE SEE THOSE EXIT POLLS? – OBAMA SUPPORTERS % WAS HIGHER- THAT THEY WILL VOTE FOR CLINTON IF SHE WAS THE ONE– THEY WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE PARTY.
THIS IS SO "SAD"

SO, IF YOU LOSE YOUR HOUSE, LOSE YOUR JOB, LOSE LOVE ONES IN THE WAR – DO NOT FILL THE BLOGS WITH YOUR COMPLAINTS BECAUSE YOU RATHER PICK BUSH/MCCAIN, BECAUSE OF YOUR HATE-

ALL THIS HATE IS LIKE THE RACE IS MORE GOOD vs EVIL– ALL THIS HATE IS NOT GOOD FOR THE NATION.

SAD

whodat   May 8th, 2008 11:22 am ET

FEDUP, you are a racist idiot.FDR was definetly on the ballot you retard!Go read a book or something.No wonder you vote for Clinton.She gets all of the lying,racist,idiots to vote for her.Fortunatly you are not in the majority.In fact most of you are very old and will be dead soon.RIP Hillary 08.

David in Chicago   May 8th, 2008 11:22 am ET

Jeez... just let them vote and THIS time make sure EVERYONE is on the ballot.... or just give her th +10 delegates.. christ it doesn't even matter when Obama's lead is so huge now.

LT for Obama   May 8th, 2008 11:22 am ET

MIke – You can be so condesending. Have you forgotten that there are two children in the Obama family? Did it occur to you that Michlle may be home with them for a day?

Just because Hillary put her child off on nanny's and servants does not mean that Michelle has to.

Paul   May 8th, 2008 11:19 am ET

CNN refused to post on this blog an audio clip of Senator Clinton stating that Michigan votes would not count in response to a question about why she'd keep her name on the ballot despite MI breaking the rules.

The clip can be Googled for anyone that's interested.

Dee, MO   May 8th, 2008 11:19 am ET

So, I guess it okay for us to tell our kids that murder is not a bad thing. Because if we can change the rules to make the situation fitted then, its okay to lie. You really didn't mean to kill him when you pointed the gun at someones head. Oh....you were just playing!!!

whodat   May 8th, 2008 11:19 am ET

Obviosly,this is completely unacceptable and a waste of everyones time.Any solution will have to involve a revote.Although 10 delegates wouldn't give Hillary the edge even counting Florida so I guess it doesn't really matter.It's all over except the shouting.The bottom line is Obama will reach the 2025 before MI and FL are resolved.Game over!

Tom Newman   May 8th, 2008 11:18 am ET

As a Michigan democrat, I feel this is absurd. Everyone knew our votes would not count, and because of this most Democrats I know did not show up. To disenfanchise Michigan voters is to seat the delegates and count the fake votes. If there was a re-vote, Clinton would not win. Look to Michigan's primary voting history for proof.

GoHillary   May 8th, 2008 11:17 am ET

Hmm buried deep within cnn the news on anything positive regarding Hillarys campaign appears. No Bias here!

Sandy   May 8th, 2008 11:16 am ET

This is the most ridiculous thing I've seen yet. She was the only name on the ballot!! How can you give the candidates anything but an even split? Does any Hillary supporter really believe that if the shoe was on the other foot, she would be jumping up and down now trying to ensure Michigan gets seated? Puhlease.

Jeff in AL   May 8th, 2008 11:14 am ET

Bottom line to all of this..If Senator Obama is the nominee, many Clinton supporters will not support Obama in the general election. And that could be just enough to give the Republicans the White House.

kim   May 8th, 2008 11:14 am ET

BUSHLEAGUE!!!

There were rules in this election, and Michigan chose not to follow them.

There were rules about campaigning in Michigan, and Hillary chose not to follow them.

Why on earth should she be rewarded with any delegates at all?! This is beyond me. Now we have to hold hands with michigan and florida, because they willfully disobeyed the rules?

FLORIDA Voter for Barack Obama   May 8th, 2008 11:14 am ET

Split Michigan 50/50 and she can have the 10 delegates in Florida- Period

And don't be confused – Down here in Florida we LOVE Barack Obama. If he had a chance to campaign here it would be a tie if not a victory for him. The old people would be her only major support.

Hillary is full of monkey S***

b   May 8th, 2008 11:14 am ET

Let's face it, if the outcomes were reversed for Obama and Clinton, Obama would be out.

Now it's time for Clinton to be out of the race, and Obama should be protected in a "Pope Mobile."

Those Clintons are ruthless.

Jim   May 8th, 2008 11:14 am ET

Unfortunately, Obama made the poor decision to not put his name on the Mich. ballot. Isn't this just proving what opponents have been saying about him? Isn't this similar to voting absent? He's showing that he doesn't care about the Mich. and FL. voters. Why doesn't the public see this?!!

If he were Republican and did the same, there would be no doubt that most of you democrats would change your opinion. I pead with you, take the emotion out of this process and just use logic.

I'm voting for logic!

Chris, Middletown, CT   May 8th, 2008 11:11 am ET

Huh?? her name was the only one on the ballot....everyone else pulled their names out....and she is rewarded with extra delegates?

Greg   May 8th, 2008 11:11 am ET

These results should not count.

They broke the rules and they knew it beforehand.

This would set a bad precedent if they allowed it.

Jeff Spangler, Arlington, VA   May 8th, 2008 11:11 am ET

Still sounds unfair and essentially undemocratic, to the extent that the severely flawed delegate process can ever hope to reflect the principle of one-person-one-vote. More of a moot deal to pacify the disenfranchised voters now that the nominee is clear. Makes me despise the Democrats' view of democracy even more.

Melissa, MI   May 8th, 2008 11:09 am ET

I would really like people who want Michigan's votes to count if they really care about the people of Michigan or if they just selfishly want their votes....I'm guessing the latter.

Randy - Denver   May 8th, 2008 11:09 am ET

A simple solution
Let Fl and Mi vote again, however they want, write a name on a npkin and send it in, only requirement is that the vote has to be notorized and signed to ensure that no one cheats too bad. count the votes and figure out the totals. Remove ALL supoerdelegates from these two states as they are the ones that caused the problems in the first place. Finally determine the percentage of votes for each candidate. If EITHER candidate gets a 60-40 margin win they get ALL the delegates otherwise a 50/50 split. Now everyone's vote counts right? Now for the PUNISHMENT PART for violating the rules. Each state only gets two (2) delegates total. Problems solved those who broke the rules will not effect the outcome unless it is that close and, more importanly, the whining stops!

Andrea KC   May 8th, 2008 11:08 am ET

At this point of the game it doesn't matter. Give Hilary 10 more delegates from Michigan and divide the FL delegates based on the percentage each candidate won in the primary and lets end this thing once and for all. All this means is that Obama will have enough delegates to secure the nomination once and for all, Hilary and her supporters can stop whining, FL and MI will be counted and the party can finally unite.

MICHIGANDER   May 8th, 2008 11:08 am ET

Sadam Hussain was the only name on his ballot as well – that doesn't mean the people wanted him to run the country!!!!!!!!!!

Derek   May 8th, 2008 11:08 am ET

The DNC set up rules that MI and FL broke. When the punishment was levied, ALL of the candidates signed off on it. Now, Clinton wants MI and FL delegates seated. If Obama had won FL and MI instead of Clinton, does anyone think that Clinton would be fighting to have the delegates from FL and MI seated?

Chuck, Oregonians for Obama   May 8th, 2008 11:07 am ET

Sorry, but I do not believe that the numbers would be that way if there was an actual election in Michigan where both candidates were able to campaign. If they are to be seated then it should be a 50/50 split.
This state broke the rules and regardless of the reasons, they were warned; however they thumbed their nose at the DNC and did what they wanted any way. The candidates agreed to the final ruling and now Clinton who is now running on empty knows her only hope is to have those two states seated in her favor. They should be seated but with neither candidate having an edge. Fair is fair, and Hillary needs to recgonize she can not change that which she agreed upon. Had the tables been completely reversed she would be screaming foul in this situation and she needs to be a stand up politician, admit this and be FAIR about it.

IN decided   May 8th, 2008 11:07 am ET

Obama will be the next president of the United States.

Ugo   May 8th, 2008 11:07 am ET

You know what, MI and FL can vote Republicans if they want. The can seat out if the want. How many times will FL screw the American democratic system? They got us in the 8-year long mess. So go ahead, vote McCain, vote Hillary if you want, continue your blatant recism against Obama if you want. In the end, you, myself and every American will have to deal with a G. Bush 3rd term in office. We all will suffer the economic woes. I am so sick and tired of you people. Go ahead and do whatever you feel like doing. Simple!!! You broke the freaking rules and you turn around to follow HRC pandaring. This is stupid!!!

FEDUP   May 8th, 2008 11:06 am ET

Hillary supporters unite, write her name on your ballot in November. The voters elected FDR with a write in, his name wasn't on the ballot. We can do it , Yes we can....

kathe oakland, california   May 8th, 2008 11:06 am ET

You know I hear on MSNBC this morning a woman saying concerning Michigan that "FOR SOME REASON" Obama took his name off ballot???? Come on be fair. It was agreed once Michigan decided to go against the rules, by BOTH Hillary and Obama they would not be on ballot, they would not campaign there however, the divisive Hillary put her name on anyway.
So Michigan – don't be fooled by Clinton or the media, Obama is not at fault and they all continue to try and focus blame on Obama because of your State going against the rules set down by DNC.

You see this is another divisive tack by media and Hillary to turn everyone against Obama since he will be our Nominee. Now if you do not like him for whatever reason fine, but don't blame him for your Michigan voting and delegate woes.

As Senator Obama says as part of his campaign – LET'S BE HONEST WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE and stop pandering, lying, using fear and racial overtones to win.
Good Luck Michigan – it is my home state and Love all of you so be sure and
VOTE OBAMA

South Africa   May 8th, 2008 11:06 am ET

Hi it's not about giving her a couple of delegates she will claim she win the state, she will the go on to convince the supper delegates she win the stats that count.

Same strategy for Florida even if she only getting a couple of delegates thats not the real prize for her. It's to claim she win the big states that count. Even if it's not really a win but a handout.

- Sneaky but then again what do you expect from her. -

South Africa stands behind Obama, and from what I could gather so does the rest of the world. No I'm not black so don't make this into race. It's just conman sense.

Maggie   May 8th, 2008 11:05 am ET

OK, here goes. Sen. Obama intentionally removewd his name in MI, knowing darn well he would lose, now he wants 50/50.

I agree with ya'll Sen. Obama is comparable to former Presidents Kennedy and Lincoln....Keep a close eye on his VP nomination, that is who you may end up picking as President in the long run....

Obama was grandstanding by removing his name....MI and FL he could care less about you...you don't matter to him.....That is who you would vote for as President????? However, he wants to negotiate with terrorists who don't play by the rules and that is acceptable? Double standard? Or wolf in sheeps clothing?

Truth   May 8th, 2008 11:05 am ET

I wonder whether she will be happy with this!!
Remember she is a greedy woman.
Why not do the follwoing:
Cancell all the primaries and caucuses that Obama won.
Give all the delegates of the state that were one by the greedy.
this is only way to satisfy her.

I am not happy with the whole fiasco. A rule is a rule. If it happens, there will be chaos during next election cycles. every state will change thier primary dates since there will be no punishment for doing so.

Marc   May 8th, 2008 11:03 am ET

I don't know why they think they have the right to give Clinton any kind of an edge. She barely won in Michigan and she wasn't even running against anyone!

The argument that those who voted undecided were votes for Obama a) is a hypothetical, since there's no way of knowing for sure, and b) doesn't address the fact that many didn't vote at all! Same issue with Florida. I'd also wager that many minds have changed since then.

This "plan," like all the others put forth by Clinton supporters, exhibits the same arrogance she showed earlier in the race when she presumed she'd be the nominee and started gearing up for the fall.

In the end it doesn't matter if they do give her those 10 votes because she'll lose unless something catastrophic happens to Obama's campaign, but her arrogance and sense of entitlement irk me to no end.

And another thing – I found it so hypocritical, the other day, when she answered "We have to follow the rules, until it's clear who the nominee is going to be." to the question of whether or not she thought winning Tuesday's contests would help her prove she's the stronger candidate. To give that answer when she has virtually no chance in hell of winning UNLESS exceptions are made to the rules is just... gah, she disgusts me.

Does she not realize the double-talk she puts out? Or does she just think people are stupid??

Bobby tray   May 8th, 2008 11:03 am ET

The split they are proposing STILL puts Obama closer to the nomination with Clinton's inability to catch up. C'mon people this is not rocket science!

SEB   May 8th, 2008 11:03 am ET

they need to be seated 50/50 or nothing. This is total BS

Amazed   May 8th, 2008 11:03 am ET

I'll give her a few in Florida but she should not get any from Michigan as he and Edwards were not on the ballot. Do people not understand the importance of following the rules? How do you think other countries will view her inability to follow the rules when they try to deal with her?

Spirit of America   May 8th, 2008 11:02 am ET

This plan cheats Hillary and unfairly rewards Barack. Do the math.
55% of the vote translates into 87 delegates. Less than 40% of the vote (which is unfairly given to Barack) translates into less than 60 delegates. What about the delegates minor candidates got? The whole thing stinks. A revote is needed.

Peter in PA   May 8th, 2008 11:01 am ET

Saddam Hussein claimed he won the presidency with 98% of the vote when no one opposed him in his country. If we allow Clinton's argument that every vote should be counted and accept either FL and MI results, we send a bad message to the world. The ONLY fair way to seat those delegates is split them evenly. There were lot of people who didn't vote because they were told their votes wouldn't count.

Baby B   May 8th, 2008 11:01 am ET

You know what would be GREAT? Hillary to run as an Independent!

I would vote for her and Millions of others! Obama would get his butt kicked!

Montreal   May 8th, 2008 11:01 am ET

To quote " Obama showed poor judgement in removing his name from the Mi. ballot as agreed to"
So according to Clintonites; integrity is equated with poor judgement?
Well the followers are like the leader.

fairandstraight   May 8th, 2008 11:00 am ET

Wake up people!!! Talking about Fla and MI some much is a scheme to derail this election. Sen. Clinton is no more concern about the voters in those states than she is the Democratic party as a whole. Sen. Obama knows a re-vote in the state of Florida could never be fair. Those who really want to know how unfair Sen. Clinton is, go to yahoo search and type in "Hillary Clinton campaigns in Flordia." If you do that, you will see why she wants the re-vote.

People are being decieved by the world greatest deceiver which is Hillary R. Clinton.

I am sorry the official, not the DNC, of those two states broke the rules but there are 48 states that did not.

Senator Obama 08

Billy From Fla   May 8th, 2008 11:00 am ET

That's BULL, Hillary won in Fla and Mich, Obama made the decision
to take his name off in Mich. Neither one campaigned in either state,
but Hillar won. Why should she have to split with Nappy Headed Obama.
I guess if they don't the blacks will riot in the streets along with
Sharpton . It is a shame that we will have a president because 99%
of the blacks voted for him. He is not qualified and everyone knows it.

Give me Colin Powell, I'll vote for him every day of the week. He is a true american and has the experience American needs.

Dennis   May 8th, 2008 10:57 am ET

10 delegates really aren't going to hurt Obama at this point. If it'll resolve the issue in Michigan, do it. Let's move on.

Petition for Barack   May 8th, 2008 10:56 am ET

I would like to see Barack's campaign start up petitions for Michigan voters to sign:

Petition 1: I voted for Hillary because Barack was NOT on the ballot. Michigan residents were told this was a "beauty contest" that wouldn't count. Since you are trying to make it count now, please recognize my voice as a vote for Barack Obama.

Petition 2: I voted UNDECIDED because Barack was NOT on the ballot. Michigan residents were told this was a "beauty contest" that wouldn't count. Since you are trying to make it count now, please recognize my voice as a vote for Barack Obama.

Petition 3: I am placing my vote for Barack Obama now because after I was told by the DNC that the Michigan primary would not count, I choose to withhold my vote. Since you are trying to make it count now, please recognize my voice as a vote for Barack Obama.

The Pill Of the Century   May 8th, 2008 10:55 am ET

Whatever happens Hillary will spin this situation. She will either say the voters were robbed, if they don't get to be seated. Or, she will say she has the most popular votes if they are seated. Hillary cheats and lies, and everyone knows it.

Today we should be talking about John McCain, and once again this selfish woman wants everyone talking about her. It's all about Hillary, 24/7. Just Hillary, Hillary, Hillary. Enough.

Obama 08 and 12 !

Dennis Saratoga Springs   May 8th, 2008 10:55 am ET

In the Democratic Party if you are BIG, POWERFUL and IMPORTANT the rules DON'T apply to you. If the two states that broke the rules were Idaho and Montana the entire discussion would be “they broke the rules and the rules are the rules.” But Michigan and Florida are big important states so there will be no negative consequences for braking the rules – so much for PRINCIPLE.

Do something with pledge delegates BUT BAR ALL Michigan and Florida Superdelegates.

Logs   May 8th, 2008 10:55 am ET

Someone wrote that Obama can have the kids in college. As a student at university, I know that plenty of us are not planning on voting Democratic if he gets the nomination. I personally would much rather see McCain in power than him. Plus if you look, Hilary seems to have more pull in "swing states" (and I'm not saying all of them). Florida and Michigan should count because it's not the people's fault that the state parties held early primaries.

Dan in CO   May 8th, 2008 10:55 am ET

""Not a perfect solution, not completely fair because Barack was not even on the ballot, but better than nothingfor both, and the slight edge for Hillary won't hurt Obama in the end.""

Is cheating suddenly okay just because it doesn't end up affecting the outcome?

Sue Z   May 8th, 2008 10:55 am ET

Everyone needs to listen to people like Ken from Michigan. People keep arguing that the votes should count or residents from Michigan and Florida will be disenfranchised. However, what about those voters who did not go to the polls because they were told the votes would not count? If you now count MI and Fl as is, those voters are disenfranchised.

And to those who say Obama had an ad on TV – it was within the rules because it was a Nationally aired ad and therefore Florida voters happened to be able to see it, too. Doubt that would make a huge difference, though – Clinton had 8 years in the White House to gain name recognition. Obama needs to triple her advertising just so people learn who he is.

Who knows what the right solution is...but I certainly wouldn't allow either Clinton or Obama to decide. The solution needs to be fair, taking into account voters that went to the polls, and those that did not – as well as those that didn't have the option to pull for Obama because his name was not on the ballot (he was following the RULES!)

s   May 8th, 2008 10:54 am ET

Now, this is getting really ugly. I can't believe this unfair tactic. This is going to be a long Summer.

kristen in PA   May 8th, 2008 10:54 am ET

just what we need another president who disregards the rules...

Jane, College Park, Maryland   May 8th, 2008 10:52 am ET

Again, the Clinton's sense of entitlement.

How do you allocate votes to people whose names were not on the ballot? This is not Democrary, and it will come back to haunt the spineless DNC.

Why set rules at all if you do not have the spine to implement them?

Poli Sci Nerd   May 8th, 2008 10:52 am ET

Read the Constitution people: Time, Place, and Method of Elections is under the authority of the STATE! Not the federal government, not the democratic or republican parties, not some TV personality. DNC has no authority under the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES to penalize them for FOLLOWING the rules.

Brett   May 8th, 2008 10:52 am ET

Wow, how generous. If Michigan's delegates were seated as-is, Sen. Clinton would get a 12 delegate boost with 55% of the vote. So the state party's solution is to give her a 10 delegate lead. That equates to a 54% win instead of 55%. Do the math... that is retarded.

Oh, and all you self-titled "Hillary Dems" claiming that you will vote for McCain if Obama gets the nod, think for a second.

That's like saying you would rather eat dog shiat because your friends ordered a pizza when you wanted Chinese food.

Yeah, it doesn't make sense, does it?

The Pill Of the Century   May 8th, 2008 10:52 am ET

If I had my way that woman would never win another primary. She wouldn't get close to winning another office. She's a joke.

Is It About Michigan or Hillary   May 8th, 2008 10:52 am ET

Don't trust her Obama. There are still "undecided/undeclared" superdelegates and then the nut in California who wants to be PAID for his vote.

Hillary was the one who felt like Obama's victories in red states shouldn't count. Well people, Michigan and Florida have BOTH BEEN RED STATES!!! She doesn't care about the votes she just doesn't want to be humiliated by the differences in votes...she is probably still trying to work out some sneeky deal to win. If she keeps saying "there could be something wrong with Obama" she deserves nothing in her column.

Sorry Florida and Michigan...you can vote against your local leaders in the next elections since they got you in this mess. Pure and simple we have election rules and laws that need to be followed. How can you call Michigan an election when Obama wasn't even on the ballot?

This is America, Not China   May 8th, 2008 10:50 am ET

I'm a Barack supporter and I say "NO". Why should Hillary benefit at all, since she BROKE the rules. Barack's name was not on the ballot. Let me repeat, Barack's name was NOT on the Ballot.

His name was not on the ballot.
His name was not on the ballot.
His name was not on the ballot.
His name was not on the ballot.
His name was not on the ballot.
His name was not on the ballot.
His name was not on the ballot.
HIS NAME WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT.

It wasn't.

Scott in Grand Rapids   May 8th, 2008 10:50 am ET

Obama stood up for the Democratic party. He and the other candidates withdrew their names because Michigan broke the rules. Only Hillary, as usual thinking of herself, stayed on the ballot. She was looking at Michigan as an easy win. Give all the delegates to Obama. At least he has integrity.

Dan in CO   May 8th, 2008 10:50 am ET

Counting Michigan and Florida in any way rewards breaking the rules and is a slap in the face to the 48 states that didn't.

No. Way.

If Michigan and Florida get to count in any way shape or form, I'll switch from Obama to McCain, even if Obama is still the nominee.

I can't vote for a candidate that emerged from a process in which the rules were broken.

Chut Pata   May 8th, 2008 10:50 am ET

Obama will win MI elections easily because

1.He will campaign and bring more voters

2. Many Billarians would break away and vote him

3. The 40% "uncommited" are already backing Obama

Billary is asking for MI hoping the elections will not happen and then she can say her loss was due to MI being kept out.

Bud from PA   May 8th, 2008 10:50 am ET

Michigan and Florida Democratic Party members knew that they were going against the wishes of the Party. They were made fully aware that their votes would not count toward the nomination of the 2008 Democratic Presidential candidate if they held their primaries before their scheduled dates. Both states did anyway, thinking that their votes could, or would, sway the rest of the country. It didn't happen. Case closed. The Democratic Party in those two states gave up their opportunity to have a say at the DNC.

Jen B.   May 8th, 2008 10:50 am ET

This is the Clinton way, break/change the rules and reap the rewards.
Not surprising that most of the country is voting for Obama, by far the more worthy candidate.

Anoop   May 8th, 2008 10:49 am ET

Does anyone knows the meaning of rules... Rules are supposed to be followed, not to be twisted or changed when you start losing.. Why didn't Michigan party move its primary ahead of scheduled time.. if they did face the consequences. Why try to get yourself seated now.. Didnt you know that moving the primary will get it invalidated.

Get some life folks. In all fairness, since neither candidate campaigned in the primary, they should just divide the delegate evenly. 50-50..

Obama can be gracious and give 10 delegate advantage to HRC.. but what will it change. She is behind the delegate count by 150 not by 10 delegates.

TN voter   May 8th, 2008 10:49 am ET

NOBAMA, NO Way! If Clinton is out, McCain is IN!

pam   May 8th, 2008 10:48 am ET

Hillary Clinton would like FL and MI think that she is the only one who wants you seated.

Funny how she consistantly talks about how she is going to make sure they are seated but she is the one who is making sure they are NOT seated unless it is her way.

If it is not her way, which completely disinfranchises ANY and ALL Obama supporters then she will make sure none are seated.

IMO, this is just another example of the moral values we DO NOT need in Government.

Hurm...   May 8th, 2008 10:47 am ET

You can't change the rules in the middle of the game! You simply CANNOT do that in the white house! It's like changing the rules of "Risk" in the middle of a game! Hold on... didn't you already do that with Iraq Hillary?

carlo   May 8th, 2008 10:46 am ET

How is it that actually following rules is wrong? Doesn't the rest of the country have to follow rules? Isn't this the standard that the rest of us live by? Why should it be any different for Hillary? How can Edwards and Obama be considered "dumb" and "stupid" for following rules? This is why other countries won't enter into agreements with us. Our candidates won't even keep their words about how to win the presidency.

I say, don't allow them in. What does that say to the other 48 states who followed the rules? What will this mean for the next election? No state will be willing to follow the rules if they think that they can itch and moan their way into being seated at the convention.

For once Hillary supporters, think rationally for a minute and see how utterly ridiculous your line of reasoning sounds.

PA Obama Supporter   May 8th, 2008 10:46 am ET

Joyce in Florida: What Planet are you on? He wasn't the one blocking the right of the voters.... MI & FL broke the rules. That's not Obama's fault. Rules are rules.... why bother having them... if we allow people to break them when it benefits them.

This is precisely the reason I despise HRC...she tries to change the rules to her benefit.

The ridiculous people saying they won't vote for Barack if he's the nominee....weren't going to vote for him anyway.... They'll use anything as an EXCUSE not to vote for him.

If you vote for McShame... you'll reap what you sow!

David   May 8th, 2008 10:46 am ET

This is so ridiculous. And do you know how many Dems in MI switched affiliation to vote in the GOP primary since the Dem primary was pretty much a wash? And how many would have voted for Obama? Unknown. This is so messed up. And Hillary must have kept her name on the ballot just for this underhanded purpose. The Dem Party should stick to it's rules that all agreed upon.

TCU   May 8th, 2008 10:45 am ET

OH MY GOODNESS- Michigan must be the DENSEST state in the Union. (Florida's probably right along their side)

BARACK OBAMA WASN'T ON THE BALLOT!
Hello?!?!?

How can you validiate a primary that had ONE NAME ON THE BALLOT? Hillary was supposed to be a lady and take her name off, but is a liar and left it on. Such a cheat. They shouldn't seat the delegates using the fraudulent 1st primary data. The ONLY WAY to have Michigan's delegates seating is to have a COMPLETELY NEW PRIMARY CYCLE, with a debate in MICHIGAN and at least 2 weeks for Obama and Hillary to campaign. ONLY SOLUTION.

California Voter   May 8th, 2008 10:45 am ET

Obama won his other elections through political dirty tricks and he has chosen to disenfranchise the Florida and Michigan voters in this election . . . .Were the rules broken, yes, are there rules to allow a revote, yes. Obama has done everything he can to stop that from happening so that he can be declared the "winner".

Eddie, FL   May 8th, 2008 10:45 am ET

I love how people in other states seem to forget, the people of Michigan and Florida DID NOT VOTE for the change of primary voting. some committee met and decided this is what they would do, not the people of florida and michgan. th eOnly reason Obama was not on the Michigan ballot is because his campaign removed his name, there was no requirement to do so, and thats a rookie mistake. Obama ran commercials in florida. So before oyu say "You broke the rules" remember, 4.5 million people had nothing to do with the rules and should not be made to suffer for a bunch of DNC cronies who decided what the rules are.

Joe   May 8th, 2008 10:44 am ET

Trying to come up with a solution based on "what if" is silly. The only way you can count the delegates is to actually split them evenly.

Oh, and to those who say Hillary or McCain in '08 ... I seriously doubt you're a true Democrat or have the faintest notion of what's at stake in the general.

I started out a Hillary fan and was disenfranchised with her pandering, but if by some miracle she actually gets the nomination – I'll be voting Democrat no matter what. This election is far to important for people to be petty and small minded.

bill   May 8th, 2008 10:44 am ET

I am from Michigan. Strip us of our superdelegates. They are the ones who caused this problem not the DNC. Then split the rest 50/50 and get on with life. I find it a joke or maybe even a conspiracy that the heads of the party all support Clinton and then she is the only major person who did not take her name off the ballot. She is the one who went on the record and said our votes would not count. The when she started losing she is our hero. BS......

Kevin Orlando fl   May 8th, 2008 10:43 am ET

The poiltburo, I mean DNC, doesn't need your votes Michigan and Florida. Besides, what do you think this country is? There is no place for individualism and free thought in politics. Follow the rules and do as your told even though there is no legal or constitutional reason for a private organization to deny the votes of individuals in a state. Of course in November the politburo, DNC, may kiss your backsides in hope that all will be forgotten so that whoever is appointed by Premier Dean and the rest of the council can win in November. So let Napoleon and Snowball and the rest of the pigs run your life Democrats. You will be better off for it.

Praetorian, Fort Myers   May 8th, 2008 10:41 am ET

It will be a travesty if FL and MI Democrats don't get their voices heard. It may already be too late–the number of registered independents or no party selected voters on the rolls is growing.

Ann Marie   May 8th, 2008 10:40 am ET

Does Hillary know that Obama will still lead her by 116 delegates if we were to add the Florida and Michigan delegates based on the current results? In Florida Hillary would get 105 delegates and Obama would get 67 plus John Edwards 13 delegates, giving him 80 delegates. In Michigan Hillary would get her 73 delegates and well give Obama the uncommitted votes giving him 55 delegates. Add these totals to their current delegate count and Hillary would have 1864 delegates to Obamas 1980 delegates, a difference of 116.

Rules are Rules   May 8th, 2008 10:40 am ET

Why would we, here in America, even think of changing the rules after the election process has begun.

Voters can express their anger when local elections come back around since their politicans got them in this mess. There are a lot of states who would have liked to vote early and be "the leader". Funny thing those states that are the last ones to vote are the very ones now with all the media and campaign hype. The ones who helped determine the outcome of this election. Those who are patient are favored.

Monica   May 8th, 2008 10:39 am ET

Rob
They do not give her the popular vote. You are just spewing the Clinton campaign garbage. They only give her the popular vote if you do not include the caucuses but of course you must think that they shouldn't count.. Which way is it? count the votes or don't count the votes.

pam   May 8th, 2008 10:39 am ET

Do we teach our children to follow rules? We reward good behavior and we need to punish bad behavior. As a mom, it is that simple.

Let us stick to the rules, MI and FL should not be able to decide the outcome of this election.

While I feel for the people of these states, I think it is their government that is the ultimately responsible and I sincerely hope that people of both states will take this into consideration come election day for those individules.

Stephy, Groton CT   May 8th, 2008 10:38 am ET

What happened to core American values? What happened to fairness? Barack Obama did not campaign nor was his name on the ballot! The democrats in Michigan tought they were all God and did not think of the consequences of their actions, now they pay. It sucks but they know it could have been avoided. If the Democratic National Commitee gives up on this, how reliable, how respectable is this party?

Marshall   May 8th, 2008 10:38 am ET

Ken from Michigan and LucieLee from Florida are right. We have people from the states that say they are being punished. Atleast they get it.

Thank you Ken and LucieLee. You are the voice of reason that everyone else needs to hear.

Willis Cheaney   May 8th, 2008 10:38 am ET

Come guys, let's call for what it really is.......................

Clinton is staying in the race talking about Obama not reaching a certain population, spending 11 plus million dollars of her own money, and making it harder for non grounded democrats to keep their eyes on the BIG picture for one reason and one reason only.

She wants to corner Obama into offering her his VP position just to keep her quiet. Hiliary is extremely selfish, manipulative, dirty, and cunning. Essentially, she is old politics! She doesn't truly care about putting a democrat in office. She only cares about herself!

Don't do it Obama!!!!

Jason   May 8th, 2008 10:37 am ET

I don't understand why everyone is so hell bent about the votes. The party officials knew what they were doing when they moved their voting dates up. They should be punished by the voters. Don't take it out on Howard Dean or Obama. Now the state should have just paid for a new election, which I believe neiter wanted to do. Stupid. Get over it.

Y   May 8th, 2008 10:37 am ET

Both Florida a Michigan should be split in half. We cannot set a pattern of rewarding rule breakers. Obama followed the rules and now Hillary and the DNC are basically saying gotcha, our rules mean nothing. You couldn't campaign there but you should have know we don't stick to our rules. I guess Hillary knew how they operate. It has to be 50-50. But if they want it this way, Obama can afford to be cheated of a few delegates because he has a huge lead.

M Philllips   May 8th, 2008 10:36 am ET

This is a singularly effective way to do two things at once: disenfranchise members of the Democratic party who did not vote in contravention of party rules and reward those that deliberately broke the rules. This must be a Clinton proposal– but why should Obama accept it ,given that the impact it has on Michigan delegates is unfair and rewards those that operate under their own set of rules.This duck does not float.

fafa   May 8th, 2008 10:36 am ET

It smells very fishy. I am holding my heart. With all respect to all those who may oppose this. If Barack agrees to this one, he done. The Clinton wll use it against him. What a pity. Any way It's POLITICS

ed   May 8th, 2008 10:35 am ET

John in PA,
I agree that this may be the only solution worth a crap that may sound good to both candidates but you can't count it in the popular vote because he wasn't on the ballot for that to acure so you have no way of having a real number of votes..

Monica   May 8th, 2008 10:34 am ET

This will be a tough call by the DNC. I don't understand how anyone can ethically say that these votes should be counted as is. In the end, IN and FL should in no way be allowed to affect the outcome of this primary. Ultimately, the votes will be counted in some form but not until one of the candidates reaches the "magic number" 2025 based on the rules previously set for this primary.

Southern view   May 8th, 2008 10:34 am ET

Clinton should get 55 % of the delegates, thank you. Nobody told Obama to remove himself from the ticket. He was on the ticket in Florida, and the people preferred Hillary. The people need to decide the primary process, not the party. The Party is on its way to bringing the Democrats down to defeat in November.

No Obama   May 8th, 2008 10:34 am ET

If it was a revote he would lose big time.

Sheila WA   May 8th, 2008 10:33 am ET

Agree to the plan..Give them their seats at the convention and lets get this thing over with. It's very disturbing to see that the best recognized woman in America can't get wrap her brain around the fact that Sen Obama has out campaigned her, raised more money than her, has won more states, more delegates and more of the popular vote despite her scorched earth campaign. She cannot continue to make the case that Obama isn't electable. She is staying in this thing to recoup her money that she loaned her campaign (again) and all the while hoping that the other shoe will drop on Obama. This will be her legacy.. Sad really.

fafa   May 8th, 2008 10:33 am ET

I agree with anon. There is really something shadowy going out there.
I have agot feeling about this one

Ann,   May 8th, 2008 10:32 am ET

I am totally fed up with the comments that "OBama wasn't even on the ballot"...........................Well, guess what – he asked for his name to be taken off... BAD MOVE on his part to pander to those who voted first.
He didn't care about the people of Michigan then.
Funny though how it was all over the CNN and other airwaves a couple of days before of the Obama camp telling Michigan voters everywhere to show their suppoirt for him by voting uncommitted since he had VOLUNTARILY removed his name.
Give her her votes and give him the uncommitted. A 50/50 split is equal to ignoring the Michigan people altogether anyway. Just seems the Obama camp wants their cake and to eat it too. He could have left his name on the ballot but he CHOSE to REMOVE IT.

paulie_nj   May 8th, 2008 10:32 am ET

Everyone here keeps saying that Hillary broke the rules. What rule did she break, please enlighten me? If I'm not mistaken, SHE did nothing wrong. The state's officials are theone's who broke the rules, not Hillary so let's get that straight and stop with that untruth. By the way IA, NH and SC broke the rules too but they were not penalized. And, the rules state that the delegates will not be seated but say nothing about the popular votes not counting.

Mary May King   May 8th, 2008 10:32 am ET

"No delegates were awarded because of national party penalties on Michigan Democrats for moving up their primary date."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What part of NO do you not understand? What's changed? Did they postdate their primary? Does the DNC have the fortitude and the character to abide by its rules? Simple question. We'll have the answer any time now.

JTA   May 8th, 2008 10:31 am ET

Clinton supporters are so bitter...you can tell by the comments that are made here and in public.

Obama is the presumptive nominee! All Democrats need to unite for the sake of their party. I am a Republican and from what I see, the Democratic party is in disarray...and as long as this "fight" continues, it will be much more difficult to heal those wounds.

Republicans for Obama!

Voter   May 8th, 2008 10:31 am ET

If they go with Obama's campaign proposition of 64-64 do you really think the voters in MI care? This is telling them that their votes still do not count. Obama should except the Clinton proposal. Isn't he far enough ahead that those few extra delegates won't matter. And then he will have a better chance of winning the votes in MI for the GE. IF he doesn't it makes him look like a divider, not a uniter.

Patriot   May 8th, 2008 10:30 am ET

This is NOT a deal!

This is just another of the deceptive Clinton campaign ploy.

Violation of rules SHOULD NOT be rewarded; especially considering that 48 states decided to stick by rules ALL states agreed on prior to the Primaries!

Neither Michigan nor Florida (WHO VIOLATED THE RULES) should be allowed to impact the result of the nomination process in favor of ANY candidate!

Florida and Michigan should be made to PAY A FINE to have their delegations seated; but those delegations should have no power to influence the nomination process!
They missed their chance this time around.

Richard   May 8th, 2008 10:30 am ET

None should count. Period.

Hillary an Barack BOTH agreed to the rules. Now Hillary is losing, so let's make new rules? BS!

Imagine if the tables were turned and Obama were losing, then insisted that we change the rules to his advantage. Would Hillary still be fighting to seat these delegates? I think not.

Besides, Obama would have won Michigan, considering second place went to "undecided" with 40 percent of the vote!

Do you get it? With no campaigning and only her name on the ballot, 40 percent of the people still chose NOT to vote for her.

Jorry   May 8th, 2008 10:29 am ET

I think there should be a revote. The results won't change because Hillary will still lose by the number of delegates. This is just so they don't feel left out.

I do find it funny though, some, not all, obama supporters make themselves look really stupid.

"Re-vote on no one seated" well you candidate does not want a re-vote because he is playing politics.... so really want you are saying is no one should be seated and let's just roll the dice in the general election, which is fine but just state it for what it is...

also i still don't get why florida needs to be revoted – no body campaigned (actually except obama had a national commercial) and he got slammed so why are these votes not legitimate? he was on the ballot. Obama should just take the lost there and move on... it doesn't mean he can't win there in the general election....

Gwen   May 8th, 2008 10:29 am ET

Not to count votes is un-American. Go ahead DNC and commit suidcide, between the rude and disrepectful Obama supporters and ignoring Mi & Fl, the dems will have defeated themselves

Debby   May 8th, 2008 10:29 am ET

Obama pulled his name from the ballot, there was an uncommited vote and it was less than who voted for Hillary so its fair she should get the 10 extra. Florida should all go to her as all the names were there and Obama even ran a state to state add in Florida before the primary.

Rick   May 8th, 2008 10:28 am ET

Just another example of the Clinton's thinking they are above the rules (even if they helped write them). But here's a fair deal deal. Seat the MI and FL delegates in exchange for Hillary's withdrawal from the race.

As an aside, George Will had a very good commentary on the whole Hillary and popular vote thing. When her Yankees (I'm sure she was a fan in 1960) lost the WS to Pitt 4-3, the Yankees outscored Pitt 55-27. Shouldn't the Yankees have been declared the winner?

Gwen   May 8th, 2008 10:28 am ET

What's been unfair is that this is the most racist campaign to date. Blacks aren't voting for who is qualified, like most Americans are. For most whites this isn't a race issue, that's been proven in the voting. What is the issue is McCain means more Iraq and Barack has no governing or management experience, his judement is poor and he's slow to respond. What's he going to do when we're being attacked next time, will he be another deer in the headlights like Bush was on 9/11. He's been slow on Rev Wright and other issues. Great guy but just not ready for commander in chief, he's no John Kennedy, at least he had battle experience.

NG   May 8th, 2008 10:27 am ET

That's fine... That would put Obama at 1904... If FL gets seated somewhat similarly, he'll get even closer to the magic number. He's going to rope-a-dope his way into the nomination.

MAry McDonald   May 8th, 2008 10:27 am ET

Why should Hillary get 10 more delegates than Obama? Obama wasn't even on the ballot. If seated, they should be split EVENLY! And Hillary should be glad for the even split. As more people come to know and understand Obama, he might even actually deserve more than half the delegates. I am a Republican so it doesn't really matter to me, but fair is fair! Why should Hillary get more??? No reason!

Will   May 8th, 2008 10:27 am ET

Fred, you are a stupid pig. Go vote for McCain and 100 years of war, poverty and failure. You're the type of jerk who takes a handout form the government with his right hand and slaps it with his left.

Glenn   May 8th, 2008 10:26 am ET

I think it is a great plan, especially if the DNC times it so that the Michigan votes that Obama receives ("even with Hillary's ten delegate edge") still gives him the outright nomination. I think it would be poetic justice for Hillary and Michigan to still be the losers after they thumbed their noses at the rest of us and clearly broke Democratic rules. Tick tock tick tock! Time, money and voters are simply running out for Hillary! Hillary so sad!

Harish   May 8th, 2008 10:26 am ET

As an foreigner watching this Democratic race for Nomination, It baffles me why the DNC is even willing to look into the option of seating those delegates from Michigan and Florida! They clearly broke the rules of the DNC on the dates holding their primaries.

Just because one candidate wants it to be done for "her" benefit, it is a shame on Democratic Party and America that the rules can be changed halfway.

The world is watching this closely and this shows that even America is not above "Petty Politics from Self Centred politicians"

God Bless.

Kevin Leo (Jonesboro, GA)   May 8th, 2008 10:25 am ET

I am not opposed to Michigan and Florida being seated at the convention but they need to be penalized to prevent other states from thinking it is okay to follow suit in future elections.This not about benefiting Hillary or hurting Barack, rules need to be followed. I think that they should bother lose half of their delegates and then they can use the results of their "primaries" to award the remaining. While this would still benefit Hillary, it would not have as agreat an impact. either way, we have to find a way to get them seated, period.

brenda ,minnesota   May 8th, 2008 10:24 am ET

dear debbie dingal,
Obama is not calling you looking for a super because you and your democrat state party tried to game the system and then told everyone when it didn't work that you will punish the dnc. please support senator clinton, do not vote for senator Obama. Your whinning that senator Obama has not called you looking for the sd vote is embarrissing.

Jason   May 8th, 2008 10:23 am ET

Obama should OK this. It can show everyone he wants to hear their voice and doesn't risk giving up too much

dee   May 8th, 2008 10:23 am ET

50 50 for Michigan...a for florida she could have more delegates

obamacrat   May 8th, 2008 10:23 am ET

This seems like the best plan that has been introduced to settle Michigan. If the state party is going to sign on this plan, I think Clinton and Obama should as well and let's move on to figuring out Florida.

Al   May 8th, 2008 10:23 am ET

Fred – Most of you hillary democrats are women or men who wish they were women. As soon as hillary tells you to vote for Obama, you'll do it. Why? Because you guys are spineless and probably sit down when you pee.

Sharon Minnesota   May 8th, 2008 10:23 am ET

Correction on previous post. Should have read Michigan not Florida.

king   May 8th, 2008 10:23 am ET

hi,am not a democratic party member not
even american
but is not right to
change the rule of a party
because of one person
the future of the
party is more important for
what ever position you take

Brian M., Allentown, PA   May 8th, 2008 10:22 am ET

How do we know that some of the 55% wouldn't have voted for Obama if he was on the ballot?

Either give them each half of the delegates, have a re-vote, or leave the votes out altogether. These are the only realistic ideas that would work.

The same thing goes for Florida.

Yes, the people of the two states feel robbed of their votes, but it's their state leaders that are to blame for this mess.

Pete   May 8th, 2008 10:22 am ET

I was taught to play by the rules, not change them when convenient.

Doug   May 8th, 2008 10:21 am ET

Regardless of how you feel about the rules surrounding the Michigan and Florida primaries, the rules were in place and they chose to forge ahead. You can't change the rules in mid-stream, ESPECIALLY if it alters the apparent result.
If the delegates from the two states want to be seated and counted, then award the delegates on a 50-50 basis, That way, at least they are at the convention and have a voice.
Now if Obama had gotten on the ballot in both states and had campaigned appropriately, then we could consider reintroducing those delegates. But the way it stands now, it simply wouldn't be fair.

LoveOBAMA   May 8th, 2008 10:21 am ET

I do not agree with this. Clinton should not get ANY edge, when she broke rules and Obama was not even on the ballot. Why is everyone sympathyzing and trying to hand Hillary votes. This is pathetic. Delegates shoul be split down the middle. 79/78. Clinton can have 1 extra delegate for being a sore loser. If Obama agrees to this it needs to be at the end of MAy or after last primary so that it does not matter.

Eddie   May 8th, 2008 10:21 am ET

I say the DNC should accept this to shut up the Hillary supporters and allow the process to end.

brad   May 8th, 2008 10:21 am ET

I say give it to her. This 10 delegate edge. However, kind of sad. Almost like giving a crying kid some candy only so the child will calm down.

Susan, PA   May 8th, 2008 10:21 am ET

So, Hillary and Michigan get rewarded for breaking the rules?

Everyone agreed to the rules before any votes were cast, and although I do think FL & MI should not be entirely excluded from the process, votes cast in their primary should not count.

Aren't we at all concerned about the precedent we are setting for future elections?

Anything more than a 50/50 split is inequitable and Obama shouldn't sign on to it.

Hm   May 8th, 2008 10:21 am ET

In all fairness the split should be 50/50.

Missouri   May 8th, 2008 10:19 am ET

It is only right that FL & Michigan get to vote. They are part of our country!

George   May 8th, 2008 10:18 am ET

Michigan has it wrong. You can't win or lose a race when you are the only one running. We have seen that in all races contested by both candidates, Obama has consistently closed the gap to a narrower margin than shown in the initial polls. Giving any candidate an advantage based on the results of an invalid contest is unwise. The only compromise that makes sense is to split the delegates 50/50 between both parties.

Dan , TX   May 8th, 2008 10:17 am ET

Ok, good for Clinton, good for Obama. Very fair.

Obama '08

Bull   May 8th, 2008 10:17 am ET

Clinton, you might think that you are better among the remaining 3 and will be a good president.. but what you think doesn't matter. What the people of America think matters.

Joel King   May 8th, 2008 10:16 am ET

They will never count.

MD   May 8th, 2008 10:16 am ET

Considering the fact that Obama wasn't even on the ballot, this proposal is grossly prejudicial.

The major issue is that Michigan (and Florida) knew the consequences of moving the primary date, and yet they chose to do it any way. Both Clinton and Obama agreed to the rules. Now they are asking to change the rules in the middle of the game, which is what you may expect from the corrupt political systems such as in Russia, but certianly not in America.

Yielding to Florida and Michigan will set such a terrible precedent that will affect how states behave in future Democratic primeries.

unions are not stupid   May 8th, 2008 10:16 am ET

No way!!!!! His name was not even on the ballot there is no fair way to do this except to split the delegates down the middle nearly half of the people in that state voted for anyone except Hillary that speaks volumes! she should have won 80 to 90 % of the vote on name recognition. Having said that if Obama really wanted to take the high road and once again show he is the better person. He should except this plan and support it just to shut these Hillary supporters up that think it is ok to rewrite rules mid game. Either way he still win so in really matter's not.

Don from Canada   May 8th, 2008 10:15 am ET

How can they do that when he wasn't on the ballot man Clinton will stop at nothing to win thats where the 6.4 million went to buy those delegates.
Fake Fake Fake thats a Clinton. Even McGovern when he switched sides to Oboma called Bill & NOT Hillary shows you who really is running for President and who would really answer the phone at 3:00a.m.
Clinton Bye Bye !!

P Diddy   May 8th, 2008 10:13 am ET

Why should Clinton get a 10 delegate advantage, or any advantage at all??? Since Obama's name wasn't on the ballot I think the only fair solution is to evenly split the delegates and call it a day.

Brian P   May 8th, 2008 10:13 am ET

Here's what I don't get. They both signed a pledge not to even participate in the MI primary. The reason he took his name off the ballot was to honor that pledge. She went back on her signed pledge and kept her name on the ballot. I don't think she should be rewared for that. FL I could deal with seating as is but how is it right, honest, respectful, to reward Hillary for breaking her pledge?

Jake   May 8th, 2008 10:13 am ET

Why should Obama get any? Hillary put the voters before the party and stayed in both the Michigan and Florida races. Out of the two, which one has actually practiced inclusion and which one has just preached about it?

Vik   May 8th, 2008 10:12 am ET

Michigan should just vote again. A lot of people who would of voted for Obama didn't do so, because he wasn't on the ballot and they thought that their votes didn't count. It would be unfair to split what is there, since it doesn't reflect a true showing of supporters. For those who keep blaming the DNC, stop and think about who's really at fault. They didn't set the dates, your states did.

JC   May 8th, 2008 10:11 am ET

DNC is like an incapable parent who cannot hold his or her own.

If you cannot carry out the penalty, do not say it in the first place.

Eric   May 8th, 2008 10:10 am ET

knock yourself out, giving giving Obama all the uncommitted votes still doesn't do anything to change the fact that Clinton doesn't have a snowball's chance.

John Burt   May 8th, 2008 10:10 am ET

The plan does reward Senator Clinton for her chicanery in keeping her name on the ballot when all the others dropped out. But it doesn't reward her much, and won't change the outcome, and will, I hope, take this phony issue off the table, so I guess I'm for it.

jane in CA   May 8th, 2008 10:08 am ET

My friends and Michigan said they've seen enough of clintons. if revote, she looses.

ed   May 8th, 2008 10:08 am ET

Sounds like a good plan to me. It still doesn't help Hillary gain on Obama's delegates but it will represent Michigan at the DNC. Now maybe people will stop blaming Obama for what the states leaders did in getting the votes disqualified in the first place.

split the votes   May 8th, 2008 10:07 am ET

The only fair way to count Michigan is to split the votes evenly. Obama's name was not even on the ballot so it makes absolutely absurd to count Clinton's votes. She agreed to not count the delegates at the beginning of the campaign so why should she be treated more favorably?? You will have many democrats around the nation upset if you blatantly give precedence to Clinton.

New York   May 8th, 2008 10:06 am ET

Florida and Michigan should take out their rightful anger against their state party officials. The candidates had nothing to do with this mess.

Jesse - San Antonio TX   May 8th, 2008 10:05 am ET

he shouldn't get any delagates. he withdrew his name. how can they say those uncommitted were for Obama? It could have been for Edwards, Biden, or Richardson.

DELUSIONAL HILLARY SUPPORTER   May 8th, 2008 10:05 am ET

Hillary is going to be President! Yay! You go girl! Hillary in 2008! Seat Michigan and Florida! Change the rules! Yay! Small states don't count! Only people who vote for Hillary matter! Yay!

Bitter in Texas   May 8th, 2008 10:05 am ET

.......and the same thing should apply to FL....those folks still haven't learned how to count ballots.

AJ   May 8th, 2008 10:04 am ET

Anything that Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick is involved in is suspect. She comes from a dirty political family who are known for corruption and avarice. Her son, the Mayor of Detroit is now under indictment.
Hillary should run as far and as fast as she can away from this one.

karesa   May 8th, 2008 10:03 am ET

Steal ! Steal ! Steal ! Hillary Clinton is going to steal it from Barack Obama. She will do whatever it takes to get it.

rehoboth ng   May 8th, 2008 10:03 am ET

good,but let us see how it worksout.

Wayne, Greenville TX   May 8th, 2008 10:03 am ET

This may be the most reasonable way to end this stalemate. Now if they can just figure out what to do with Florida..

Independent   May 8th, 2008 10:02 am ET

I support Obama, but I think he and Clinton should agree to this deal. Even though I think Michigan could have been a state that he would have won. At this point, the race is over, let's compromise a little and help the people of Michigan out by making their votes count.

Tina   May 8th, 2008 10:01 am ET

Why not it's not a bad plan. I don't think the 10 more delegates that Hillary will have will make any changes. My only concern is what about the 157 if they decide to endorse Hillary?

R.I.F.   May 8th, 2008 9:58 am ET

Look…she wants MI & FL’s voices to be heard, but she wants all of the voices of the 48 states that would have voted by June not to be heard because she wants the superdelegates to overturn the will of the people based on some opinion polls taken six months before the general election. The same polls that back last fall had her and Rudi Gulianni winning their respective nominations by Super Tuesday. Makes as much sense as the gat tax holiday. Someone please explain that logic to me? I guess I’m just too dumb.

Laura Kolodziej   May 8th, 2008 9:53 am ET

This 'plan' is insulting to me, a Michigan voter. We did not get a full ballot therefore Clinton did not 'win' Michigan as she keeps claiming. Either we get a re-vote or nobody is seated at the convention. Please honor the VOTERS.

Anonymus   May 8th, 2008 9:52 am ET

If the goal is representation at the convention, then 64-64 makes the most sense. The people can be there, but the votes cancel each other out and the states primary will still be null and void as agreed on. The way Hillary likes to look at voting shows she's from Chicago, where the dead can still have a voice and vote.

Fredi in Illinois   May 8th, 2008 9:51 am ET

I think Obama should accept. The Michigan party wants it, it does not hurt him, it may begin the healing in the party, it seems "fair" – what does fair mean anyway in a primary that Hillary openly declared would not count and now she accuses Obama of disenfranchising voters ... look at the turnout in Michigan compared to the other contests where voters knew theit votes would count. It is very clear that many did not vote because they knew it would not count – let's get this issue off the table and move on to defeat McCain.

Dan (TX)   May 8th, 2008 9:51 am ET

Utter crap! Only one name on the ballot – give me a break! Is this the Soviet Union or what?

MI broke the rules and should pay the price for their arrogance – they can all stay home and watch the convention on TV.

Same goes for Florida.

Follow party rules – votes count. Break party rules – votes DON'T count. Plain and simple.

Try again in 4 years.....

Mikki, Washington, DC   May 8th, 2008 9:50 am ET

Why should the delegates have any vote? If the delegates are seated, then the DNC should be prepared to have this type of nonsense occur again and again.

Obama supporter   May 8th, 2008 9:50 am ET

If we give in as a party and allow their votes to count, in 2012 it will total chaios with all states doing whatever they want.

proud army and navy mom   May 8th, 2008 9:49 am ET

ok, give them to her. old girl can't catch up, even if she receives more delegates however unfairly.
but democratic party leaders, stop pandering to the clintons!
rules are rules and they were agreed on by all the candidates.
you leaders are beginning to work my patience.

H Martin   May 8th, 2008 9:47 am ET

I don't think it should happen. You can not change the rules 1/2 way through the game. That is like telling a child well you needed the money you put in the bank, but the bank is closed. Go ahead and break into the bank, the vault and then say well it was my money I just wanted it out. What a message to send to the children of this country.
Play by the rules that you agreed to at the beginning and deal with the outcome.
I know waiting for moderation I doubt you will print this CNN.

Kel in Auburn, AL   May 8th, 2008 9:46 am ET

So in a state where Obama was on the ballot and she didn't even get a respectable amount of vote from the people that did turn out, Hillary still wins? Yeah, right. That's fair.

Lana   May 8th, 2008 9:46 am ET

I am not sure why all of this is going on. When you break rules there are consequences and Michigan should suffer the consequences. They knew first hand what would happen if they broke the rules. The democratic party is looking less and less credible and this would just add insult to injury.

Farrell, Houston, Tx   May 8th, 2008 9:44 am ET

Hillary meets with approximately 7 superdelegates on Wednesday and didn't reveal what they discussed and now it's the Michigan democrats accepting a new compromise. I believe voters have the right to know what was said in Hillary's meeting as well as what's being revealed as an acceptance by Michigan democrats. The DNC is leaving itself wide open to speculation of mistrust and a strong possibility of hurting the party even more so. DEMOCRAT VOTERS NEED TO BE INFORMED THRU THIS WHOLE PROCESS AND NOT HAVING BITS AND PIECES DRIBBLED DOWN AS AN ATTEMPT TO DISTORT OR TELL THE TRUTH. THIS CAN BE THE BEGINNING FOR THE END OF BRINGING THE PARTY TOGETHER. DO THE RIGHT THING, PLEASE.

Jeanne from Michigan   May 8th, 2008 9:42 am ET

Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm hijacked the Primary in Michigan. She's Clinton's State Campaign Chair. All the candidates agreed the keep their names off the MI ballot in accord the with the DNC sanctions. But Hillary put her name back on at the last minute, at the urging of Granholm. Clinton supporters were telling voters to vote for her, because this was a "beauty contest" and wouldn't count. This was such a blatant attempt to disenfranchise the black voters in Detroit. I am a white woman from the suburbs of Detroit even I could see that.

Yes we can!   May 8th, 2008 9:41 am ET

I THINK IT'S SAD THAT OUR GOVERNMENT IS SETTING A BAD EXAMPLE FOR THE REST OF THE US......YOU BROKE THE RULES, THERE WAS NOTHING CONFUSING ABOUT THE RULES...YOU WERE DEFIANT BECAUSE YOU THOUGHT HILLARY WAS GOING TO WRAP THE NOMINEE UP EARLY.....I FEEL BAD FOR THE VOTERS THAT CAME OUT, BUT YOU HAVE TO PUT THE BLAME WHERE IT BELONGS ON MICHIGAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS....IT'S ALSO SAD THAT OBAMA IS BEING USED AS THE "NEGATIVE" CANDIDATE ON THIS ISSUE. THEY BOTH AGREED TO THE RULES AND IT'S ONLY AN ISSUE BECAUSE HILLARY IS BEHIND. IT'S NOT ABOUT BEING FAIR OR NOT DISENFRANCHISING THE VOTERS...IT'S ALL ABOUT ME ME ME......

Ada   May 8th, 2008 9:40 am ET

No, we are not going to accept anything that would give her an egde.
Divide it 50/50 because Barak was not on the ballot.

From Obama supporter

Kyu Reisch, Radcliff, Kentucky   May 8th, 2008 9:40 am ET

Obama pulled out his name from ballot, nobody asked, it was his choice and judgement, he didn't deserve delegates because Hillary supporters raise the money to revote, Obama didn't accepted, it was his choice too. Hillary should get the most of Michigan delegates and whatever won from Florida too. That is fair, without Florida and Michigan, DNC will fail the General Electin. Hillary should get whatever she earned from the voters. Obama is not electable, he will fail too. Go Hillary, DNC is stupid, keep fighting. You will win.

MI 4 Obama   May 8th, 2008 9:37 am ET

OBAMA'S NAME WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT!
HILLARY KNOWS THE RULES AND BROKE THEM! SHE DISENFRANCHISED THE VOTERS IN FL n MI!
THE WORLD IS WATCHING!! LETS SEE IF THE RULES AND POLICIES OF THE DNC CHANGE MID STREAM BECAUSE HILLARY SAY SO!
LIKE THAT JUDGE IN HILLARY'S FRAUD CASE WITH PETER PAUL.

Deb n Texas   May 8th, 2008 9:37 am ET

That cow is going to get 10 delegates, like I have a whole in my head.
SHE WAS THE ONLY CANDIDATE ON THE BALLOT. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE NOT STUPID!

Atiya   May 8th, 2008 9:36 am ET

this proposal is absurd. anyone with a shred of integrity knows that the elections in florida and michigan were ethically compromised for the exact same reason that the media is not allowed to project winners based on exit polling until the polls close.

any election where the voters have predetermined knowledge about results is a complete sham. florida and michigan voters knew, before their primaries, that their delegates would not be seated thanks to broken DNC rules. seating their delegates in any proportion besides 50/50 is overtly fraudulent and WILL be taken to the supreme court. PERIOD.

democrats unit   May 8th, 2008 9:36 am ET

Clinton is a fighter but it seems increasingly clear she is more concerned with fighting for her own ambition rather than fighting for the democratic party and fighting john mccain. Clinton supporters should really look inside and think what Clinton is trying to gain by continuing this race. I feel as though if you are a true democrat first and hillary supporter second, you will see that it is time for democrats to rally around the person who after 42 primaries is ahead by 160 delegates.

I hope clinton supporters will see the light. Obama supporters are our neighbors and we should all unite. The greatest evil to this country is a bush 3rd term and that is exactly what John Mccain is running on. If a democrat is president, we will be able to literally investigate Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the neocons and I wouldnt' be surprised if they are tried for war crimes and crimes against the constitution. I am waiting for the day that these criminals are behind bars for ripping the fabric of what makes this country so great.

Kaye- Jacksonville FL   May 8th, 2008 9:34 am ET

Michigan delegates shouldn't be seated at all. Their Democratic governor and legislature changed the primary date knowing the sanctions would be severe. Clinton was the sole candidate on the ballot. They disenfranchised themselves!

As for Florida, our Republican governor and legislature did the dirty deed and Obama was on the ballot. One could argue, give them both their elected portion of delegates. But if Florida is seated, what about the other 48 states that played by the rules? Heaven forbid, in the next election states will be moving their primaries and caucuses to whatever date they choose – the primary season could begin on Inauguration Day!

I don't envy the DNC rules committee on May 31 – there's no way on God's green earth to resolve without screaming from one state or the other, much less the two campaigns!

Independant   May 8th, 2008 9:33 am ET

I believe that now is the time that Obama steps up and agrees to this plan. He is at a point in the campaign that this would not hurt him, and he can step up and say let's seat this state and give in and do the right thing. It will also show that he is willing to compromise and find a resolution to the problem. That is what he is touting as his stance on most of our current ptoblems that we face. This would be a good move for him. It would also take some of the steam out of Hillarys argument that he is the won that is keeping MI. and FL's people's voices out of this race.

NickNas   May 8th, 2008 9:29 am ET

How does this figure??? How do they come to this figure when Obama wasn't even on the Ballot? This is just Political pandering to Hillarys bitter supporters. ANY 6 year old can see you can't win a game when only one person plays.

6 year old: " I beat you at tetherball yesterday ay recess while you were home sick"

Other 6 year old: " Ok so I will admit now you are better than me"

See how SILLY you people sound???

Mary   May 8th, 2008 9:29 am ET

This would be wrong. Senator Clinton knew the deal on Florida and Michigan. To do this would be breaking the rules for her. How do you think this looks? Would you break the rules for Senator Obama?

KJR   May 8th, 2008 9:29 am ET

....and history will look back on this as the "hanging chad" story of the 2008 election

Walls   May 8th, 2008 9:29 am ET

If I could give any advice to Howard Dean, I would tell him to start going "winner takes all" in the next election after I slapped him upside his head for being the soul reason why this party cannot get ahead.

Only in the Democratic party can a nomination be given on 48 states. The Democratic party [even aside from Obama and Clinton] cannot get along. Everyone is snapping at everyone. The party seriously needs to get their act together.

One thing I find funny about Barack Obama is that Sen. Barack Obama's campaign has been particularly vociferous in claiming that its candidate stands for a transformative, participatory new politics and yet he's so hard on making sure the MI and FL delegates are either not counted or split evenly. It's Barack's own fault that his name wasn't on the ballots in Michigan after he voluntarily took it off. His campaign even advertised in Florida. Same old politics, my friends.

Ilona Proud Canadian   May 8th, 2008 9:28 am ET

This is just not right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What about all of those voters who did not go to the polls, because they knew the votes would not count????? Under this plan these voters WILL be disenfranchised. So it is okay to take away these people's right to vote, simply because it will help Sen. Clinton? This is one reason that she is staying in the race. The other major reason is because she is hoping to dig up another scam like Bill and Hillary's collusion with Rev. Wright. I am convinced that Rev. Wright issue was a deliberate set up between Wright Bill and Hillary. This man was a breakfast guest at the White House during Bills impeachment days.
cnn even today you are still being biased. Please post my comment.

Honest American   May 8th, 2008 9:28 am ET

Well, to be honest, if Obama had campaigned there with his name on the ballot, then he might have even won, but everyone knew there were rules in play, no one was allowed to campaign, but Clinton campaigned, she broke the rules right there (although she agreed to the rules). Everyone knows that Obama does well once more people get to know him thru town hall meetings, and all that, even media agrees on that. So, to be fair, the delegates can be split among the two. Anyway, if this plan proposed by MI DNC was accepted, a 15 delegate difference would not affect Sen. Obama. It's time to unite the democratic party. It seems to be that Hillary cares about her more than the party. It's just so wrong. If Obama was in Hillary's position now, he would've already left, because he really cares about the party & the people. Anyway, people will have to decide for themselves as to who is honest, and also consider that the rules were in place, and were followed by Obama., Edwards, etc... no one campaigned there except Hillary.

former clinton supporter   May 8th, 2008 9:28 am ET

At this point, I don't see the harm in allowing Clinton to pick up 10 delegates. She would still be behind by 140 delegates.

Gabby   May 8th, 2008 9:28 am ET

55% of an election against no one. Now you want to give her a 10 delegate edge? that is perhaps the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Both states knew the penalty of holding elections early, now the Clintonites are blaming Obama for that. Do they not realize that they should be blaming the ones who decided that they were above the rules. If you want your voices heard in Fl. and Mi. start letting your state representatives hear from you, write and call.

Obama 08 :)

Florida Voter   May 8th, 2008 9:27 am ET

Sen. Obama's name WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT!!
The only fair thing to do is hold a re-election OR split the numbers 50/50.

sharong58   May 8th, 2008 9:26 am ET

I think Michigan & Florida should have a revote after all the other primaries or give each candidate a 50/50 split. What is this deal about giving HIllary a 10 delegate edge? This is not fair because you don't know how the voting would have ended up if Barack Obama had been on the ticket! He may have won 60% to 40% or visa versa. A
50/50 split is the fairest way to deal with the situation. Hillary has friends in Michigan and is desperate for more delegates because she is so behind! That's what that whole deal is about! That's why she's been screaming to count Michigan & Florida all this time. It's
like she thinks she has the power to "call the shots" to the DNC!!!!
Power-hungry elite egomaniac, that's what she is! Boy, is she dillusional! I hope she goes bankrupt in her ridiculous "I'm gonna go all the way to the covention" bit! Even Huckabee knew when to "bow out"!

Alice   May 8th, 2008 9:25 am ET

Just say NO.

Once you start bending rules like this, you can never go back.

Even-stevens or nothing.

Barbara,   May 8th, 2008 9:25 am ET

I am sure they will accept that suggestion as long as it does not change the outcome of the race. The important thing is that the people will now feel that their votes were a part of the process and the deligates will be seated for the convention.
It still boggles my mind that the officials in Michigan was allow their state to be in this situation over a date. It is obvious that they were more interested in being in the lime light than ensuring the people's votes counts as they choose to ignore the rules knowing the concequences.

jonathan   May 8th, 2008 9:25 am ET

The Demcrats elections/primaries have been so exciting. I usuallly am bored by now. I like Hillary going on to the finish line. I also wish there would be a Obama/Clinton campaign.

Kathy   May 8th, 2008 9:24 am ET

DO NOT ACCEPT THIS HILLARY, YOU KNOW YOU DESERVED MORE VOTES, OBAMA'S OWN FAULT FOR TAKING HIS NAME OFF THE BALLOT!
GO HILLARY 08!!!

H HEIDI   May 8th, 2008 9:23 am ET

YOU DON'T REWARD AN INDIVIDUAL (Hillary) OR STATE (FL & MI) FOR BREAKING RULES.

If the DNC does not enforce their rules this will only cause more Chaos in the future.

FL & MI should unseat their local officials who got them in this mess....when this is demonstrated then the other 48 states will support their efforts.

NC followed the rules...we remained at the end of the primary and our state COUNTED and played heavy in the numbers.

Helen
Charlotte, NC

paulie_nj   May 8th, 2008 9:22 am ET

How come FL and MI were penalized for moving up their primaries but IW, NH and SC were not? DNC Rule 11 states that no primary should occur prior to Feb 05 with exceptions for IA, NH and SC which shall not have primaries prior to Jan 08, Jan 22 and Jan 29, respectively. All 3 moved them up to Jan 03, Jan 08 and Jan 26, respectively. So why the the DNC not penalize those states?

Michigan Male   May 8th, 2008 9:22 am ET

How about we give all the uncommitted delegates and uncommitted votes to Obama and the rest to Clinton. Then remove all the super delegates who favored moving the primary up and let the rest vote as they see fit. Penalize the people who broke the rules, not the voters!

Ben I   May 8th, 2008 9:21 am ET

Why should Hillary get a 10 delegate lead? I bet many Obama supporters didn't go vote because he wasn't on the ballot and felt their vote wouldn't be counted.

The results from January are in no way fair. I think they should be split evenly.

Kevin, Hanover PA   May 8th, 2008 9:21 am ET

Obama and Edwards foolishly removed their names from the Michigan ballot (probably to look good in the eyes of the DNC). Then the Obama supporters tried to rally the troops and have them vote "uncommitted". Based on those two facts I'd say the Michigan results should count.

anon   May 8th, 2008 9:21 am ET

By hook or by crook... I'm starting to get a really bad feeling about all this stuff. The hair on the back of my neck is starting to stand up. The supers need to step up now because there is something really shady going on here.

Daniel   May 8th, 2008 9:20 am ET

Cheaters never prosper. Don't move up your election if you want your votes to count. It's quite simple. If their votes are allowed, then every state will move up their elections in 4 years.

SMOQ   May 8th, 2008 9:20 am ET

I don't like changing the rules, but am amicable to the 50/50 split and potentially the 59/69 split mentioned in this article. I don't like the fact that all candidates names were not ont he ballot, and there is no telling how many more voters would have shown had the rules not been broken and they voters knew their votes and delegates would count. Florida is a totally different story especially since no other option was avail on the ballot but Hillary...at least Michigan had the Uncommitted category to allow for some type of representation of each candidate.............

Tired of W, OH   May 8th, 2008 9:18 am ET

I still don't think this proposal is fair. If Michigan were to hold a re-vote with both candidates on the ballot, I think that Obama would get 50-55% of the vote, easily. But, I hope that everyone agrees to the proposal because a 10 delegate gain wouldn't do much to help Clinton and then she could finally quit whining about it.

CW4Barak   May 8th, 2008 9:17 am ET

They should be split 64-64....since Obama's name was not on the ballot....Billary knew those votes wouldn't count and now wants to change the rules. FL, however they may split according to how people voted, since his name was on the ballot....all this still won't help Billary's case!

Marc in DeKalb, IL   May 8th, 2008 9:16 am ET

The election was still a sham and counting its votes would *STILL* be a bad precedent for the Democratic party.

Who cares that these rules had all been agreed upon well in advance?

Rules? What rules?

===

To people who are angry at the Presidential candidates for this, don't be. It's not their fault.

Blame the state-level politicians responsible for the decision to have an early election. Hold them accountable, they seem to be getting away relatively blame free because everyone is placing the blame on the nominees, where it should *NOT* be...

Anonymous   May 8th, 2008 9:15 am ET

Michigan & Florida should have a revote after all the other primaries. . . . and I still don't think Clinton will get it!!! Or, if they don't want to do that, give each candidate half of the delegates for each state. You can't give Hillary a 10 delegate advantage because you don't know how the vote would have gone if Barack Obama was on the ticket! He may have won it 60/40 for all we know! I say 50/50 down the line.

Cammi317   May 8th, 2008 9:15 am ET

That's cool. The race basically over, regardless.

Common Sense   May 8th, 2008 9:15 am ET

No compromise. They agreed it wouldn't count and it shouldn't count. The end. Hillary can't keep calling the shots and changing rules mid game.

Carol   May 8th, 2008 9:14 am ET

Simple,they broke the rules why should they be rewarded.they knew what they we doing . I'ts funny how Hillary went along with the other canidates at that time not to go to those states,it just shows you how desperate she really is to win this nomitation.why should they change the rules just to suit Hillary.I feel sorry for the people of these states because of the delegates that represent them.I'ts not the voters fault ,but they need to take a look at who's representing them.

LucieLee   May 8th, 2008 9:13 am ET

In my opinion...as a Florida resident...neither states delegations should be used to decide who the nominee will be. We were punished for breaking the rules...and any lame reasoning saying that the voters didn't break the rules...I don't think we really have a say...because this is about delegates.And the idea I heard last night from Debbie Dingle who was on LKL...about Barack Obama not wanting to be on the MI ballot because he thought he coudn't win, is just ludacris. She shouldn't be putting herself out there as being "neutral" or uncommitted..because with that statement..she is definitely in Hillary's camp~!!! Hillary, along with the other candidates took their names off the MI ballot because the state broke the rules according to the DNC, they signed a pledge, including Hillary~she put her name back on the ballot after she "bombed" in Iowa...thinking it didn't matter anymore, anyhow....so Hillary also broke therules....why should she be rewarded for that? This whole thing won't matter anyhow...because there is no way she can catch Obama, who as the presumptive nomineem and head of the Party, can move to seat those delegates from MI and FL if she so chooses...and there is every indication he will~~~

Bob   May 8th, 2008 9:12 am ET

The results of the primaries in Michigan and Florida should not even be mentioned as the results are not valid by any stretch of the imagination. You simply can't conjecture what the results would have been if there was a valid primary – no one knows. Split the delegates 50/50 and move on.

MurphyMorseJohnson   May 8th, 2008 9:11 am ET

Since Obama not surprisingly followed the spirit and the letter of the rules of the Democratic Party, as opposed to the Clintons, Obama should receive 55% of Michigan's Delegates. Otherwise, Michigan should not be seated. One final note–the Clintons had the opportunity to show their leadership on this issue and failed. The Clintons could have personally interceded in Michigan and Florida to to beg these delegations to abide by the rules before the fact. However, the Clintons sat on the fence until the results were in. The Clintons are weasels, not leaders.

FEDUP   May 8th, 2008 9:10 am ET

Obama will be against any proposal that would favor Clinton to any degree. That is the uniter for you. The person of change, who says he is for us. He is for Obama and nobody else. Save time and go straight to Credentials Committee. This sounds more then fair to me. Hillary did not break the rules by leaving her name on the ballot. Obama just showed his lack judgement when he removed his name. The only one who campaigned at all was Obama, urging his voters to vote non-committed. Florida was equal in all aspects, with the exception of Obama running adds. Watch the great uniter fight this proposal, as he fought against a re-vote..

Bitter in Texas   May 8th, 2008 9:08 am ET

That's interesting.....how-bout seating the pledged delegates with a 10% advantage for Clinton and not seating any of the super delegates, after all they are the elected state leaders that VIOLATED THE RULES and they should have no say at the convention...someone needs to be punished for this violation.

Kyle   May 8th, 2008 9:07 am ET

Obama could have left his name on the ballot, as he did in FL. The 73-55 split is the best for both candidates because if Obama had left his name on the ballot he would have gotten less than the 40% that was undeclared (I would like to think John Edwards would have received part of the undeclared vote). 5% of the vote went to other candidates. Neither candidate fought to unite the party by including FL and MI at the onset of this problem, but Obama has been campaigning for the last year and a half that he wanted to unite the party and country. Again he has failed to live up to his promises, and he's not even nominated yet.

Chris from SC   May 8th, 2008 9:07 am ET

Sounds reasonable to me. Just get them seated and get them back in the mix. Obama is going to need both of these states to win.

Bernard Shelton   May 8th, 2008 9:06 am ET

Give her the 18 delegates to please her. Giver Floridas's delegate to please her .
She does not play by the rules because if she did she would not request them,
And then Let the super delegates switch to Obama. And listen to what she will now say.

Alpha   May 8th, 2008 9:06 am ET

How about the votes that translated to pledge delegates?
Are they going to be counted according to the delegates split?

Is Obama campaign ready to accept this compromise?
I doubt it.

James, VA   May 8th, 2008 9:06 am ET

Whatever is worked out has to be fair. A 50 50 split would be fair. What
is not fair is giving Hillary all of the delegates when Obama's is not on
the ballot. Which one of us personally would go for this if it were us?
No one.

Kenneth M   May 8th, 2008 9:05 am ET

That sounds like a good deal. She should be happy to get that. She is like a gangster.

voter   May 8th, 2008 9:04 am ET

I am not happy with the proposal because Obama's name was not on the ballot. Therefore, Clinton should not receive the majority of the votes. However, for the sake of the party and uniting the party to beat McCain in the general election, the two campaigns should accept the offer and end the process. On to the general election and McCain.

tom   May 8th, 2008 9:04 am ET

crazy what else can we say, why don't you sart everthing alover or just give the presidency to Hillary it looks like we are in Africa I will compare this to Zimbabwe, changing the rules when they are not on your side. I thought she signed the initial plan why is it changing now because she is losing it is sad welcome to Africa, that is what we call democracy, maybe we need the UN to intervine. She lost she lost is time to pack and go. The world is also watching how, and what are you going to say tomorrow and what are you going to say to Africa when you can not lead by example? was the Zimbabwean elections fair this is for Hillary and her supporters

oil rules the planet   May 8th, 2008 9:04 am ET

Michigan still doesn't get it....Like any whining dem, they want to change the rules after they knew their delegates would not count as punishment from the D'n'C for moving thie primary. Quit crying and take some responsibility for your actions. It is called accountability...everyone is a victim I guess.....

Brian   May 8th, 2008 9:03 am ET

Why is this still an issue? Hillary was for their votes not counting until it turned out that it might help her. Both delegates were supposed to remove their name from the ballot in MI but only Obama did. How should he be penalized for listening to the party leaders?

jj   May 8th, 2008 9:02 am ET

If my vote counts now, then maybe I will vote for a Dem in Nov. Depends on the team they end up with.

M.S. Indiana   May 8th, 2008 9:02 am ET

Amazing how they use an illegal election as base for how to come up with those numbers...

Why not a new election, and let the candidates pay for it ????
To many people did not have a chance to meet either candidate, we did not get people mobilized and heated up for this election... But that is not disenfranchise some voters... Why not count them all ???

Chipster   May 8th, 2008 9:02 am ET

What is the point of making up numbers? That's still the same as not counting the votes. The voters did not make the rules. They went to the polls when they were asked to do so. Punish the fools who created this mess and count the votes. These dates are all completely arbitrary anyhow. Chairman Dean doesn't want to bother with the remaining votes either. He should have asked ALL of the states to move up their primaries instead of punishing them for not doing it.

Obama and Edwards withdrew their names for grandstanding. That was their mistake and was not required by the rules or any agreement. It was just bad judgment on their part.

I'm sorry but pulling numbers out of the air is not the same as counting the votes. If they do, they will still disenfranchise the voters who are the only ones who are not at fault.

gary   May 8th, 2008 9:01 am ET

yes, the people will take the numbers so we can close this asap! Yes, we can...

Linda   May 8th, 2008 9:00 am ET

No! Not before they declare Obama the candidate and Hillary drops out. If they do that, the next election will be chaotic again, because other states will defy the rules, knowing they will be waived eventually.

T C   May 8th, 2008 9:00 am ET

Sounds Fair – Now lets move on!

John in PA   May 8th, 2008 8:59 am ET

They should allow this and count the popular vote as well. This will help Hillary's claim, and not destroy Obama.

Ken from Michigan   May 8th, 2008 8:59 am ET

If you're going to award the delegates from Michigan, I think ALL the people of Michigan should be allowed to vote in a primary that counts.

I personally DID NOT vote in the previous primary because it was widely known that the primary wouldn't matter because of the rules broken by our State government in scheduling the primary early.

I'm sure a lot of Obama supporters did the same. His name wasn't on the ballot, thusly I did not even go to the polls.

Fair is fair, if you're going to award the delegates, let us all have a say in a primary that matters.

God!, how much more messed up can this process get?

kissnahug   May 8th, 2008 8:58 am ET

What is the reasoning to giving Hillary a 10 point lead in delegates. Doesn't seem fair. No outcome is going to be fair unless they split it in half. How can it be if his name wasn't even on the ballot.

I wouldn't be surprised if clinton was behind the proposal somehow

Brandon   May 8th, 2008 8:57 am ET

Obama should agree... Get this behind him, and defeat McCain...

Independent   May 8th, 2008 8:54 am ET

If the DNC is going to seat Michigan, then it must be a 50-50-split. Obama was not on the ballot. This seems to be being differential to Queen Hillary. 50-50 is the only fair way to handle Michigan to make all things equitable. If it is not 50-50 for Michigan, then they should not be seated period. They were the ones who broke the rules, and BOTH candidates signed off on those rules.

Rob   May 8th, 2008 8:54 am ET

The delegates should be seated. These people voted and most of them voted for Hillary. The votes have to be counted even if the delegates aren't seated. Because people still physically got up to support there candidate. It is not fair to Hillary espcially since the voting from Michigan and Florida easily give her the popular vote. And even though those states broke party rules you cannot ignore the votes that were cast. And those votes went to Hillary and they should be accepted for Hillary. It is the will of the people in those states. What has happened to democracy! ACCEPT MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA!

Debbie   May 8th, 2008 8:53 am ET

Hillary supporters you can't get any fairer than this and she still loses.

Derrick in Houston, TX   May 8th, 2008 8:52 am ET

What part of YOUR VOTE DOESNT COUNT dont these people understand? You broke the rules. Deal with it. It is unfair to go back and readjust the rules for the sake of HILLARY CLINTON and getting her extra delegates.

mr g   May 8th, 2008 8:52 am ET

THEY BROKE THE RULES AND THEY DO NOT DESERVE TO BE SEATED. BILLARY NEED THIS HELP AND SHE HAD SIGNED OFF ON NOT SEATING THEM WHEN SHE THOUGHT SHE WAS GOING TO WIN, AND NOW SHE FLIPPING OVER. STAND DOWN HILLARY AND LEAVE WITH SOME RESPECT.

Susie   May 8th, 2008 8:52 am ET

Howard Dean and the whole DNC need to step down and allow someone who cares about this country to try to solve this issue. There is no way to resolve the issue so that someone does not feel slighted. However, since Obama blocked the revote, he should gracefully accept the vote tally as it was counted-73 for Clinton, 55 uncommitted. Put the names of the prospective uncommitted delegates in a bowl and draw names; those delegates (like unpledged delegates) could determine for themselves whom to support. The Democrats need Michigan in November; this would allow their votes to count. Dividing them equally is the same as not counting them. Perhaps Obama would prefer to draw names for all delegates (and those in Florida) and allow the delegates to decide whom to support.

Incoming Sniper Fire   May 8th, 2008 8:51 am ET

The results don't and should not count but if we have to please Michigan...sounds fair to me.

Status QuO.   May 8th, 2008 8:51 am ET

If the DNC silences the voices coming out of Michigan and Florida Democrats will lose the White House once again. They must be heard. No matter what the outcome, it's un-Patriotic not to count their votes.

Ivey League   May 8th, 2008 8:50 am ET

The delegate count is irreverent at this point.

The problem is that Michigan and Florida should have some sort of "punishment" for moving up their election date. The DNC has stated that the delegate count should be cut in half.

That's the real rules. I would oppose ALL delegates being seated. There is an article in which Michigan's Clinton supporters stated that this was their plan from the start.

I expect that the DNC or Barack will "rightfully" decline this offer.

Greg, NY   May 8th, 2008 8:49 am ET

At this point, they should just do it. Obama would still be in the lead in states won, delegates won, popular vote and gaining in superdelegates.

This would shut everyone up about the Michigan and Florida issue and leave less and less arguments for Hillary to stay in the race.

Hopefully if they do this, Michigan and Florida voters will stop saying they were disenfranchised and support the Democratic candidate in the fall.

LT for Obama   May 8th, 2008 8:49 am ET

It should be a 50/50 split. There was not campaigning and Obama was not on the ballot. Based in that, there can be no other fair way to split the pledged delegates.

fred   May 8th, 2008 8:49 am ET

Hillary should get MI and FL votes as they are. Obama took his name off the MI ballot...that is his problem (dumb). FL he ran ads....against the party rules. They should stand as they are and be counted. Otherwise you are giving it to Obama. Obama will never win in the General Election.

Most of us Hillary Democrats will either vote for McCain or write Hillary in!!

McCain is a lot closer to what Hillary believes than Obama!!
Let Obama have the black, college students and educated????(they must not be too bright). He can't win without us and he won't have us. I don't care if the race stops today, I will never, ever vote for him and his Anti-America wife!!!

Ray H, Gainesville VA   May 8th, 2008 8:49 am ET

Not sure how much it matters now but they should be split 50-50–fair and square. You shouldn't penalize the person who agreed with the rules of the DNC nor should you award a victory to someone who agreed with the rules of the DNC but who now says they shouldn't apply. Nuff said on this.

s.b.   May 8th, 2008 8:48 am ET

Nothing like arbitrarily overturning an election whenever you feel like it.

The Dems don't deserve to win Michigan or Florida in Nov if they do this and I now think the US Supreme call made the right decision in 2000.

Democrats obviously don't care about votes or elections at all.

CINCINNATI, OHIO   May 8th, 2008 8:48 am ET

Leave it alone Billary....you are such a sore looser. The game is over and you cant add extra innings.

What about the people who didnt even show up to vote since he was not on the ballot?? Bow out gracefully, while you have to chance to muster up some type of respect.

Stop working for the Republicans. Since you know you dont have a chance, you want to make sure he doesnt either.

If they hand the general election to you, they risk the African American, young voters and first time voters who will think that there vote does not count and will not vote in the general election. Dont forget it was the African Americans who put Bill in officer, after all we make up 25% of the votes in the general election...you need it and wont get it.

MrSod   May 8th, 2008 8:47 am ET

The DNC screwed up- they should have followed GOP's lead and made FL and MI be worth half instead of eliminated altogether.
But it's too late now and I'm not sure any plan beyond a complete revote (which aparently will take too long) will be fair.

Dana in north Carolina   May 8th, 2008 8:46 am ET

Not a perfect solution, not completely fair because Barack was not even on the ballot, but better than nothingfor both, and the slight edge for Hillary won't hurt Obama in the end.

CP   May 8th, 2008 8:46 am ET

I don't see how it is fair for Clinton to get the majority when Obama was not on ticket. Not that it matters anyway because Obama will still be ahead anyway. Clinton has manipulated this whole voting process and the DNC (and Media) are letting her get away with it.

Mike   May 8th, 2008 8:45 am ET

I noticed, under the headline" "On The Trail," it speaks of the candidates campaigning and the respective cities, (all but Barry).

It states that Barry will spend the day in Washington; what is Michelle doing, trying to select china patterns, drapes and trying to determine which guest room will be for BO-PRAH?

Go Hillary!!!!

Marshall   May 8th, 2008 8:45 am ET

"Clinton was the only major candidate to appear on the ballot in the state’s January contest, which she won with 55 percent of the vote. No delegates were awarded because of national party penalties on Michigan Democrats for moving up their primary date."

Just two examples of people not following the rules or doing what they said they would.

Justice is Justice. Fire the Party bosses, but no delegates. Sorry, you broke the rules.

Joyce in Florida   May 8th, 2008 8:45 am ET

Well, it appears that Senator Obama needs to make a decision on this one. Do we think he can do it? I'm not sure. This might be a tough decision for him (LOL). Let's see if he will accept this and not keep blocking the will of the voters anymore. Time for Obama to stop dividing our party and stalling efforts of this presidential campaign. Come on Senator Obama, step up and do what is right; that is if you really can. Next stop FLORIDA. I still continue to donate funds and support Hillary Clinton because I believe she will be the true nominee in the end. GO HILLARY 08!!!!!!!

miles   May 8th, 2008 8:45 am ET

50 50 or no deal

RON   May 8th, 2008 8:45 am ET

This is not Fair....

They would have to vote again.... plain and simple......

Ed, Santa Fe NM   May 8th, 2008 8:44 am ET

does anyone play by the rules anymore? why should Hillary get a majority of votes from an election that never happened? Stupid plan.

hahaha   May 8th, 2008 8:44 am ET

Clinton can have that 10 delegate edge that Michigan is proposing. It will not improve her situation whatsoever; In fact, the more delegates Obama receives, the closer he is to the finish line. This is a laugher.

Comments have been closed for this article

subscribe RSS Icon
About The Ticker

The latest political news from CNN's Best Political Team, with campaign coverage, 24-7. Sign up for our twice daily Ticker emails. Got a news tip or feedback? For complete political coverage, bookmark CNNPolitics.com.

CNN=Politics Screensaver

CNN=Politics ScreensaverTap into the power of The Situation Room. Download this powerful new tool that keeps you posted on the latest political news from the campaign trail.
Download (4.1 MB, PC only)

twitter
@wolfblitzercnn: Trifecta -- NOT. My Redskins, Bills and Packers all lose this weekend. Very sad.
Updated: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:40:09 -0800
@HornickCNN: RT @andersoncooper: Interactive: The top 10 Health-Care-Reform Players http://bit.ly/6C3OlX
Updated: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:47:50 -0800
@HornickCNN: RT @cnn_oppmann: CNN.com: Mexico City approves same-sex marriage. http://bit.ly/5RyMnk #mexico
Updated: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:46:26 -0800
@HornickCNN: Rudy's reportedly not running for NY SEN or Gov ...
Updated: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:43:48 -0800
@wolfblitzercnn: Redskins-Giants always exciting. Both teams have a lot to prove. And Giants can still salvage playoffs. Skins just need a win.
Updated: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:19:36 -0800
Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP