March 06, 2008
MI Bound For Compromise
Statement by Michigan Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer on seating Michigan's delegates at the Democratic National Convention:
"We are currently in negotiations over the seating of a Michigan delegation to the National Convention. Any resolution must be agreeable to all four interested parties: the MDP, the DNC, and both the Clinton and Obama campaigns because we all want a united Democratic Party in Michigan to ensure a victory for the Democratic nominee this fall. A McCain presidency would continue the failed policies of the Bush Administration that hurt Michigan jobs, keep health care out of reach for millions, and make our country less safe. I am confident that we will reach a compromise that will result in Michigan being a full participant at the National Convention."
Posted at 04:52 PM
Comments
Mark Brewer is a tool. Thanks for disenfranchising us MI voters.
Chris W. | 03.06.08 06:30 PM
 |
How did he disenfranchise us?
You can't possibly mean by doing a Caucus now. It would disenfranchise Michigan voters if the current situation is not resolved.
Either our delegates won't count, or they go to someone when we ran a Soviet style election, with one candidate to chose from.
Dave Dial | 03.06.08 07:16 PM
|
Giving Michigan and Florida a "do-over" is generous.
Since Walt Disney re-wrote Three Little Pigs so that everybody but the wolf lived, Americans have been increasingly taught that there are no consequences for our actions... Do whatever feels good at the moment and don't worry the future. Somebody, usually the government, will always come along to fix it, give you a mulligan, or simply forgive you and let you go trotting down that self-absorbed road.
I am so proud of Howard Dean and the Democratic Party for saying "There are rules and there are consequences for knowingly breaking them." Period.
Larry McD | 03.06.08 07:52 PM
|
so far, there have not been any caucuses in states with large black populations. will this hurt obama's supporters?
tony | 03.06.08 07:57 PM
|
so far, there have not been any caucuses in states with large black populations. will this hurt obama's supporters?
tony | 03.06.08 07:57 PM
|
"so far, there have not been any caucuses in states with large black populations. will this hurt obama's supporters? "
WTF was Texas? It's like 20% black in the Defeatocrat party.
Richard Aspinall | 03.06.08 08:29 PM
|
Could there possibly be ANY resolution "agreeable to all four interested parties"?
Marla Erwin | 03.06.08 11:11 PM
|
'split the baby' - see article by dana milbank - that's the only equitable way to settle this thing w/o favoring either candidate, still seating the delegates and saving lots of money and blood-letting which is only helping john mccain - hillary's new running mate. hehe.
vita | 03.07.08 12:44 AM
|
The DNC collaborated with Iowa and New Hampshire to allow their voters to have an undeserved influence. The Michigan Democratic Party has been on a decade long crusade to change this.
The underlying principle is that all voters should have as equal a voice as possible. Since both the DNC rules and the DNC penalties for MI and FL violate this principle the DNC needs to change both.
From the standpoint of the ordinary voter they have had absolutely nothing to do with the actions of either the DNC or the state party structures but the voters are the ones being penalized and they are being penalized in ways that will make it harder for the Democrats to win in the GE. (You can argue that the voters need to get active in their parties if they want to complain about what the parties are doing -- the if you don't vote, shut up -- argument.)
Obama took his own name off the ballot: this was a political decision not required by the party rules and he should suffer the political consequences not have his bacon saved for him by being granted a do over in the format most favorable to him. If he gets a do over, does Hillary get a do over by having a primary rather than a caucus in Iowa. Obama is a pretty effective whiner.
Jane | 03.07.08 01:29 AM
|
The rules don't preclude Michigan from have a new contest because their initial primary was unsanctioned. I hope they include the ability to have absentee votes in the caucus, using Maine's process, so the Clinonistas won't have anything to whine about when they lose an actual contested election in that state.
Mike in Iowa | 03.07.08 07:56 AM
|
The rules don't preclude Michigan from have a new contest because their initial primary was unsanctioned. I hope they include the ability to have absentee votes in the caucus, using Maine's process, so the Clintonistas won't have anything to whine about when they lose an actual contested election in that state.
Mike in Iowa | 03.07.08 07:56 AM
|
He disenfranchised to begin with by trying to move up the primary when the party said they would be punished, yet still did so. Since Obama wasn't even on the ballot, nothing short of a revote or not sitting them is acceptable. Clinton must not be allowed to cheat the rules.
Michael | 03.07.08 09:00 AM
|
"so far, there have not been any caucuses in states with large black populations. will this hurt obama's supporters?"
Huh - Maine is the second whitest state in the nation and Obama had a blow out caucus victory there!
Fred | 04.28.08 09:19 AM
|
Post a comment
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
