Florida, Michigan Primary Do-Overs?

Increasing Calls For New Vote In States Disqualified By Democratic Party

(CBS/AP)  The governors of Michigan and Florida are saying it's increasingly important that delegates from the two states be seated.

Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm and Florida Governor Charlie Crist say it's "reprehensible" the voices of 5.2 million people who voted in the two primaries would be silenced.

Granholm, along with top officials in Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign and Florida's state party chair, are now saying they would consider holding a sort of do-over contest by June. That's a change from their previous insistence that the primaries their states held in January should determine how their delegates are allocated.

CBS News senior political correspondent Jeff Greenfield reported Wednesday that the Clinton campaign was considering asking for "re-dos" in the two states.

Clinton won both contests, but the results were meaningless because the elections violated national party rules.

The Democratic National Committee stripped both states of all delegates for holding the primaries too early, and all Democratic candidates - including Clinton and rival Barack Obama - agreed not to campaign in either state. Obama's name wasn't even on the Michigan ballot.

"A do-over could change the whole complexion of this race," Greenfield said.

Crist and Granholm called it "intolerable" Wednesday that the DNC had stripped the states of their delegates for moving up their primaries in violation of DNC rules.

DNC officials have suggested to both Michigan and Florida that holding another presidential contest of some kind would be one way to get the delegates seated. Both states had maintained that holding caucuses would be too expensive.

Florida and Michigan moved up their dates to protest the party's decision to allow Iowa and New Hampshire to go first, followed by South Carolina and Nevada, giving them a disproportionate influence on the presidential selection process.

But no one predicted the race would still be very close at this point in the year.

Ironically, Michigan and Florida could have held crucial primaries had they stayed with their traditional later dates. They may yet do so if they decide to hold new contests as Clinton and Obama compete to the wire.

Clinton has been insisting that the desires of more than 2 million people who cast Democratic ballots in the two states should be reflected at the convention, which would help her catch up to Obama in the race for delegates. Obama has said that he, too, wants the delegates from the two critical swing states to participate, but not if Clinton is rewarded for victories in boycotted primaries.

"Let's let all of the voters go again if they are willing to do it," Clinton adviser Terry McAuliffe said Tuesday night on MSNBC. "Whatever we have to do to get people in the system, let's do it."

The new contests could be part of a strategy for Clinton to come back in the race and attract votes from super delegates who are not bound by any primary or caucus votes, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell told the network. "Let's assume for the moment Hillary Clinton wins Ohio and Texas, she wins Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan have primaries in June, she wins both of those," said Rendell, who has endorsed Clinton. "Then, can the super delegates look at that and say, `Gosh, she's won the last five big primaries in a row. She's won almost every big primary since we began.'"

Granholm, a Clinton supporter, told the Detroit Free Press that Clinton's victory in Ohio changes "the landscape a bit." She said it could open the door to a caucus, if it can be privately funded and both candidates agree.

[pepperwood2]

Give it some time! The Clinton Camp is currently working with the DNC to come up with another SPIN, scheme or gimmick for all of this.

It will be something to temporarily to point out how all these disenfranchised Clinton voters in Florida & Michigan, by breaking the DNC rules should receive a special pardon & reconsideration.

Why don''t we have every State that feels as though they''ve been slighted by DNC own actions come forward an ask for another primary. That is, just those that Obama won. Sounds fair to me!

The Clinton Media & Press machine will buy into it & rush to judgment for Hillary. If Obama was in this situation the DNC, Rendell, Media, & Press would be looking the other way.

The Clinton Conspiracy is becoming more & more transparent. It is real & it is here to prevent Obama , The People & This Country from the opportunity to make their Country a better place.

[jasonfought]

Taddles:

The Republicans are not loving the coverage, but they will love any excessive money that the DNC or state parties have to spend to hold another election. This is money that would be typically used against their candidates and may result in higher percentages of Republicans in the Michigan and Florida state and national (congress) offices ....

[tibu987]

All this electoral nonsense has to be put to an end.
1. Let the popular vote decide who wins. 51% is the winnner, anything less than 51% but more than 50% should be re-voted.
2. All States would hold their primaries and final month voting on the same dates.
3. This would also save many millions of dollars that are wasted on this unfair system.
There is too much room for problems within the electoral votes system and it would also help to limit the amount of corruption available to unethical politicians.
Why put the ultimate decision to elect a president in the hands of Super Delegates who may have insider connections to one candidate or the other?
It is simply not a fair, honest, system.
Makes sense to me.

[taddles-2009]

"taddles, I have seen that comment but just do not trust career politicians. I would be surprised if you do either.

Posted by donbl1 at 12:56 PM : Mar 06, 2008"

I trust in a career politician to do what is best for him/her self. That means they are not going to go against the will of the people who gave them the job and risk having to go back to selling furniture.

[donbl1]

good differences of opinion.

will see you later as got to go back to work.

don

[taddles-2009]

"The Republicans are loving this.

Posted by jasonfought at 12:53 PM : Mar 06, 2008"


Why because we actually have an interesting vibrant race for our candidate? The Republicans should be looking at this in horror noting that the Dem turnout has been historic and has exceeded the Rep turn out by 300%. Dems are more energized and excited about this election than they have been in a generation. The only thing I''d be thinking as a Republican is whether I''m going to wear black to the Dem inauguration.

[donbl1]

Jason, aggressive campaigning will at least get truth out there both ways and make me feel better as vision is not enough to run a country. It takes more than that.

[jasonfought]

Agreed that the coverage may marginalize McCain. I suspect the Democratic nominee will still be Obama and the fight will prepare him for November. The question will be how voters will react if he tries to go negative with Clinton. Will watching who can be scummier than the other dampen enthusiasm?

[donbl1]

sis, the Republicans in 2001 and 2003 removed the bottom 40% of working Americans from having to pay taxes. They do not get any credit for that........

[donbl1]

Ioweign, the primaries are supposed to pick a "winner" for the general election.

One problem for Clinton is that a lot of her delegates are from states she will not take in the general election as they have been red states for 30 years.

A good way to pick a probable winner would be to only count delegates from historically blue states and swing states. i think Obama would come out ahead but have not done the math.

[donbl1]

jason, IMHO, the continuing Democratic race is going to be a disaster for the Republicans as the Democrats will be in ALL the news ALL the time and McCain will be buried inside the newspaper on page 16. He will have to fight and "create" news to get any free press coverage.

Old saying is that any media coverage is good coverage.

[sis003]

In the MI primary, voters who wanted to vote for their candidate were denied the right to do so because most of the truly viable candidates were not on the Dem. ballot. Some Dem. voters even left the voting place without voting because all that would count was only knowing how many people voted Democratic. A larger percentage of Dem. voters did not even go to the polls because they knew they could not vote for their candidate, so decided not to vote at all.
The MI and FL Democratic parties were protesting--an American right--the unfair practice of certain other states having a large influence on the rest of the country. To me, the best practice would be to hold ALL primaries on the same day of the year, just like we do in November when electing Presidents. That way no state has undue influence on the rest of the country.
With that said, MI and FL should do re-do elections to give the Democratic citizens their rightful opportunity to cast a vote for whomever they wish. Thus said by a Republican. And, Yes, Reps. have their own "super delegates."
Traditionally, Reps. have a "trickle-down" way of thinking. If they support and encourage the rich, life will get better for the common citizen by having more jobs available and the rich supporting charities, etc., but, Dems. try to support and encourage the common citizen more directly. Not sure which works best nowadays!

[ioweign]

BTW, winner take all approximates the national election decision on electoral college and seems to be a safer predictor of an eventual national winner which is what the primaries are for.


Posted by donbl1 at 12:43 PM : Mar 06, 2008

Yes Winner take all does approximate the electoral college but this isn''t a "election" - it is a caucus or primary to determine who most closely represents your views and goals within your party - you are looking for that silhouette that everyone can identify with...

[donbl1]

taddles, I have seen that comment but just do not trust career politicians. I would be surprised if you do either.

The nomination is going to be a draw by convention. No one will have enough votes or pledged candidates to win. ONLY the super delegates will decide.

This is a mess.

Personally? I am hoping for a real choice for America.

That real differenc in choices is Obama vs McCain.

[jasonfought]

The solution is to have caucuses, which are less expensive than primaries. Somebody on the Democratic side is going to have to pay for repeat elections as the states shouldn''t pay for 2 elections. If the DNC isn''t paying (they want to spend their money against McCain) then the state parties would, keeping them from funding Democratic candidates.
The Republicans are loving this.

[jasonfought]

To Democratic voters in Florida and Michigan:

You knew during the primary that your vote wouldn''t count, right?
All of the candidates agreed that these votes wouldn''t count, including Obama and Clinton. Now you (i.e. Clinton campaign/supporters/Republicans) want them to count?
Be careful of what you''re asking for. Projecting delegates and assuming a 55:45 Clinton/Obama split, this likely puts Obama over the top and secures him the nomination. (Play with delegate counters and give Obama 140 of the 300+ pledged delegates and see ... it gets him the nomination.)
The best bet Clinton has is to go to the convention and broker a deal (i.e. steal the election). Of course, this risks mass defections of young voters/blacks.
More importantly, the Democratic Party has an opportunity to capture a generation of voters. If Obama wins the pledged delegate and popular vote, and Clinton secures the nomination, I suspect these people won''t vote and McCain is more likely to win. (I don''t believe that many Clinton or Obama supporters will actually switch to McCain because their candidate lost ... unless they are sexist/racist.)

[tibu987]

Sounds like more political under-the-table goings on to me. Let''s all be very careful that this snafu, pre-arranged or not, does not effect the ultimate outcome of the presidential race.
It sounds very suspicious to me.
I suggest that everyone out there watch this carefully and report anything that smells badly.
Politics being what they are, I no longer trust anyone and especially do not trust the Clintons.

[taddles-2009]

"taddles, If your not old enough to vote and carry on an Adult conversation you shouldn''''t be on here.

Posted by truth-hurts at 12:38 PM : Mar 06, 2008"

Nothing to prove, you''re wrong....as usual.

[donbl1]

Ioweign, 18 of the Republican states so far are apportioned with about the same number being winner take all.

[taddles-2009]

"What bothers me is that "the common folk" do not get to select in the end because of the nearly 1/3 super delegates and the apportioned system of most of the states.

Posted by donbl1 at 12:34 PM : Mar 06, 2008"

That''s 19% remember...math is hard.

Every super delegate I''ve heard interviewed has said basically the same thing, "I will vote based on the general wishes of my constituents". To do otherwise would be political suicide since many of the Dem super delegates are sitting legislators. Your comments about 1/3 of the super delegates "deciding" who to anoint as "the chosen one" in complete disregard of the will of the people is simply foolish and uninformed.