The foot dragging's getting old.  Time to get this mess cleared up.

yeah, we're waiting down here in florida, too. the silence from obama's camp is deafening.

Voter disenfranchisement is NOT cool.

Why would Obama work for a revote, when the prospect of one is the only thing keeping Clinton in the campaign?

Once the door is closed on those, she's basically mathematically eliminated.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail /2008/03/18/michigan_revote_plan_up_in_t he.html

if Obama was so sure of his ability ti win this thing then he would welcome all voters voices being hear; whether it meana revote or seating the delagates as is.

if he is so far ahead that it is impossible for her even with those states included...which has been his camp's refrain as well as the bots here...then what is te problem?

I am angry as a FLorida voter that he is dragging his feet and denying me my voice just to keep the nomination.

Disenfranchisement of Florida and Michigan voters was the luckiest thing that ever happened to obama.  If he has  the ability to destroy any plan to revote, and he is going down in the polls, there is no way he is going to agree to a do over.  It is about him and his win, it is not about counting all the votes and constitutional right to participate in electing the leader of your country.  He said himself it was all about delegates, and Hillary would have more of them, if people were allowed to vote.

Hillary is traveling to Michigan this week. Good to know she is fighting for all Democrats and their right to vote. Great diary Alegre.

The local press in Michigan is reporting that the Republican-controlled legislature is blaming their failure to act on the Obama camp.  They say they're not going to do anything until it's clear both campaigns are on board with the plan.

I have this funny feeling Obama's internal polling doesn't look anything like the single poll that showed the race as a tie in Michigan.

comments in other diaries from Obama supporters concerning Michigan and Florida. Apparently they feel Michigan will vote for the Dem nominee, no matter who it is, and Florida doesn't matter. This freakin' tossing Florida overboard and taking Michigan for granted crap is obnoxious to the extreme. Hillary needs to ramp it up on this one. Obama doesn't get a pass on disenfranchising voters...

While I am sure that as Clinton supporters, any delay by Obama is seen to be a way to deny MI the chance to vote.  Now, while some of this might be tactical -- it is politics after all -- please do remember that it was the DNC, and not Obama who decided that this contest would not count.  Obama has not had an issue with any other state beside the two that the DNC punished, even in states where he has lost solidly.  If he is willing to compete in PA, where he is down big, why would he object to competing in MI?  It doesn't make a lot of sense, especially considering that he is even in the last poll in MI that I saw.

The hang-up, as far as I've heard, is the line mentioned above.  Many dems, when they knew that their vote would not count in the dem primary, voted for McCain in the Repub contest.  The language above, as far as I understand it, means that these dems would not have the right to vote in the re-do.  I think this would be a problem for anyone interested in the constitutional right to vote.  No?

This has all been truly tragic. I cannot imagine any black American disenfranchising any voter. So I expect that the Obama campaign will agree to this plan forthwith.

Can you at least agree that not allowing people who voted in the Republican primary to vote in the new contest is seriously unfair to Obama.  Given that many lifelong Democrats cast their ballots in the Republican primary--because Obama, their chosen candidate, was not on the Democratic ballot and because they wanted to disrupt the Republican nomination--it seems unfair to disenfranchise them now.  This is especially true since they were unaware that there would be a future Democratic primary and that their votes in the Republican contest would make them ineligible for this as-of-yet unborn election.  Obama has a right to be suspicious of this plan, and while I support efforts to get the voices of MI voters heard, I don't begrudge Barack for balking at this specific plan.

I'll be there!  Looking forward to it.

   Why isn't it the fault of the Michigan pols who demanded that the DNC rules (approved by the MI reps on the DNC) be violated.

  Why not focus your ire on them? Obama, and in all fairness Clinton also, did not bring this problem on. Jennifer Granholm and the others who decided to violate the DNC schedule (knowing the results if they did so) are responsible for this mess.

  Why your beef only with Obama? Haven't seen you utter a word against Granholm and her ilk! Had they not been so damn determined to go against the DNC, Clinton would have a ton of MI delegates.

"Ickes pointed out that there are three players in finding a resolution to this mess in MIchigan - Hillary's team, Obama's team, and the DNC."

Mike Gravel qualified for the michoigan Primary ballot by the rules the State had in place. Is he trying to cut him out?

First, why am I not surprised that Edwards, who also removed his name from the ballot in Michigan is not mentioned in this diary, or the comments.

Second, I'm an independant in NY state, and have always voted democrat.  Where was Hillary when the board of elections told me I could not vote in the democratic primary because I wasn't a democrat, and I could not become a democrat until after the general election.  Mind you this was in December 2007.  I didn't see Hillary clamoring for my enfranchisement.

They know who it is that obstructed their vote vote in the Democratic Primary

They won't forget in the fall.

Oh so very clever. Blaming everyone else for his two-faced sneaky obstruction.

It is you Obama. We've been watching. We've been paying attention.

Don't tell us who caused this mess. That's just more bull.

It is you right now standing in the way of the voters. Stealing the votes of entire states. You are the one.

of you Alegre.

You got me out of a dump for good where I was mistreated and abused (DailyKos) and you have been making news which highlights the Big Blogger bullying, unfair, sexist, disgusting tactics that show that lack of unity and downright nastiness of Obama supporter behavior.

Their elders and moderators have to work on it, pure and simple they are to blame.  If they can shut you out for defending yourself and Hillary, they could stop the vile, vicious, bullying and hate speech.

You're like Norma Rae (Sally Field movie, is that right?) you know.  You make me hear that Green Day song "Working Class Hero" in my mind with a little "God Bless America" thrown in.

I salute you, madame.

So proud of you.  One person can make a difference.

Hoo rah!

after Hillary agreed not to participate.

She shouldn't be rewarded for that.

Clinton people just do not get it...since the DNC was not going to count Michigan and ALL campaigns agreed not to campaign, of course the most well-know candidate would do best...the people with the most name ID always start out ahead, and it requires an aggressive campaign to challenge and beat them.  Since this could not happen in Michigan due to the rules, of course Obama needed to take his name off the ballot.  Otherwise STUPID people would say that she won the state and it should count because all of the candidates were on the ballot...sound familiar maybe?  People are dumb, both states favored the most well known candidate heavily.  The results in Florida would have been a lot different had Obama been allowed to compete.  Hillary thinks people are stupid, and maybe they are, as shown by this post.  If you have been on a campaign, you know how it works.  And you know that Hillary is running a deceitful campaign.

Very funny. Great parody of the kind  of nonsensical rhetoric characteristic of the Clintons. Keep this up, we need all the humor during these tense times.

Idea for next diary: a do-over of the election in Russia where also there was just one candidate. Except there the lone candidate won a larger percentage of votes. It is pretty funny to be the only candidate and have uncommitted get 40% of the votes.

What is two and two?

Depends on what the meaning of `is'  is.

So Clinton waited until the day before the deadline to suddenly decide that this was an important issue for her?  Why wait so long?  If she had been pushing this a month ago, this would have been trivial to accomplish.  By waiting until there was only 24 hours left to get the vote set up, it's going to be next to impossible to achieve a revote.

Cynics might say that she was trying to get the appearance of pushing for the vote without having to actually have one, so she could still point to the sham election in January.

I do not understand why Senator Obama is dragging his feet on this one. Since Florida re-vote is unlikely there is no way Senator Clinton is going to get more votes or delegates even if Michigan re-votes. He is just going to loose the publicity war on this one and further antagonize Clinton's supporters. After the Wright episode,
he needs as man of Clinton's supporters as he can get for the GE.

The author should post the whole story from the Iowa Independent. It sends a different message from the misleading extract in the post.

At any rate, the fundamentals are these:

1. the exercise of the franchise in a democratic election requires that the election be free of any bias in favor of one candidate or another

2. Senator Clinton (and Mr. Ickes),betrayed the trust that they committed to the DNC and fellow candidates

3. Senator Clinton arrogated to herself the role of defender of the voting rights of Michiganders, and in so doing she guaranteed that a fair and unbiased election could not be held there;

4. That's a double sucker punch by the way: first she suckers them by staying on the ballot, and then she suckers them by flying to Florida and claiming victory in a state she herself had agreed  doesn't count

5. Come to think of it, wouldn't a fair election require that we re-wind, put Edwards back on the ballot, and allow him the chance to win with the working class base in Michigan that should favor him...???

6. But if we do that, shouldn't we then not also "re-do" the races that come after, because if Edwards wins Michigan, then the whole shebang might look different

7. But the fundamental point is that Clinton (and Ickes) betrayed a trust. Obama would be a fool to enter into a new agreement on the basis of trust, quite apart from the fact that an unbiased election in Michigan is now logically precluded;

8. Superdelegates should also study carefully who sticks to their word and who doesn't.

LETS HAVE THAT VOTE IN MICHIGAN.

PICK THE DAY IN JUNE ALEGRE.

PICK PRIMARY OR CAUCUS

PICK MAIL IN OR NOT.

You pick.  Let's have a real vote so the millions of people who didn't show up b/c they knew the vote didn't count won't be disenfranchised.

Now is it your position that Hillary should get 100% of Michigan's pledged delegates when most Democrats never voted and 40%+ selected uncommitted?

Let's have that vote in Michigan.

New PPP poll out today shows Obama losing Florida and Ohio to McCain big margins.  Hillary wins Ohio against McCain and loses florida by a very small margin.

Florida:  McCain 50%, Obama 39%
Ohio:  McCain 49%, Obama 41%

Florida:  Clinton 43%, McCain 47%
Ohio:  Clinton 45%, McCain 44%

Obama only wins 35% of the white vote in both states. Hillary loses Florida because she only gets 65% of the black vote.  Looks like Hillary has a chance at beating McCain in November and Obama doesn't.

I wish Clinton supporters around here would understand one thing: many of us in the other camp simply do not believe that Clinton is acting in good faith on this issue.  Frankly, we think that she is being duplicitous and playing a lot of people for fools.  For months, Clinton was completely fine with the punishments meted out to Florida and Michigan.  Then, when it became politically necessary to do so, she recast herself as the Great "Enfranchiser" (enfranchisement is not the correct term here, but whatever).  Meanwhile, she continues to retain on her staff a man who actually deprived those states of their delegates, and has in fact made that person her spokesman on this very issue.  Allow me to quote from MSNBC's First Read (3/17/08):

"Said Clinton adviser Harold Ickes, who as a member of the DNC voted to strip both states of all their delegates: 'The right to vote is the foundation of our democracy. If Barack Obama's campaign stands in the way of a new vote, he will be putting his own political interests ahead of the people of Michigan. They deserve to have a voice and a vote in the Democratic Party's nominating process. A re-vote is the only way Michigan can be assured its delegation will be seated, and vote in Denver. If the Obama campaign thwarts a fair election process for the people of Michigan, it will jeopardize the Democratic nominee's ability to carry the state in the general election.'"

Now, perhaps the Clinton campaign and others around here feel that we are all idiots (witness the dueling "crossing the CiC threshold"/"fit to be VP" memes), but you simply are not going to convince many of us that Clinton is actually trying to do right by Michigan and Florida voters until you explain, in rational terms, how Clinton's actions over the past few months are consistent with her current stance.  

I'm personally open to a re-vote in Michigan, however none of us has participated in all of the recent closed-door sessions of Michigan Democrats and there appears to be widespread opposition to such a re-vote (only 2 of 17 supported the proposed plan a day ago).  I highly doubt that Obama has mind-controlled all of the participants into rejecting a fair plan, especially since the local politicians would be on the front lines of any pushback from voters (just like I'm sure that more than 2 of those 17 support Clinton).  Moreover, Clinton's actions over the past few months, which I believe have been calculated for maximum political benefit, cause me to distrust her spin on this issue.  So, please, understand that until you can explain Clinton's apparent hypocrisy, you're only going to be preaching to the choir.

"I am here for one simple reason: to make sure Michigan's votes are counted and your voices are heard in this election," the New York senator said.

Clinton, a former first lady, urged rival Barack Obama, a senator from Illinois, to give his backing to a proposal that would allow the state to hold a new Democratic contest to pick the party's nominee for president in the November election.

"Senator Obama speaks passionately on the campaign trail about empowering the American people. Today I am urging him to match those words with actions," she said.

"We need to either count the votes that have already been cast in Michigan and Florida or have new full and fair elections so that we can have your voices and your votes counted," she said to applause.

Michigan Democratic Party leaders said on Tuesday a proposal to hold additional primary voting in June was stalled and unlikely to be approved before a deadline this week.

Opposition from lawmakers backing Obama's campaign seemed certain to scuttle any proposal.

Clinton comes to Michigan to press for re-vote

MI going RED! Ha!

You people are insane. The hate is making you blind.

"If the Obama campaign thwarts a fair election process for the people of Michigan.."

Translation: "It's obvious at this point that Michigan's not going to do a re-vote.  We'd like to somehow blame Obama for that, because...um...we've got nothin'."

Obama's internal polls must be absolutely dreadful for him to cower away from any revotes in Michigan and Florida.  Keep fighting on, Hillary!

First, it was meet me in Ohio,

Then, meet me in Texas.

Now, meet me in Michigan.

How about your candidate meets Barack in Indiana, North Carolina, Oregon, Montana and Guam, since she couldn't meet him in Maine, Colorado, Kansas, Georgia, etc.

Isn't it convenient how the only states that matter are the ones that Clinton expects to do well in?

I hope that the Obama campaign downplays PA.  I think it's only fair.

I mean, first, it has the 2nd largest elderly population in the country.  Second, Hillary is expected to win there, so clearly, by the standards of the Clinton campaign, Pennsylvania doesn't matter.

Now that MI and FL learned when you break the rules, there are actually consequences can we get rid of that silly delegate counter that tries to portray Clinton as having a shot?

CLICK ON PLAYER TO START VIDEO

I'm confused.  Didn't Hillary declare, in writing, that the MI and FL primaries wouldn't count before the first votes were cast?  I'm thinking this post is a McCain desire to poison the well.  I'm not trying to anger anyone but it looks like Obama has a better chance of winning.  That's just math.  So why would alleged democrats be so intent on making sure both FL and MI will never vote for the more than likely winner?  This was a democratic mess which no one candidate owns.  Given the math HRC is looking for new places to find delegates.  Good idea.  Yet, reviving the body you helped kill seems odd.  This isn't an Obama doing/problem.  

According to top Michigan Dems not associated with Hillary or Obama state that Obama is blocking the plan for a re-vote.  This will hurt him long term.

Get real...In a fairly contested election Obama probably wins Michigan...after all Jesse Jackson won there.  The Clinton camp pontificating on Michigan is nothing more than pandering.