Michigan Radio News

NPR News

« Interview: Mark Brewer - 2/11/08 | Main | Interview: Mel Small - 2/12/08 »

February 11, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I agree with you completely about the travesty of our primary. I thought it smelled fishy that Clinton left her name on the ballot and two days later Granholm endorsed her. Now the Dingells have too...I'm extremely unhappy and don't know what to do beside writing to the Michigan Democratic Party which I did.
If Clinton's on the Nov. ballot...I will not vote for her.

Thank you for calling the Michigan Democratic Party on their biased and unethical decisions about the Michigan primary. I thought at one point they were just idiotic, stubborn and immature, but your comments suggest something worse. I now understand why Mark Brewer dismissed out of hand the possibility of a spring caucus. It is not difficult to do, just not consistent with the desire of Michigan Democratic leaders to stack the Michigan delegates for Hillary Clinton.

Jack, thank you for what you do. This is a situation I am deeply frustrated about and don't hear enough about. Like many reports I have heard on NPR, I and most people I know here did not vote in the primary with the understanding that the primary would not mean anything, only to find out later that it may end up counting after all! If these guys are refusing to hold a caucus, then I hope the delegates are not seated. I am a liberal independent who would never vote for McCain or any of the Republican candidates, so I'm not exactly sure what I will do if Clinton is the candidate.

Jack, thank you for your essay today, February 11. Here are some comments I posted on--of all places--a Buffalo Bills forum yesterday. As you'll see, we agree on this subject:

We were told our Democratic primary wouldn't count, so fine, keep it that way. I cast my vote with that in mind. Obama, Edwards, Richardson and Biden all removed their names from the ballot; Clinton did not. And a write-in would have invalidated one's ballot. The only real option (to Clinton) was "uncommitted," which didn't guarantee that uncommitted delegates wouldn’t eventually go to Clinton anyway. It was such a mess, that the whole thing should be discarded. (I)f these shenanigans make the difference in Clinton getting the nomination, this life-long Democratic voter will be truly P Oed...

...In my mind, the only right thing to do is ignore the results of the Jan. 15 primary and, if they really want to count MI in on the decision, let us have a caucus. Who knows, a late caucus just before the convention could be decisive. Then you can call Michigan the Decider.

I was a Richardson supporter. I am now Clinton supporter. But I was angry about this whole thing from the very beginning, long before I understood it to be a ploy. And I have written letters of disgust to both Brewer and Granholm (who I actually highly support) telling them so.

That said, I address Democrats and other progressives when I plead: Do not punish the rest of us for the leadership's folly. However you feel about Clinton/Obama or anybody else, I think we can all agree that none of the Republican options will fix our country, and will undoubtedly lead to worse.

Not voting for the nominee -- whoever it is -- is cutting off your nose to spite your face; and you will cut off the country's nose in the process.

I pledge to practice what I preach. Clinton/Obama, I may have a preference, but come November, I will vote for the Dem nominee. Period.


Please watch the video above about this controversy.

The following are key arguments that I believe support a Michigan Presidential Caucus.


(1) Michigan deserves to have clout in this election. So long as our delegates do not count, Michiganders do not have clout.

2) Our 128 delegates could be decisive. The race for delegates is expected to be very close at the time of the convention, with both candidates near, but not at, a majority. Michigan could tip the balance.

(3) Michiganders deserve to see the primary candidates up close and hear the candidates debate the issues that matter in Michigan, like the health of the Great Lakes and the loss of manufacturing jobs. Michiganders will not have this opportunity if January's results stand.

(4) Michigan voters deserve to be able to choose between all of the candidates. Most of the candidates names were removed from Michigan's ballot, and "Uncommitted" won the "youth vote," the "black vote," and over 40% (200,000) of the overall votes.

(5) Michigan deserves to have our delegates seated at the Democratic National Convention. As it stands, the DNC will reject the delegates distributed at Michigan's January 15 Primary because Michigan advanced the date of our Primary in defiance of DNC rules. They will restore our delegation's voting credentials if and only if we hold a caucus.

(6) Whichever candidate wins the nomination, they must win Michigan to win the presidency. The opportunity to campaign in Michigan prior to the nominating convention would strengthen the nominee with Michigan voters.

I certainly agree with you, Jack. I have and I hope all who read this will contact Gov. Granholm, MI DNC, and their elected officials if only to state their disapproval.

Thank you for addressing this problem. After contacting Mark Brewer's and Governor Granholm's offices, I am more convinced than ever that their intention is to have the Michigan delegates seated. Governor Granholm’s office stated that this was a fair primary with large voter turnout and everyone should have known that the votes would be counted. I really fear that on March 29 when Michigan delegates are elected, not only will Clinton get her share of the delegates based on the primary results but a number of "uncommitted" delegates. Then the DNC will reverse its position and seat the Michigan delegates. The DNC should take a firm stand and take it now. If a caucus is not a feasible alternative, then the DNC should stand by their original position and not seat the delegates.

Jack – You and your minions have it wrong from the start on this primary mess. This primary flap is a perfect example of why state and national political parties in fact are and should remain independent organizations free to decide their own times and methods of choosing the candidate(s) they deem best suited to their ideals whims or fancy. The legislatures and governor should not be allowed to use the power of the state to tinker with them (besides we can use the money elsewhere). The legislature has no more business setting the rules for primaries and caucuses than they would have in telling the Rotary club how they should pick their leaders! I am confident that political parties left to their own resources and devices in today’s information saturated society will come up with suitable mechanisms (at least no worse than what we have now). Citizens always have the final discipline for perceived political party shenanigans …. Don’t like the way a party picked its canidate? Don’t vote for them!

"Citizens always have the final discipline for perceived political party shenanigans …. Don’t like the way a party picked its canidate? Don’t vote for them!"

That makes good sense! Let's punish the individual candidate for the party's mistake. Why not? Let's tar with as broad a brush as possible, shall we? Nevermind that working that way may leave you with only someone reprehensible to vote for, eh?
Matt Howell, smarten up! There's a lot of area you could smarten up TO.

the Republican options will not fix anything, but neither will the Democrats.

Might as well Vote Green/Ralph Nader. That is what i intend to do.


The comments to this entry are closed.

A Production of

***UPDATE 9/2/09: Read the user agreement, effective immediately.***

The Podcast


April 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30