Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Should Hillary Clinton have kept her name on the Michigan ballot?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
FlyingSquirrel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:15 AM
Original message
Poll question: Should Hillary Clinton have kept her name on the Michigan ballot?
There's no middle ground on this one IMO, either she was justified in doing so or she was not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:21 AM
Response to Original message
1. How else would you all know how many "refused" to vote for her?
I would think you'd consider that a helpful, friendly public service.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlyingSquirrel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Some are spinning it that way...
But in reality it is not possible to know how many "refused" to vote for her. I know if I were rooting for some other candidate and they were not on the ballot, I'd be thinking twice before trudging to the polls in inclement weather to vote "Uncommitted" in a primary when the DNC had made it clear they were not gonna be seating delegates from my state. At that point it's not even a beauty contest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:22 AM
Response to Original message
2. Q: Isn't Florida in hot water for doing basically the same thing?
And all the candidates kept their names on the ballot there. Why in FL and not MI?

If there's no appreciable difference between the circumstances in both states, then I don't see why Obama/Edwards took their names off there and Clinton was justified in staying on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlyingSquirrel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Excellent question.
I shall leave the answer to other gentle readers.... for myself, I'm goin to bed.

:boring: :boring: :boring: :boring:

But I'll be back in the morning

:donut:

for some answers!

:hi:

(If there are any)

:freak:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:40 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Rather simple to answer i believe
Unless my memory is wrong, the only way to get your name removed from the Florida ballot is to drop out(and i don't think anybody would drop out purposefully to remove themselves from a ballot)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:56 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Not true, according to these articles:
http://www.algore.org/forum/general_category/everything_else/senator_nelson_suing_dnc_over_fl_2008_primary_delegate_issue
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/09/michigan.primary/index.html

The candidate list was presented to the Florida Secretary of State on October 31. Candidates had up until that date to simply withdraw from the primary. Why didn't they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:57 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. in that case, i don't know
what date was all the withdrawing and rules made and such?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Hmm
Well, I know Florida moved up its primary in August '07.

But this article seems to suggest that the other candidates withdrew from MI not out of solidarity with the DNC but to avoid ticking off NH and IA voters.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22054151/

Democratic candidates John Edwards, Barack Obama, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden have withdrawn their names from the ballot to satisfy Iowa and New Hampshire, which were unhappy Michigan was challenging their leadoff status on the primary calendar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #6
35. they cannot take themselves
All of the Democratic candidates have pledged not to campaign in Florida. But they cannot take themselves off the ballot unless they drop out of the presidential race entirely, said Mark Bubriski, spokesman for Florida's Democratic Party.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/10/10/five_democratic_hopefuls_pull_names_off_michigan_ballot/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrdemocrat78 Donating Member (535 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:32 AM
Response to Original message
5. She only beat "uncommitted" by 15%
HA HA HA HA HA!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Konza Donating Member (237 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:51 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. I'm changing my name to uncommitted. I'll see you in Denver! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunonmars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #5
12. that 15% was over 90,000
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 07:16 AM by sunonmars

thats still a hell of a win, she raked in over 328,000 votes, i would not call that insignificant. Those people came out for her and saying otherwise is disrespectful to them. People were asked if Obama and Edwards were on the ballot, she still would have won hands down, so stop the sour grapes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 06:50 AM
Response to Reply #12
14.  A helluva win when you're really the only one on the ballot? Bwaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaahaaaaaaa! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunonmars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. thats not how Obama and Edwards were pushing it


You obamabots really are pieces of work. They have been saying a vote for uncommitted is a vote for them and they split 40% between them. Thats not great in my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Oh you nailed it!...... err... NOT SO MUCH.
I'm not even an Obama supporter so I doubt your right about the rest either.

Let's remember the weather and that 40% of the people came out to vote against her. Imagine how many didn't even bother to vote because they knew it won't count in the end. 55 - 40 and there wasn't even another team present!!! What a major victory!!! Again, Not so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #14
23. Kucinich, Gravel and Dodd were on the ballot, and Kucinich actually campaigned in MI
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #23
31. None of her rivals were on the ballot tho were they? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. Kucinich is not a rival?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. He can't even get into the debates, so I'd say he's not considered much of a rival. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunonmars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #5
13. duplicate sorry, browser stuck
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 06:37 AM by sunonmars
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 04:55 AM
Response to Original message
8. She made the "smart" move
If the Michigan delegates somehow get past the convention gatekeepers and bouncers, she racks up some votes.

On the other hand, her opponents can say that she beat "nobody", and not by all that much.

The party (and we) may be the real loser. If Michigan voters don't "get over it", Democrats could stay home in droves in November and let the state turn red. It wasn't blue by a wide margin in '04.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 07:24 AM
Response to Original message
16. I've had it explained to me many times: if Hillary did something, it was wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 07:26 AM
Response to Original message
18. Well, if she had not, we would not have known that more than 200,000 people came to the voting poll
just to say NO to her. So, it was a worthwhile experience, for those who thinks she is not divisive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #18
26. That is not what happened. They were protesting the democratic party for excluding them
There was a media blitz TV/newspaper/fliers/radio that asked to vote uncommitted in protest of the exclusion.


I personally wonder who was behind it, as I suspect it was a candidate. Nonethless, this was not a vote against Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
19. Where's the "Who cares?" option?
Serious yawn quotient with this poll...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Essene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 08:21 AM
Response to Original message
20. 1. It was wrong to do 2. It makes her look like a sleezy winner
It was a bad decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
21. This should never have reached this point
It was not the fault of any candidate, including HRC. It was the fault of 2 stubborn groups of people, who created a result that was a mess. The DNC should have coordinated the removal of names with the candidates to insure they either all were off or all were on. All off would have the effect that Dean likely wanted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
22. Still trying to figure out why the two removed their names. Kucinich, Gravel
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 09:30 AM by robbedvoter
thought enough about the voters to stay as well.
But those two, thought DNC rules were more important than people's right to vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Apollo11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #22
29. Maybe they thought it would hurt them with folks in Iowa and NH?
Iowa and NH don't want any big blue-collar states undermining their privileged status.

I guess Edwards and Obama were expecting that Hillary would also get her name removed from the ballot.

Maybe Hillary is even smarter than some folks think? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. Gee! Whatever happened to equal votes? The two were hoisted on their own petard
and now their supporters are bitter at Hillary for not being as idiotic as their candidates. That makes sense!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
24. Not justified
She should have stood with the national party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AJH032 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
25. To all those who say no, I just hope you hold Kucinich to the same standard.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmallind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. Not a chance.
Clinton bad, Dennis good on DU. I'm not even a Clinton voter and it's silly how many times I feel compelled to defend her against these idiotic complaints that are entirely driven by animosity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlyingSquirrel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #25
32. Good one... so far I agree with #21 the most of everything I've read
And agree with "BWAHHHHAHAHAAHHAAAAAAA!!!!!!" the least.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Apollo11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
28. Yes. Because our right to vote is more important than the DNC calendar.
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 09:47 AM by Apollo11
It is bad enough that the leading candidates accepted the DNC's request not to campaign in Florida or Michigan. But denying citizens the right to vote for who they want is completely crazy when we are supposed to be the "Democratic" party. Look it up in the dictionary.

I mean - HELLO Howard Dean!! You make me want to SCREAM!! B-)

When will John Edwards stand up for the rights of his supporters in Michigan and Florida? I for one would have loved to see him show some "backbone" on this issue. Same goes for Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlyingSquirrel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #28
33. But aren't we an organized party? Doesn't following that party's rules
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 10:40 AM by FlyingSquirrel
go with the territory? Doesn't SOME line have to be drawn? I'd rather not see the Christmas season taken up with campaign ads and lawn signs, would you? 'cause if a line isn't drawn somewhere, the states will just keep creeping earlier and earlier to try and stay "relevant". And if a state decides not to go by the DNC's rules, there has to be SOME consequence, or the rest of the states will follow suit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu May 16th 2024, 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC