"I am a member of no organized political party..."
January 7, 2008 8:34 AM Subscribe
The Democratic party in Michigan has seen fit to royally screw up the upcoming primary. Will my vote really be worthless?
In a sane situation, I'd prefer to vote for Edwards or Obama. But things being as they are, should I:
A) Vote uncommitted on the Democratic ballot and hope that some like-minded delegates get seated at the convention.
B) Vote strategically in the Republican primary. (Ron Paul LOLLZ!!)
C) Something else?
In a sane situation, I'd prefer to vote for Edwards or Obama. But things being as they are, should I:
A) Vote uncommitted on the Democratic ballot and hope that some like-minded delegates get seated at the convention.
B) Vote strategically in the Republican primary. (Ron Paul LOLLZ!!)
C) Something else?
Best answer: I work for one of the top two Democratic presidential campaigns and I'm registered to vote in Michigan. Sadly, your vote (and my vote) will not count. The only candidates on the ballot in Michigan will be Hillary and Kucinich. All of the candidates, including Hillary and Kucinich, have agreed not to campaign in the state. No delegates are going to be awarded to the winner of the Michigan Democratic primary. All of this means that the media doesn't know how to cover the Democratic primary in Michigan and have largely been avoiding it.
The situation sucks, and irate phone calls to your state legislators are definitely in order. They were warned that this was what would happen if they moved the primary and they went ahead and did it anyway. It was idiotic.
I suppose it's possible that if the nomination fight goes to the convention the Michigan results could mean something, but that seems exceedingly unlikely. What WILL happen is that the DNC will kiss and make up with Michigan and give them back their delegates at the convention - after the nominee has already been decided.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
posted by fancypants at 9:12 AM on January 7, 2008
The situation sucks, and irate phone calls to your state legislators are definitely in order. They were warned that this was what would happen if they moved the primary and they went ahead and did it anyway. It was idiotic.
I suppose it's possible that if the nomination fight goes to the convention the Michigan results could mean something, but that seems exceedingly unlikely. What WILL happen is that the DNC will kiss and make up with Michigan and give them back their delegates at the convention - after the nominee has already been decided.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
posted by fancypants at 9:12 AM on January 7, 2008
Won't there be an opportunity to write someone in? Even if not, seeing as how you support Obama or Edwards (who aren't on the ballot), an uncommitted vote is really a vote for the two of them, right? If a lot of the state votes uncommitted when Hillary Clinton is the only name on the ballot that's a win for Obama and Edwards in my book.
posted by the christopher hundreds at 9:14 AM on January 7, 2008
posted by the christopher hundreds at 9:14 AM on January 7, 2008
Response by poster:
posted by kc8nod at 9:22 AM on January 7, 2008
"What WILL happen is that the DNC will kiss and make up with Michigan and give them back their delegates at the convention - after the nominee has already been decided."So that means that the Michigan delegates will just be pouting in a corner at the convention? They'll have no say in the platform or any other party business?
posted by kc8nod at 9:22 AM on January 7, 2008
Best answer: Michigan law idiotically disregards write-ins which aren't for registered candidates. If you want to support Obama or Edwards you should vote uncommitted in the primary rather than writing in their names since the latter will result in your ballot not being counted. If you support Hillary, Kucinich or Gravel you're good to go. Here's the official Michigan Dems site for more.
Yes it's a mess. Ironic since the whole idea of shifting the primary earlier was to make Michigan relevant. Years ago a local cartoonist showed a couple in clown suits on the phone saying that they were going to the Halloween party as the Michigan Democratic Party. I'm a long-time member of same but that cartoon is sadly appropriate just now.
posted by leslies at 9:28 AM on January 7, 2008
Yes it's a mess. Ironic since the whole idea of shifting the primary earlier was to make Michigan relevant. Years ago a local cartoonist showed a couple in clown suits on the phone saying that they were going to the Halloween party as the Michigan Democratic Party. I'm a long-time member of same but that cartoon is sadly appropriate just now.
posted by leslies at 9:28 AM on January 7, 2008
So that means that the Michigan delegates will just be pouting in a corner at the convention?
Well, either their delegates are accepted, in which case they'll all be for Hilary or Kucinich (or someone else if one of those two drops out and pledges their delegates), or they won't be accepted in which case they wont' even be at the convention.
posted by smackfu at 10:09 AM on January 7, 2008
Well, either their delegates are accepted, in which case they'll all be for Hilary or Kucinich (or someone else if one of those two drops out and pledges their delegates), or they won't be accepted in which case they wont' even be at the convention.
posted by smackfu at 10:09 AM on January 7, 2008
You can write in whoever you want, but I know my campaign has specifically requested not to have the write ins accepted. I suspect the others have done the same.
posted by fancypants at 10:14 AM on January 7, 2008
posted by fancypants at 10:14 AM on January 7, 2008
What's the background on this? I know that there's the brouhaha over stripping Michigan of its votes because it bumped up the primary, but what's with the decision of who is/isn't on the ballot?
posted by mkultra at 10:15 AM on January 7, 2008
posted by mkultra at 10:15 AM on January 7, 2008
Sorry to monopolize the answers here... but for once this is something I actually know about. After the party stripped the delegates, most of the candidates requested to be taken off the ballot to send the message that they were serious about respecting the Party's wishes and skipping Michigan.
posted by fancypants at 10:26 AM on January 7, 2008
posted by fancypants at 10:26 AM on January 7, 2008
As a Michigan voter who is very interested in the political process, I just want to say that I'm thrilled about this...
*grumble*
And the thing about it that gets me is that it wasn't like this is a surprise. It seems like we were made well aware of the consequences of moving our primary forward.
posted by kbanas at 11:00 AM on January 7, 2008
*grumble*
And the thing about it that gets me is that it wasn't like this is a surprise. It seems like we were made well aware of the consequences of moving our primary forward.
posted by kbanas at 11:00 AM on January 7, 2008
Michigan law idiotically disregards write-ins which aren't for registered candidates.
What's the point of having a write-in space at all then? There aren't any registered candidates who aren't on the ballot this time, right?
posted by grouse at 9:32 AM on January 10, 2008
What's the point of having a write-in space at all then? There aren't any registered candidates who aren't on the ballot this time, right?
posted by grouse at 9:32 AM on January 10, 2008
The Washington Post says to vote uncomitted if you're an Edwards or Obama supporter.
posted by frecklefaerie at 10:07 AM on January 10, 2008
posted by frecklefaerie at 10:07 AM on January 10, 2008
One more thing if you're still watching the thread: MI (and FL, for that matter) Democrats will probably only be allowed to the convention if the nominee is evident at that time (as it has been at every convention for decades). Then the MI delegates (just like all the delegates) will essentially be rubber-stamps for the nomination and get to participate in all the fun and speech-watching and partying. But you better believe that it comes down to the convention (which, given the strong contenders this year, it just might), the MI and FL delegates will not be allowed to participate.
BTW, fancypants: I used to work on one of the "top two" campaigns too! I must wonder how you have time to be on AskMe! :)
posted by lunasol at 6:49 PM on January 10, 2008
BTW, fancypants: I used to work on one of the "top two" campaigns too! I must wonder how you have time to be on AskMe! :)
posted by lunasol at 6:49 PM on January 10, 2008
The best way I've seen to handle the primaries in MI, for the Dem side, is to vote in the Republican primary for Romney. Republicans in MI have screwed with the Dem side by voting for less-palatable candidates, like Jesse Jackson, and the theory is that it's time to return the favor.
posted by daveqat at 8:19 PM on January 10, 2008
posted by daveqat at 8:19 PM on January 10, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
The other issue is media coverage. The early state voting really has more to do with media coverage then anything else, so if the media decides to cover the Michigan primary the way it does NH, it might mean something. Especially if there was a surprise Edwards (or Hillary) win.
Mitt Romney seems like the weakest and most pathetic GOP front runner, if you're wondering who to vote for to screw up the republicans the most. (IMO)
posted by delmoi at 8:50 AM on January 7, 2008