Report: Michigan Revote Unlikely To Happen

WWJ Radio:

It's appearing more and more likely there will not be a re-do of the Democratic presidential primary election. WWJ Lansing Bureau Chief Tim Skubick reports state Senate Democrats came out of a closed door meeting Tuesday morning and said there are not enough votes to approve a re-do.

Legislative approval is necessary for a re-vote to happen. Speaking live on WWJ, Skubick said it would take a "miracle" to have the re-do approved, but he added it's still possible.

Read the whole story: WWJ Radio

Comments

[Zhonni]

Of course a revote won't change a thing. I believe a revote is bound to help Sen. Obama because he was less known at the time and basically has no place to go but up.

Sen. Clinton ,on the other hand, was at the top of her game and is the most known of the candidates.

[joh]

The reason Michigan will not get a re-vote is the Obama Campaign is against it. Check out the Detroit News or Detroit Free Press newspapers. Obama's spokesperon first said there was no reason to revote. The rules were the rules. Then when the rules allowed a re-vote, Obama was against it because "some people voted in the Republican primary and the rules will not allow them to re-cast a vote in the Democratic Primary." What happened to the rules are the rules? The rules are the rules only if Obama's camp gets an advantage. Michigan voted for McCain over Bush a number of years ago, and McCain will probably win Michigan this fall because Obama refuses to sign off on a June primary for Michigan. It turns out Obama is just a politician like all the rest.

[nellie]

I'm torn. I completely support the idea that rules are rules, and we shouldn't change rules in the middle of the primaries, and that if we break the rules then what happens the next time someone sets a rule if this one is broken without any repercussions. I get that.

At the same time, I feel like it isn't the electorate's fault that their votes didn't count. I really thought the fair solution was to have the states re-vote.

I guess this is the least controversial solution but it seems like an unhappy one. Times like this, I'm glad I'm an independent.

[globality]

Hillary agreed that the vote would not count. she said so herself.

This shows that she is a liar and a cheat. She claimed the Michigan elections were fair and should count but listen to her saying the exact opposite (before she was way behind)

http://www.jabberwonk.com/flinker.cfm?cliid=zydzt

[lockewasright]

That's all folks. We are now looking at a president Obama. That is unless Hilary supporters manage to ignore reality after the primary as effectively as they have during the primary.

The public is ready to move away from failed republican policy. The democrats have a whole bunch more money than the GOP for the first time in ages. The war is unpopular and the republican candidate wants to stay there for 100 years. Painting McCain as a 3rd Bush term will be easy since McCain's plans are pretty much identical to W's. I could go on.

The point is that America desperately needs to repudiate neoconservatism at the ballot box and thereby force the GOP to abandon it as an electoral failure. To do otherwise is to throw away what is possibly our last chance to reinstate the constitution and instead hand power back to the party that started the assault on liberty so that they can finish the job. If Hilary supporters refuse to acknowledge that reality like they have refused to acknowledge the reality of their defeat for the last month, then we're sunk. If that is to be the case, I would recommend that everyone watch the HBO miniseries John Adams and commit it to memory because his accomplishments will be destroyed and your memory will be what remains.

On the other hands, if her supporters will acknowledge reality then we can get a democratic president. One that will not be a veto pen as Hilary leads the senate to mend Jefferson's experiment. A president whose agenda is the same democratic party platform essentially as Hilary's advance if she held the same office. He'll be a president who once taught Constitutional Law too.

[fishsandwichesr2good]

Dude, let's talk in November. Once Barry's basically socialist "solutions" become apparent to the average American voter, he'll make George McGovern's campaign look like it was competitive in 1972. Neocon v. Barackowhatever is a false choice. That will become VERY obvious once the glitter fades. Hillary was too late and too tied to the liberal left to reveal it during primary season. I think it's you that needs to "acknowledge reality".

[JerryJef]

I must say this is one of the worst pieces of news reporting I have ever come across.

Of pertinent fact, it says only Senate Democrats came out of a closed door meeting saying there were not enough votes to pass the primary bill. The article says nothing about who was in this meeting. It leaves hanging to questions of whether the Democrats could not agree among themselves or whether the Senate Republicans were squashing the deal. It implies strongly the meeting was between Senate Democrats and representatives of Obama, and Obama's people squashed the deal. It ends by blaming Obama for the failure of the whole thing.

HuffPo editors, if you can find an article the reports the facts of this Michigan meeting without all the background of how Michigan came to this impasse, I would certainly be interested in reading it.

[nearing]

Good, we shouldn't vote again. We knew the rules and the punishment and broke them anyway. Maybe the MI Dem officials will smarten up.

[Trollstakeyourmeds]

Why are there several threads we aren't allowed to comment on. I.E. the new Govenor's "admission" and Robertson's latest idiocy. Why put them on the site if we aren't allowed to comment on them?

[VOTER]

I imagine Huffpost will work this out very soon. Recently the ability to have discussions has

almost totally disappeared and it is disheartening.

If we are not happy and we are not, then they too must be frustrated too.

[billrott]

I'm glad this debacle is over. Of course, now Hillary is going to attempt to argue to sit the delegates per the primary where she was the only person on the ballot.

[VOTER]

I am still hoping a 50-50 delegate split between both candidates will be the answer.

That decision will be more than fair, as it is GENEROUS.

Most recommend halving the usual number of delegates and then dividing the remaining, 50-50,

as a form of punishment for not following the DNC rules.

And if it is offered, Hillary will have no choice but to accept it.

[rojo7449]

No, I like your version better. The people of Michigan don't matter. But, you all think Obama can take that state in the GE.

Just maybe, I wasn't there, so I don't know for sure, but just maybe when all the candidates signed these agreements they thought their stand would cause Michigan and Florida to rethink their plan to vote early. Why is it sinister to regret that choice when you see that those states voices would tip the nomination in your favor? Why isn't it sinister to be unwilling to rethink that unfortunate vote because you can see it could tip the nomination away from your favor? Just wondering.

[kevenhusseinseven]

Bill, I hardly think this is over. The Clintonistas are going to whine about this all the way to August.

[cesca1]

What's the big decision on the Florida and Michigan primaries? The local parties made a decision a year ago to tell the DNc to stick it! And they were punished per the rules. So they essentialyy disenfranchised their voters. Too bad!

just split the delegates 50/50 and seat them in Denver. That way neither Obama nor Clinton get favorable treatment. There was no campaigning (or even name on the ballot in MI), so a 50/50 split seems fair. End of story

[PKSSK]

cesca1 is correct, many have expressed the same throughout this site and others. Split the FL and Mich delegates 50/50 and move on, I don't understand who is holding this up. We the People want to move on to the general election before the party is destroyed and the election is lost to McCain!!!!!

[rojo7449]

Actually, the Florida plan to give the delegates the split from the actual election and cut it in half is more fair than 50/50.

I am far more impressed that Hillary is fighting to get the voices of the people of those two states heard than I am Obama's efforts to keep them in "time out". I don't like that element of the Changes he proposes.

It stands to reason that only the loser in those two states would take this hard-line stance against the people of his own country. The one he wants us to believe can only be unified through his leadership, but he's already showing he's going to punish those who don't join his campaign.

[kevenhusseinseven]

In fact, that would by far be the best outcome for Obama, and one of the worst for Clinton.

Not that I mind.