December 1st, 2007
06:51 PM ET
14 years ago

Democrats vote to strip Michigan of its delegates

VIENNA, Virginia (CNN) – The Democratic National Committee voted Saturday to deny Michigan’s request to hold its primary on January 15, but party leaders vowed to move forward with the event even though its delegates won’t count in the presidential nominating contest.

“This is about principle,” Debbie Dingell, a Michigan DNC member, said in an interview after the vote. “It is the only way we are going to get there.

Earlier in the year, the DNC voted to strip Florida of its delegates for scheduling its primary on January 29. Both states violated DNC rules by holding contests before February 5.

The Michigan vote came right after the DNC allowed Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina to reschedule their presidential nominating contests to earlier dates in January.

“As expected, the (DNC) Rules and Bylaws Committee took action to protect the intent of the calendar as adopted by the DNC over a year ago,” said DNC spokeswoman Karen Finney.

The Democratic presidential nominating calendar will kick off with the Iowa caucuses on January 3, followed by the New Hampshire primary on January 8, the Nevada caucuses January 19 and will close with the South Carolina primary on January 26.

On February 5, more than 20 states will hold presidential nominating contests on what is described as "Super Tuesday."

- CNN Political Editor Mark Preston

Filed under: Democrats • Michigan • Race to '08
soundoff (84 Responses)
  1. John, Michigan

    I think the DNC was within its rights.
    Personally, there is not a Democrat or Republican who has earned my vote. They are as dumb as the elected in Lansing.

    December 3, 2007 10:29 am at 10:29 am |
  2. demwit

    Hey! Here's a novel idea...


    December 3, 2007 10:38 am at 10:38 am |
  3. JC Topeka, KS

    I think the DNC was within its rights.
    Personally, there is not a Democrat or Republican who has earned my vote. They are as dumb as the elected in Lansing.

    Posted By John, Michigan : December 3, 2007 10:29 am

    The DNC might be with in their rights, but not make it a smart political move move on their behalf. So they alienate two states that they need to carry in the general elections and in the process do nothing to help elect the Democratic canidate, big deal they were within their rights.

    Let's screw everything up, the primary dates then can be determined by the date the state became a state of entry, that's your primary date. Think they would shout then.

    December 3, 2007 12:33 pm at 12:33 pm |
  4. ellen,detroit,michigan

    People think that it's the Dems in Michigan.It's the Independants in MICHIGAN,which most people in the state are who put this preasure on the state officials.People in MICHIGAN have lost faith in either party and are hoping moderets from either party become candidates.Most people in the state are not affiliated with either party.The last successful 3rd party was started in Michigan(Republican Party).The people of the state are not into social arguments.They want to talk about Economy,Enviroment,and personnel freedoms,etc

    December 3, 2007 03:20 pm at 3:20 pm |
  5. Bernard Sulliban - Fayetteville, ARK

    Compromise that could help ALL parties (Dems/Reps/Grns/Indpndts):

    REGIONAL primaries, in this order...SE,Southwest,NW,Northeast.

    1. IA & NH... If the DNC/RNC want to continue to honor these 1st 2 Northern states, fine. **That's why the Northern 2 weeks are set up to be the 3rd and 4th weeks. That still leaves 48 states up for grabs – 12 each week.


    2. While a national 1-day primary is efficient for the voter, it would be a logistical nightmare for EVERY candidate – and cost-prohibitive for those with less-funds. *If voters REALLY want a choice within their party, there needs to be inclusion of candidates with more dynamic policies.

    3. This 1 month whould shorten the nominating process enough that under-funded or less charismatic candidates have (at least the first round) to inform us about their POLICIES.

    4. The 4 contiguous regions above also aid in the following ways...
    A) more cost-effectiveness for candidates – allowing more to remain in the race longer, giving a truer test of "electability"
    B) providing a better sense of regional preferences, as many neighboring states share similar ideologies.

    December 5, 2007 10:09 am at 10:09 am |
  6. Joan Davis


    How dare Legislators, put my right to have a say in the presidential candidates at risk. Why wasn't changing the date of the presidential primary put to a vote. You have a lot of very angry constituents here in Michigan. I for one will remember my Representatives names and vote no on them and anything they push for a vote on . I will bad mouth them at every turn. That is ONE RIGHT of mine they will NOT take away.

    Joan Davis

    January 15, 2008 06:41 pm at 6:41 pm |
  7. Erika

    Why is everyone trashing the Dems? Reps made the same kind of move to seat only 1/2 the delegates of any state before Feb 5, INCLUDING NH, SC, NV, etc..... anyways the delegates will likely all be seated when a nominee is picked. Get a grip people. Independent voters like myself don't even get to participate in the nominee selection process half the time.

    January 15, 2008 07:32 pm at 7:32 pm |
  8. Chris, NH

    Do people realize why we have a House AND a Senate. Small states need a voice too. Do NH and IA need to be the first every time? No, but only other small states should. How else would our voice ever matter when we have so few delegates. I think a rotating schedule would be fair, only if you excluded larger states. You people from California who think it would be fair for you to have the most amount of delegates and get the first primary are ridiculous no candidate would ever care about ND, SD, DE, VT, NH, ID or all the other states with a small amount of delegates. This is why there is a House of Reps and a Senate. The little guys need a voice too, if there was not a Senate California, Texas and New York would control the entire Legislative branch and if they voted first they would essentially decide the president. So being from NH I really don't really care much about being first unless it's stopping the more populous states from thinking they're better than everyone else and squelching the voice of the little guy. Let's rotate first primaries with smaller states and let them get their voices heard and then let the big guys throw their massive amount of delegates around.

    January 20, 2008 12:42 am at 12:42 am |
  9. k allen

    Michigan has voted for a democratic presidential candidate at least the last two elections. This vote to not count our votes in our primary makes me want to vote for a republican!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    February 6, 2008 05:23 pm at 5:23 pm |
1 2 3 4