Edwards and Obama both campaigned in Michigan indirectly; "vote uncommitted"

Here is the Edwards link and blog post by Edwards from January 08:

Edwards abd Obama both campaigned in Michigan via indirect contacts.They fought on the sidelines loud and clear, to encourage voters in Michigan to vote, uncommitted per their operatives.

examples:

Edwards Blog Jan. 08

http://michiganforedwards.blogspot.com/2008/01/if-you-s...


snip>

Tuesday, January 15, 2008
If you support John Edwards, Vote Uncommitted Today...***(also if you're for Barack Obama).

Polls open at 7:00 am
Polls close at 8:00 p m

Do not sign Recall Petitions and Right to Work (for Less) Petitions.


then.....after the vote....Edwards said this......

The 15 January Primary Results

Thank You For Voting Uncommitted.

Uncommitted made an incredible showing in Michigan. I mean we asked people to take time out of their busy day and go vote for "nobody" in a largely meaningless election. Thank you for preventing a victory for Hillary and the Forces of Coronation. Here are some final totals:

Mi Dem guide book where it says that those who support the candidates whose names do not appear on the ballot to vote uncommitted RATHER than "write -in" their candidate, because 'write-in's' would NOT be counted as per Mi STATE LAW

http://michigandems.com/Guide.pdf

I'd caption the relevent passage, but it's a pdf-

peace~

Edwards definitely put the work out to the troops to "vote uncommitted" in Michigan. It was also an issue of direction poster here on DU back in January....The message was loud and clear....it was a campaign action.

others DU examples:

1).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

John and Monica Conyers urge Mich. Democrats to vote 'uncommitted'
Gregg Krupa / The Detroit News
Two supporters of U.S. Sen. Barack Obama announced today that they will produce and air campaign advertisements urging voters to cast "uncommitted" ballots in Michigan's Democratic Presidential primary on Tuesday.

U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Detroit, and Detroit City Councilwoman Monica Conyers said they are acting because of the failure of state and national leaders of the Democratic Party to salvage a consequential primary for voters in Michigan.

"Democratic voters have been disenfranchised, indeed had their vote rendered meaningless, by not being able to vote for viable Democratic candidates because of Democratic party rules that evade reality," said Monica Conyers. "We urge Democratic party voters to cast a ballot for uncommitted if the candidate of their choice, such as Senator Barack Obama, is not on the ballot."

//snip/.

The Conyerses, who are married, both support Obama, according to Sam Riddle, Monica Conyers' chief of staff.

"Here in Michigan, the primary is almost meaningless," said Riddle, who blamed both state and national party leaders for effectively disenfranchising Democratic voters in Michigan. "Because of the screwed up process, no one is really having a chance to endorse any of the candidates. That's why we are urging people to vote uncommitted."

Radio advertisements will begin running as soon as today, Riddle said, and the Conyerses also hope to run advertisements on television.

The cost of the advertising will likely be between $15,000 and $25,000, Riddle said.


http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080 ...

2).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

3).
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

4).
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

scroll thru thread for data/ plan

to the document that the one I linked to do-

Which is from the MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC STATE CENTRAL COMITTEE-

Which is not affilliated with ANY candidate, or 'newsmedia'-


Did you even look at the document?


peace~

"uncommitted" is from the MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC STATE COMMITTEE- which does not have affiliation with any individual candidate. This information is from the GUIDE for VOTERS- not any 'campaign advertising' it is info that the party needed to have made known to all potential voters.

The reason this was so important is that voters needed to know NOT to 'write-in' their candidate if the candidate was Biden, Edwards, Obama or Richardson. If any of these were written in, the ballot would be invalid, and NO 'delegate' would be representing that 'vote'. This is important. -

peace~

I live in Michigan and it was my vote that didn't count, not yours. Because of that, I get a little irritated when someone from Pittsburgh tries to push some talking point over the will of the people who were really disenfranchised.

I was disenfranchised when my state legislature decided to break the rules already agreed to. They set this debacle in motion at the instigation of Debbie Dingell, a devout Hillary supporter.

The DNC didn't decide one day that Michigan just shouldn't count because they were all plotting for Obama. They took the actions they did so that six or more states don't pull the same thing in 2012, the year your candidate is pushing for now.

And "uncommitted" is not a vote, it's a protest. Even with little name recognition for the other candidates and the assurance that our vote wouldn't count, a full 45% of Michigan's residents STILL came out to protest the idea of Hillary Clinton becoming president.

Now please stay out of our primary in future. It's not your business to tell us what we want.

so we are all eligible to share.

That you are willing to lie cheat and steal for Hills.

Cut it out.

I didn't interfere with your state so stay the Hell out of mine. Concern trolls, such as yourself do no good when you talk about what we want. You only antagonize us and believe me, if Hillary somehow manages to take the nomination on the backs of those in Michigan who she disenfranchised, she will not win Michigan and it's electoral votes. Plain and simple.

So, once again, stay the Hell out of our business!

Sometimes, we forget what we had for lunch yesterday; thus, lets review what the campaign orders were to the people in Michigan last January 08.

Those uncommitted votes were for Obama. Those 55 delegates are ours.
Well half of them per DNC rules.

their choice at the Convention. I share this so that we can revisit the position and rational of the candidates actions back in Jan. 08.........It should help us accept or debate the issues May 31st.

Here on DU, there was much encouragement to also vote uncommitted. It's a snap-shot of the past...it is data to review.

Uncommitted are Obama delegates since the voters intent was to vote for Obama

Here is what the converation was back in Jan. 08. I do look for other links pointing to written articles....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=159&topic_id=11195&mesg_id=11205

snip>

A vote for “uncommitted” is a vote to send delegates to the Democratic National Convention who are not committed or pledged to any candidate. Those delegates can vote for any candidate they choose at the Convention."


This comes from the "Official Michigan Site".


http://michigandems.com/Guide.pdf

Paid for by the Michigan Democratic State Central Committee, 606 Townsend, Lansing, MI
48933, 517-371-5410 and not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.

See points #8 and #9

The Democratic ballot will have 6 choices:

Hillary Clinton
Christopher Dodd
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
Uncommitted
Write-in

8. A vote for “uncommitted” is a vote to send delegates to the Democratic National
Convention who are not committed or pledged to any candidate. Those delegates can
vote for any candidate they choose at the Convention.


9. Supporters of Joe Biden, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson are urged
to vote “uncommitted” instead of writing in their candidates’ names because write-in
votes for those candidates will not be counted under state law.

and in October they all signed a pledge and Hillary said it wasn't going to count at all. Guess what things have changed.

You do realize that they are specific PEOPLE, not arbitrary numbers, right?

You seem to ignore how information is actually spread. Compare a post on DU with 187 views to an article in the Detroit Free Press which will be read by several hundred thousand, if not a million, readers. Or something on the channel 5 news that will be seen by millions of viewers.

You think that blog post was read by every Edwards supporter, much less reaching potential Edwards supporters?

The fact is that there's an unknown number of Edwards and Obama supporters, who don't read blogs, who perhaps voted for Clinton because Edwards' and Obama's names were not on the ballot. There's also an unknown number of voters who didn't bother to vote in the primary since they were told it would not count. It's also true that an 'election' without a campaign favors the candidate who is more well known.

Put all those together and it's clear that the 'election' that they had does not represent the true will of Michigan Democrats. Hillary knows that as well as I do, but because the illegitimate results favor her, she is pressing to have them counted. To me, that in itself displays a disgusting lack of integrity, and I believe I would feel the same way if it was my candidate, Edwards, who was pulling such a blatantly dishonest stunt.

cannot be found, but even if it was, prove that it's an official Edwards campaign blog. And the second is just an innocuous message.

(a plan the Hillary campaign rejected)

Here in Royal Oak we used Optical Scan of paper ballots. :shrug:

There were NO authorized Write-In candidates, so any write-in would be a 'no vote.'

And then there's no problem. Clinton is the one saying they should remain uncommitted, and stacking the deck with her supporters as uncommitted delegates.

NEXT!!!!

I can't believe we're supposed to be on the same side.

My name wasn't on the ballet but clearly I was running!

n/t

Sauce. Goose. Gander.

that's accurate of the Michigan people's choice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULxxBz-PAjg

That was before she got her ass kicked in Iowa. She was measuring for her crown when she told the truth...

Right?

They could all vote for Obama, split their votes between Obama & Edwards, even vote for Hillary.

Uncommitted got 40% and that would be about 35 delegates.

No wonder voters get FUCKED OVER with every petty asshole with an ax to grind throwing their shit ... but STILL there's no respect for the VOTERS of Michigan!

"If "uncommitted" receives at least 15 percent in a congressional district or statewide, Brewer said, delegates will be sent to Denver where any candidate -- including Clinton -- can compete for them."

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/09/voters_face_confusion_in_michi.html

.

"Clinton is showing desperation", says in interview

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2008/05/paterson-sees-desperation-by-c.html

"I would say at this point we're starting to see a little desperation on the part of the woman who I support and I'll support until whatever time she makes a different determination," Paterson said, adding: "I thought she was the best candidate and I thought she had the best chance of winning."




Paterson, who is a DNC committee member and was present at the meeting when a vote was taken to penalize Florida and Michigan for moving their respective primaries ahead of the traditional starting contests in New Hampshire and Iowa, said he thought that decision was "a little unfair" and he "didn't agree with it at the time."

But he also noted "nobody was screaming" after that decision was made, although some people were unhappy with it, adding:

"There was a process. I thought at the time everybody agreed to it. I didn't hear any objections from the candidates...So I would think the Democratic National Committee would leave it where it is."

On Clinton's claims regarding the popular vote and likening the fight to set the Florida and Michigan delegates to the civil rights movement, Paterson said:

"You have to rule out the undecideds in Michigan. You have to assume she won 100 percent to nothing in Michigan. I don't think anybody in their right mind would do that, nor would they see it as a civil rights issue."



Thank you, David Paterson! He is my governor, and I appreciate that he is able to be honest about this, despite the fact that he supports Hillary Clinton. I would make an op about it, but I already have three posts.

The candidates were not there nor were there any campaign functions which were sanctioned by the campaigns. No campaign money. Nothing like that. But you already knew that I'm sure. You're just looking to spread some BS around GDP as if there isn't already enough.

If we could harvest the cloud of methane hovering over this forum we could power UP NYC for a week. :rofl: