Hillary Clinton and the Michigan delegates
Hillary Clinton again today banged the drum for the Democratic National Committee to let the Michigan and Florida delegates go to the party in Denver in August. "Honor the results or hold new primary elections," she said. "I don't see any other solutions that are fair and honor the commitment that 2 and a half million voters made in the Democratic primaries in those two states."
That's a somewhat different tack from the one she was taking back in October -- which also, of course, was back before anyone realized just how tight the race for the Democratic presidential nomination was
going to be. Back then, just after Barack Obama and others withdrew from the Michigan ballot, Clinton told a caller into a New Hampshire Public Radio program that the Michigan vote wouldn't matter. "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," she said.
But Clinton also addressed a key issue back then that remains alive: Whether the Democratic Party would be giving the Republicans an advantage in those two crucial states by ticking off rank-and-file Democrats who had nothing to do with the state party's decision to thumb a collective nose at the DNC and its primary and caucus calendar. She said then:
"I did not believe it was fair to just say, 'Goodbye Michigan' and not take into account the fact we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009.... I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008.... If you look at some of the states we have to win, the margins have been narrow. And it wasn't, in my view, meaningful, but I'm not going to say there's an absolute, total ignoring of the people in all these other states that won't come back to haunt us if we're not careful about it."
It's already haunting the party. Remember, it was just a few months ago that people were talking about how divided the Republicans were and how united the Democrats were. Now John McCain stands alone to prepare for the general election, and the Democrats are not only fighting for delegates, but also over who the delegates will be.
That might be enough to get Howard Dean, the DNC chair, to scream again.
-- Scott Martelle



"Honor the results"????.. shocking to think that she would consider possible the validation of an election in which only one of the candidates (herself of course!) was on the ballot. I think it is plain unfair and shameless... coming from a presidential candidate, it is scary too..
Posted by: angela | March 12, 2008 at 07:51 PM
If anyone supports not counting those people's vote, it is plain that you don't support democracy. How can anyone sit here and make an arguement for not counting votes in any way shape or form. Maybe you don't agree with the way the results played out, then we can do it over to apease you, if you arugment is that they couldn't campaign. FINE. But don't sit here and deny people the right to vote, because of a fevor one has for a canidate. THAT is not AMERICAN and that is not democracy, no matter how you look at it. This is not Obama nation.
Posted by: darryl Touchet | March 12, 2008 at 10:55 PM
The Primary process is not about democracy. It is about a political party choosing a candidate to compete in a Democratic process that takes place in November. That's why the rules are governed by the party and not the constitution. Both Hillary and Barack can run in November. Just that one of them would be booted from the club!!
Posted by: David | March 12, 2008 at 11:58 PM
Count our votes as is. Sorry to Obama, for choosing to take his name off the ballot here in Michigan! He was still on the ballot in Florida, and he lost still!
Hillary '08
Posted by: Kyle | March 13, 2008 at 07:17 AM
"He was still on the ballot in Florida, and he lost still!"
Of course he lost. None of the Democratic candidates were allowed to campaign in Florida. As a result, the candidate with the highest name recognition "won".
And, yes, I know that a few Obama commercials were broadcast in Florida (because he had purchased air-time on a multi-state contract). But it can't be said that either candidate campaigned aggressively in Florida.
Posted by: Gary | March 13, 2008 at 08:00 AM
look, if Hillary continues to spout off about changing/breaking the rules and we allow that, how will every other Country ever view us/her in future. There are rules in treaties and agreements--they'll just think we don't care about rules, or agreements, or commitments, if she gets any power.
Posted by: Tom | March 20, 2008 at 06:48 AM
I guess I keep missing something. The Michigan legislature moved the dates and the DNC said your punishment is that your delegates won't count if you do move the date. They moved the date and were punished, but now they want to undo what they caused.... wow I see a pattern here, in michigan here we have a democratic mayor who stole 9 million dollars from the people of detroit, yet has the nerve to tell everyone to get over it and let him do his job. When will anyone take responsibility of the their own actions and accept the consequences that come with those actions good or bad. Well at least Elliot Spitzer took responsibility and accepted the consequences.
Posted by: Mark | March 20, 2008 at 06:52 AM
darryl Touchet must be retarded. The votes can't be counted, because of course the results are reflective of only a small portion of Democrats - the ones who actually educate themselves on the process - stayed home. When your told your vote doesn't count, you stay home. Typicall Hillary doublespeak.
Posted by: Jon Sherry | March 20, 2008 at 06:57 AM
If Hillary want the votes counted then the only fair way to count them is to split them 50/50 and because she agreed to the way it was before it all started ! If she doesn't like the 50/50 split then she needs to keep her mouth shut at leat the votes are counted !
Posted by: J.D. Long | March 20, 2008 at 07:01 AM
nothing says the residents in MI & FL can't vote in Nov. So no one is "disenfranchising" anyone.
Posted by: Gary | March 20, 2008 at 07:01 AM
We are not divided in our goal of seeing someone who wants to bring our troops home. We are not divided in our goal to see someone in the W/H who will give a damn about the middle class. We are not divided in not wanting to see a continuation of foreign policy follies that have ruined our credibility around the world. I'm only 30 but the America I grew up in, gave a damn about Americans first. I wish someone would please have an American 1st. Platform. We can't do anything for anyone else until we are where we were, these past 7 years have been 4 steps backward.
I support the Democratic Nominee!
Posted by: Dewarren | March 20, 2008 at 07:05 AM
The consequences for moving the primaries up, in violation of party rules, were clearly laid out. Clinton supporters who now see these two states as part of last hope strategy to override the delegate system by emphasizing the popular vote are making all democrats look like whining cheaters.
Follow the rules, its a delegate system! The failure of your candidate to secure the nomination is not justification for changing rules.
Posted by: Noah | March 20, 2008 at 07:06 AM
Why does everyone complain about this not being democratic and say how horrible the DNC is for not counting these votes? Ifeel pretty certain stating that the rules were laid out before these two states decided to bump up their dates. Why doesn't anyone hold the state Democratic party leaders at fault? This is like a pothead asking for a re-do in life after being told that pot makes you dumb and lazy since grade school. Chillary Clinton now sounds like the loser pothead's mom saying we should build a time machine to get her kid's life back on track so he can take care of her when she reaches old age. She's a pear shaped hypocrite.
GO MCCAIN!! MICHIGAN, REMEMBER WHICH PARTY COUNTS YOUR VOTES!
Posted by: Josh | March 20, 2008 at 07:06 AM
Darryl - the issue is not about people having the right to vote. The issue is that the DNC had its rules and it told Michigan and Florida not to buck the rules, and not to schedule their primaries for as early as they did. And they said, if you do that, your delegates will not be seated. So the Democrats in Michigan had a choice. They could fight the party and try to make the party agree with them regarding the timing, or they could vote KNOWING that their votes would not count for anything.
Why do you insist that people who are told the consequences of an action in advance are being injured by the enforcement of those consequences? Isn't that just refusing to take responsibility for one's actions?
Michaganders and Floridans need to be angry with either their respective state Democratic committees or the DNC. But the whining about the rules being enforced, and people being disenfranchised has me stumped.
Posted by: Jeff | March 20, 2008 at 07:13 AM
of course hil wants the mich-flor primary to count as stands, but thats an unfair representation of how the voters really feel. her experience? like how she and bill paid the minimum on the taxes they tried to skip out on? or her tie-in with whitewater? the documents that popped-up after the court case? how much have they already cost the people? pull out of iraq in 60 days? think of all the equipment that would be lost! the military needs the gear, not just the bodies.
Posted by: karl roenfanz ( rosey ) | March 20, 2008 at 07:14 AM
Scary is right. To think that we want to reward the Clintons when Bill did so much to tear the party apart.
Posted by: Stu in Des Moines | March 20, 2008 at 07:14 AM
I personally find it interesting, that Hillary showed up in Florida the day of the primary...to announce, she wasn't campaigning.
Posted by: ZigZagMan | March 20, 2008 at 07:17 AM
Hold firm, Michigan! Do not let the Clinton campaign change the rules in the middle of the game.
Posted by: AG | March 20, 2008 at 07:18 AM
I think it is funny that the democrats accuse Bush of "stealing the vote" in Florida in 2000, and now a democrat is trying to "steal the vote" in Florida in 2008. If the delgates get seated from the primaries in Michigan and Florida it will just go to show that the democratic party does not know how to follow its own rules and has no scruples. I wonder if Clinton is a racists for trying to keep the black man down by trying to steal votes in Mighigan and Florida. How could such racism be coming from the wife of the "first black president? Is Obama a sexist for not allowing a revote in Michigan or Flordia assuming the states can agree on how to hold a revote?
Posted by: ISAAC | March 20, 2008 at 07:19 AM
If it's so un-American, why did Hillary sign off on the agreement NOT to count the votes as punishment for breaking the rules? What I see as un-American is to try to change the rules after the game has been played. Here in Florida, the proposal to move the primary ahead in violation of the rules was made by a Democrat, and not a single Democrat in the state legislature voted against it. My solution is simple and won't cost the states nor the Democratic Party a single quarter. After all the primaries are over, take the total number of delegates available nationwide and make a ratio of that number and the number Obama won, and award him that portion of the Fl and Mi delegates. Same with Hillary. Whatever portion she wins nationwide, she'll receive in Fl and Mi delegates. The delegates get seated, so their states count. Problem solved.
Posted by: Bill | March 20, 2008 at 07:25 AM
i think it is unfair to include Florida's votes. I didn't vote because i knew my vote wouldn't count. If you want to include Florida then we have to have a re-vote with the same rules as any primary
Posted by: sigmund fraud | March 20, 2008 at 07:26 AM
Harry Truman refused to help China defeat the communists and then because he refused to fight to win we lost North Korea ,because he was a coward.
Johnson got us into Vietnam then refused to fight to win ,because he was a coward
Jiommy Carter abandoned the Shah and Radical Muslims took contro in Iran, because he is a coward.
Clinton cut and ran from Somalia, did nothing after almost a dozen terrorist attacks, took NO action when Saddam kicked out the UN weapons inspectors, and made a deal with North Korea that had no verification tools and they immediatly cheated, because he is a coward.
See a pattern here? The democrats have NO clue when it comes to National security. The people of this country need to study history. If we don't examine and acknoledge our past mistakes we are doomed to repeat them. Joe Knight
Posted by: Joe Knight | March 20, 2008 at 07:28 AM
""Honor the results"????.. shocking to think that she would consider possible the validation of an election in which only one of the candidates (herself of course!) was on the ballot. I think it is plain unfair and shameless... coming from a presidential candidate, it is scary too..
Posted by: angela | March 12, 2008 at 07:51 PM"
Oh please . . . they're politicians and everything and nothing is fair.
Shameless . . . well maybe, but that too is just a tool in the politicians bag.
Posted by: rplat | March 20, 2008 at 07:30 AM
The rules under the DNC were for 50 states not 48.
Those voters unhappy with the decision by the DNC should vote out the morons in their own state that got them into this fix..
The DNC clearly stated the ramifications of holding early elections. MI and FL proceeded. Take responsibility for the mistakes and move forward.
Posted by: fred astaire | March 20, 2008 at 07:32 AM
You MI and FL folks cry cry cry all you want, but the bottom line is YOU KNEW there would be NO delegates presented to the winner. All of this is for nothing, so move on.
Posted by: E | March 20, 2008 at 07:32 AM