May 31st, 2008
07:23 PM ET
12 years ago

Full Michigan delegation with half-vote to be seated by Dems

WASHINGTON (CNN) - The Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws
Committee on Saturday voted to seat all Michigan delegates to its convention, giving each a half-vote and dividing them to give Hillary Clinton a slight edge over Barack Obama.

The 19-8 vote gives 69 pledged delegates to Clinton and 59 to frontrunner Obama - each with half a vote because Michigan was penalized, like Florida, for moving its primary ahead in the campaign season.

Clinton adviser and RBC member Harold Ickes said, "Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the Credentials Committee."


Filed under: DNC • Michigan
soundoff (760 Responses)
  1. Heather

    In response to the ridiculous comment posted – Obama, and ALL the other nominees (Edwards, Biden, Richardson) AGREED WITH THE DNC to remove their names from the ballot because Michigan broke party rules. It would be completely inequitable to do this any other way. There's no way she can pull this off, with or without MI and FL, so let's move on. If you want to be hateful and rude because of a fair decision, that's your choice, but we have an election to win. Personally, I don't think it's fair to give her the lead in delegates. There is no way of knowing how the primary would've actually ended, but the decision was made and we must move forward.

    June 1, 2008 12:11 am at 12:11 am |
  2. cph9680

    Hey! Now all the Clinton supporters can shut up and start supporting Obama

    June 1, 2008 12:11 am at 12:11 am |
  3. Henry Haider

    Now that Mi and Fl have been settled by the DNC, I strongly suggest that Harold Ickes and Hilary Clinton should form a panel with their supporters and vote for the general election during the Month of October 2008 and make the same hue and cry that all votes should be counted. That will be another wild circus to watch. With economygoing downhill, housing crisis and gas prices we need a lot of diversation. Hillary can give us those diversions.

    June 1, 2008 12:11 am at 12:11 am |
  4. Kathy

    I agree with Josh, Obama made a choice to take his name off. Kind of sounds like he did it just for this reason.

    June 1, 2008 12:11 am at 12:11 am |
  5. barb, seattle WA

    What a bunch on whining brats............they aren't ready to run this country............hope they keep it up for all to see and spend their war chest in the process...........what a nasty crowd

    June 1, 2008 12:11 am at 12:11 am |
  6. Christian

    Hillary supporters have now gone beyond bonkers.

    The idea that this wasnt fair is beyond ridiculous.

    The RULES were that no delegates would be seated and Hillary agreed to this and signed off on it. Does her word or her signature mean anything? Obviously not, and with each post the Hillary supporters' lies grow larger.

    This is ridiculous, BY THE RULES HILLARY AGREED TO, THERE SHOULD BE NO DELEGATES SEATED IN FL AND MI. THIS WAS A COMPROMISE TO TRY AND SHUT THE SORE LOSERS UP.

    June 1, 2008 12:11 am at 12:11 am |
  7. pauline

    The sanctimonious DNC destroyed Democracy today as they rewarded a candidate that took his name off the ballot in Michigan. They ignored the will of the people and let the world know that American elections are corrupted and manipulated by a few. The few DNC members with the courage of their convictions, and armed with a sense of fairness and truth were quickly crushed by the tainted membership. Every voter quickly learned that the system is corrupt and a joke. Our basic freedom does not exist, it is only rehtoric..words that can be altered in the blink of an eye. I will never vote for Obama,,,he is vile and a racist, and I will campaign vigorously for Senator McCain. But I understand that the DNC could care less, they just crushed they will of over 600,000 voters, what's one more vote when you have dennegrated freedom and democracy!

    June 1, 2008 12:12 am at 12:12 am |
  8. James Lewis

    I hear a great deal of controversy and talk that it is unfair not to seat the delegates and votes in Florida and Michigan, and I understand it to a degree, my only argument is that why didn't anyone from the Clinton campaign contest before she was losing the democratic nomination? If it is unfair now, why wasn't it when they initially made the decision.

    June 1, 2008 12:12 am at 12:12 am |
  9. Marlon

    There is something fundamentally wrong with the DNC providing an educated resolution to proportionately seat delegates in Michigan and Florida. The best and accurate solution to seating delegates in Michigan and Florida was a revote in a second primary, provided that the DNC fund the voting process. I can arguably presume that the existing tally of votes does not represent the will of the people.

    The DNC had a chance to fix this months ago, and consequently this became the best solution at such a late date. The DNC leadership was respectful to Sen. Clinton and the delegates in Michigan and Florida by seating them and providing a reasonable penalty for breaking the rules. Maybe next time Michigan and Florida will voice any difficulties keeping a schedule and ask for help before the republican party gets them in trouble again.

    June 1, 2008 12:12 am at 12:12 am |
  10. jon

    From Michigan here and she should have not gotten all of them, thats just insane to suggest. Stop being such a crybaby and get over it. Are you going to fight for my right of not being able to select my candidate? Or do you just fight if it benefits Hillary? Its over for her time to get on board with Obama or get run over by the straight talk express

    oh yea 1 more thing GO WINGS!!

    June 1, 2008 12:12 am at 12:12 am |
  11. D

    It wasn't only Obama, it was Edwards as well that didn't put his name on the ballot, or campaigned in that state. Further, they were told the stipulations of what would occur since Michigan did push up the primary and go against the rules that had been agreed upon. Hillary was the only one that had her name on the ballot. Regardless, Florida and Michigan broke the rules, willingly, and they are very lucky that they are getting this compromise, as opposed to the alternative (not counting at all). It goes to show you that you can break the rules, and not suffer consequences if you stamp your feet and have a tantrum.

    June 1, 2008 12:12 am at 12:12 am |
  12. Jason Rieger

    I love that all of these Clinton supporters are saying that not fully seating the delegates from Michigan is undemocratic without realizing that having an election with only one candidate on the ballot and giving voters no other choice is exactly what dictators do to feign democracy.

    June 1, 2008 12:12 am at 12:12 am |
  13. Super-Duper Delegate

    I don't understand the hoopla!!!!! The rules were broken and the candidates were asked not to campaign in these states. As far as I see it Obama followed the rules!!!!!! At least now, this is behind the democratic party and we can move on to the general election.

    Obama '08!!!

    June 1, 2008 12:13 am at 12:13 am |
  14. chris vargus

    As a servicemember from michigan who never voted until after I left the military because of medical discharge. I lost my leg in iraq for what? So my vote wouldnt count? Im changing to republican!!! At least I know mcain knows the sacrifice I made for this country. I know my vote wil count for them. I always thought my vote would count! I never knew they decided when and how my vote would count!!!!

    June 1, 2008 12:13 am at 12:13 am |
  15. Dennis Domondon for Obama

    whats was done is fair. how can u even complain when the votes in these two states should have not counted for anything. the fact that there is even an argument when all candidates ageed in the beginning on the rules surprises me.

    put an end to the say anything do anything to win politics

    OBAMA 08

    June 1, 2008 12:13 am at 12:13 am |
  16. Aaron

    I am a young voter(28) in Ohio, I have never voted but have registered to vote this year. I didnt know who to vote for, before today. After the DCN changed their rules, I have decided to vote for McCain. This is non-sense, I wish many times in my life I could change the rules. I live a simple life and follow the rules (if I dont I get fired). Actually that is a good idea, the DCN should "fire" those people responsible for this (maybe then I would change my mind),

    June 1, 2008 12:13 am at 12:13 am |
  17. erika morgan

    To be legit they need to revote these States now after all the others are done. Whoever decided to hold the primaries ahead needs to pay for the new elections.

    I am from Washington, our top two primary has been validated by the Supreme Court so we will be voting in August with only the top two vote getters making it to the General Election in November. The parties are not very happy about this because we Washingtonians want to vote for the person not the party, and the party candidate may not even be on our ballot in the General. The people of Washington are overwhelmingly happy to have a primary that looks so much like our "blanket primary" so we can vote the person regardless of party affiliation.

    June 1, 2008 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  18. rules are rules

    COME TUESDAY THIS CHARADE BY THE BILLARY TWINS WILL BE OVER-GOOD RIDDANCE.

    OBAMA/BIDEN '08

    June 1, 2008 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  19. Concerned American

    On October 11, 2007, Hillary Clinton said the following on a New Hampshire public radio station:

    "I personally did not think it made any difference whether or not my name was on the ballot...it's clear this election they're having is not going to count for anything."

    **Have people simply forgotten her saying stuff similar to this prior to primary season?**

    June 1, 2008 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  20. Anonymous

    Please, please, Josh. Control your emotions.

    Kevin

    June 1, 2008 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  21. Nate

    Clinton's strategy in the last month has been an effort to exert what influence she has left in order to define the conversation with regard to how the public should view the seating of both the Florida and Michigan delegations. This is a transparent, yet effective, technique most often utilized by those who do not have objectively verifiable truth on their side. Can you say Bush administration?

    I sincerely hope that everyone who intends to vote for a democratic candidate this fall can rally behind the presumptive nominee, Barack Obama.

    June 1, 2008 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  22. Jason

    Be thankful you Hillary supporters get anything at all, as Hillary's own advisers agreed to abide by the initial rules of both states losing all their delegates.

    Where was she yelling about so-called disenfranchisement when she agreed that these states would not count? Oh yeah, she was still holding the belief that she would win the nomination by a handy margin.

    June 1, 2008 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  23. deb

    Should have known that the DNC would back Obama again. I will not vote for Obama and all the DNC did was to split the party with its unfair decisions. Obama was on the Florida ballot, and the people of Florida voted for Hillary, come on DNC, open you eyes. Its going to be just like it was in 2002, another cheating, lying and back stabbing election.

    I will vote for Hillary, ONLY

    Pelosi and Dean are double dealing cheaters. I thought Pelosi would be a good leader, NO, SHE IS JUST LIKE BUSH. LIAR.

    June 1, 2008 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  24. Joe Issano

    The Clinton clan are just dispicable. Nothing more than a bunch of creeps, who will do anything ousrside of the rules to be nominated. They should just get lost and let the real campaign begin.

    June 1, 2008 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  25. Berkeley

    I am not happy with the decission either. Votes were stolen from Hillary. She should take it all the way to the Denver.

    June 1, 2008 12:15 am at 12:15 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31