Hillary on her decision to stay on the Michigan ballot...

[SaveElmer]

It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," Clinton said Thursday during an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio's call-in program, "The Exchange." "But I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008."
...
"I did not believe it was fair to just say, 'Goodbye Michigan' and not take into account the fact we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009," she said

[incapsulated]

1. Hrm, that doesn't make sense

If no one is campaigning in MI, what difference does it make for the GE? The republicans will have the mic whether or not Hillary is on the ballot.

[monktonman]

2. well sorta.......

If the votes wont really count anyway, its gives all the Democratic
candidates a chance to stop swinging at each other and spend
all their time slamming the crap out of the republics.
Am I missing something?

[incapsulated]

4. But she is saying this somehow relates to her staying on the ballot

One doesn't have anything to do with the other. Democrats won't be in MI campaigning, period. Her decision to stay on the ballot, against the wishes of the DNC and the other candidates, won't effect that one way or another. In fact, she admits it will be a hollow, meaningless win, so I don't understand her reasoning. It may make some people in MI who don't like being left out happy, but it may piss off people in other states, especially Iowa, where she is competitive.

[rinsd]

11. The DNC has said nothing about the ballot

That is a false construct by the candidate who withdrew who are using political theater to ingratiate themselves with IA voters.

Her point is that its not worth pissing off the voters of MI to score cheap points with the voters of IA.

That could be a negative for her in the early primary states but Michigan has 17 electoral votes.

[incapsulated]

20. They don't have to say anything

To know how they feel about it, they are taking away their delegates. It's a cut-off for anyone who keeps their name on the ballot.

It's not "cheap points" if it costs her a win in Iowa, is that worth the risk?

I have no idea how strongly people in MI feel about this, to the point of voting against a democrat over this? And rewarding Hillary?

[rinsd]

23. MI delegates have not been taken away, only FL's, though that may be coming soon.

"It's not "cheap points" if it costs her a win in Iowa, is that worth the risk"

Its weighing the risks. She has the time to explain to Iowa & NH how she is honoring their place in the calendar by not campaigning or spending money in MI or FL. Her campaign will likely downplay any wins in FL or MI (though of course be privately happy about them).

The flip side risk is attacks on a Dem nominee because they "rejected" MI voters in favor of their party in some intra-party battle. Not just from the GOP nominee but the local media will join in as well.

[incapsulated]

27. Oh, I think they will

I dunno, this seems like a risky strategy given the attitude of Iowa and NH about this. They are much more aware and educated about this issue than anyone else and won't be impressed with those explanations, they will see it as a purely political move that benefits her campaign. And the media will cover those wins and draw attention to her breaking ranks and make remarks etc.

[rinsd]

29. Well I think the MI primary is the day after IA.

The candidates cannot withdraw themselves from the FL ballot without dropping out of the race entirely.

So maybe we are looking at the wrong state thinking IA and we should be looking at NH in terms of impact.

[incapsulated]

32. Probably

I guess we will see. It may not amount to anything. But man, those people are nuts when it comes to this primary shit.

[BootinUp]

48. It appears she is committing to campaign there. no?

[incapsulated]

51. No

Not until after the primary is held, when everyone is "free" to campaign there.

[rinsd]

6. She means after the nomination.

The restriction on campaigning is limited to before the primaries. The day after MI's primary any of the candidates can campaign there.

If the eventual nominee had to spend time in MI explaining to voters the inside baseball of their intra-party battle caused them to remove themselves from MI's primary election ballot that could hurt the nominee.

I would also expect the local media to use that as a bludgeon.

How effective it would be is hard to predict but MI while blue is not a slam dunk.

[incapsulated]

7. Ah, ok... but...

Won't she and other candidates be busy campaigning in other primary states? I mean why would she be wasting time in MI while there is a primary battle actively going on elsewhere?

[rinsd]

13. Well candidates would be unlikely to return to MI until the nomination is decided.

I just meant the restrictions and possible party sanctions (such as not seating delegates etc) are no longer in effect after the election has happened.

[bain_sidhe]

45. it does from a Michigander's point of view

As I posted on another thread about the same article (in LBN), I'm in a bit of a rush, so I'm not going to type it all again, so I'll just cut and paste... sorry.

As a Michigander, I understand the "no campaigning" and the taking away of delegates, really I do. The National party has to enforce its rules. Not campaigning is a passive affirmation (by the candidates) of the rules. But the other candidates *actively* slapped Michigan voters in the face by taking their names off the ballot. They essentially said "out loud and in our faces" that Iowa and New Hampshire voters are *more important* to them than Michigan voters. That won't, and doesn't sit well with many people here.

Michigan is purple, nearly 50-50, in fact (Kerry only won it with 51%), and it could definitely make a difference in who wins the state. While I suspect die-hard Democrats will hold their noses and vote for the Dem nominee even if it is one who took their name off, I also know that a lot of those die-hards won't work as hard for a candidate that slapped them in the face. And a lot of swing voters don't consider themselves "married" to any particular party, but they ARE hurting--Michigan's economy really *is* in dire straits--and being slapped in the face by those candidates on top of it *will* have an effect on their enthusiasm for the candidate, if it's one of the slappers. They may not vote for the republicon, but they're more likely to just stay home... and that has consequences down-ballot as well.

As for me, I won't donate or work for the GE campaign of any of the slappers. Yeah, I'll vote for them, and I may do some down-ballot volunteering and donating, but them? They've lost my money and my energy.

And, further, in response to another post in that thread,
I wrote that I think that the DNC has a right to enforce their rules... but the rules are both stupid and unfair. That's what caused the whole break-away by the state leaders in the first place. I know our state had high-hopes when the "reform" was being negotiated that "rust belt issues" would find a place in the "early states" -- even if it had been Ohio or Indiana or Illinois, *our* issues would have been addressed... but they weren't. This supposed "reform" was actually no reform at all, since Iowa and New Hampshire still retained their control of the nominating process. This so-called "reform" was a sham, and I understand our state leadership's anger at being "played" by promises of reform, and ending up with the same short end of the stick. Do I agree with their solution? I'm not sure. It'll cost us, but if the disruption makes *real* reform more likely, it may be worth it.

[incapsulated]

46. I'd be curious

How many people feel the same way you do about this. I really don't know.

[bain_sidhe]

47. I don't know either, but just from the MI

people posting on this issue that I *have* seen, there's a lot of anger among the "politically engaged" Michigan Democrats on *this* site, and I've seen quite a bit of similar posts at KOS and Michigan Liberal. So, in that admittedly rarified pool, I'm not alone in my feelings. A majority of Mich. Dems.? dunno. Wouldn't be surprised though. And even if it's not a majority, a significan minority feeling that way could make all the difference in the GE.

[Froward69]

3. No sense at all

in other words, it is ok to break party rules. yet another Inevitability for the Hillary machines arrogance. I don't blame Michigan or Florida Dem's. I blame their Repuke controlled legislatures.

[William769]

8. What party rule is she breaking?

[Froward69]

12. after Feb 5

Michigan are jan 25 I think

[rinsd]

16. And whats does that have to do with one's name being on the ballot?

[Semper_FiFi]

18. Absolutely NOTHING!

But, some people hope and pray that she breaks some rule somewhere.:eyes:

[Cameron27]

24. That's right,

there's no other reason for ignoring the fact that Clinton isn't breaking her pledge at all, or ignoring the fact that Obama's doing the same thing in FL.

[William769]

17. And how is she breaking that rule?

[Semper_FiFi]

15. She's ahead in the polls.

And some Dems, just can't accept it gracefully. You won't get a response to your query, she is NOT breaking any rule. She has done the smart and sane thing...why give the finger to the Michigan voters and then come back in the GE and say, "Oh by the way, I ignored you earlier...but we want your support now." :eyes:

[SaveElmer]

26. It is clear y ou have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...

You might want to inform yourself before you post...

It is not a violation of the 4-state pledge to appear on the ballot in Michigan or Florida...

This is simply a campaign tactic on Obama's part trying to give him a boost in Iowa...

[Clintonista2]

55. It's not that complicated. Keeping your name on the ballot does NOT break the pledge. nt.

[jillan]

5. There are rules set up by the DNC - maybe she should run as an independent if she wants to make her

own rules as she goes along.

[William769]

10. Again what rule is she breaking?

[Froward69]

14. Here Here!!!

[William769]

19. You need to cheerlead for someone who know what they are talking about. NT

[rinsd]

21. Like Joe Biden? Whose name will STILL be on the ballot because he missed the deadline

If only Joe weren't trying to play catch up with Richardson and the rest he might have been able to actually remove his name from the ballot.

[incapsulated]

22. lol, is that true?

I don't know if I am buying all this sudden incompetence with paper work, to be honest, heh.

[rinsd]

25. From his campaign

Wilmington, DE (October 9, 2007) – In keeping with the rules established by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) regarding the Democratic Presidential primary calendar, today the Biden for President Campaign announced that Sen. Biden would not participate in the Michigan State Democratic Primary and that formal steps were being taken to remove Sen. Biden’s name from the ballot in that state.

“Today’s decision reaffirms our pledge to respect the primary calendar as established by the DNC and makes it clear that we will not play into the politics of money and Republican machinations that only serve to interfere with the primary calendar,” said Biden for President Campaign Manager Luis Navarro.

Source: Joe Biden campaign

I see nothing about the paperwork being filed even in later reports on the withdraw.

Here's the problems Kucinich had.

Excerpt -

"Barack Obama, John Edwards and Bill Richardson filed paperwork Tuesday saying they were withdrawing. Two other candidates, Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich, said in statements that they also were bypassing the primary.

But Kucinich twice filed incorrect paperwork with the secretary of state's office, and had not filed a notice of withdrawal with his notarized signature by Tuesday's 4 p.m. deadline, said the office's spokesman, Ken Silfven.

A campaign manager first signed the paperwork, then the campaign sent in another withdrawal notice signed by Kucinich. But the signature had not been notarized as required.

"Unless his camp wants to litigate the matter, his name will appear on the ballot," Silfven said Wednesday.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071010/UPDATE/710100459

[incapsulated]

30. I knew about Dennis

But other than not seeing any paperwork filed, do we know Biden is on the ballot at this point?

[rinsd]

31. I can't tell.

This article implies the paperwork was filed.

John Edwards, Barack Obama, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden all have removed their name from the ballot. Dennis Kucinich announced Tuesday he had done the same, but the Secretary of State in Lansing said the campaign had filed incorrect paperwork and missed the 4 p.m. Tuesday deadline to withdraw.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071011/METRO/710110381/1409

[jillan]

34. What's the matter? Can't you tell the difference between Joe and Dennis?

Or do all white men look the same to you?

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071010/NEWS07/71010026

[rinsd]

35. So did Biden file the paperwork or not?

None of the articles seem to confirm it one way or the other.

[jillan]

36. So in other words - you are starting a rumor since you can't find anything

Why am I not surprised?

[rinsd]

37. Considering you posted that Hillary broke a rule that doesn't exist that is quite rich.

And here is what I was basing my post on

LANSING -- Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich remains on the Michigan Jan. 15 presidential primary ballot along with Hillary Rodham Clinton and two others, despite his attempts to withdraw.

Four other Democratic candidates have taken their names out of contention, turning the primary into basically a beauty contest for front-runner Clinton and the other three lesser-known candidates.

Barack Obama, John Edwards and Bill Richardson filed paperwork Tuesday saying they were withdrawing. Two other candidates, Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich, said in statements that they also were bypassing the primary.

Note that is says nothing about Biden filing paperwork like it does for the others.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071010/UPDATE/710100459

Also it looks like Biden maybe be a patsy for the Obama campaign

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3600326

[jillan]

38. Hillary did break a rule - and you are trying to start 2 rumors about Biden

http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/08/highlights_of_t.php

Some highlights of the 2008 Rules:

Calendar
Last year the Party's Commission on Presidential Nomination Timing and Scheduling issued its recommendations on the 2008 primary and caucus calendar.

The Party recognizes the need early in the nominating process to broaden participation to reflect the Party’s rich racial, regional, and economic diversity by including 2 additional states. Twelve states applied to conduct early primaries and caucuses. We believe that shows the energy and excitement for opening up the process.

The addition of 2 states early in the process will also open up the dialogue to engage a broader range of people to talk about a wider variety of issues. This will enable the Democratic Party to choose the strongest candidate to be our Presidential nominee.

The new schedule is as follows:

Iowa holds the first-in-the-nation caucus on January 14.
New Hampshire holds the first-in-the-nation primary on January 22.
Nevada conducts a caucus between Iowa and New Hampshire on Saturday, January 19.
South Carolina holds a primary 1 week after the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday, January 29
The regular window will open for all other states on the first Tuesday in February -- February 5, 2008.

Presidential Candidate Sanctions on the Window
There is a new rule that imposes new sanctions on presidential candidates. If a state, any state, violates the rule on timing/the window, presidential candidates will face sanctions if they campaign in that state. Examples of campaigning include: making personal appearances in the state, hiring campaign workers, and buying advertising and so on.

Currently, the only punishment for states that violate the window was on State Parties. This new enforcement provision recognizes that presidential candidates must also bear a responsibility in enforcing the window or face sanctions.

[rinsd]

41. LOL! Where does it say anything about removing one's name from the ballot to be in compliance?

Again what rule did Hillary Clinton break by leaving her name on the ballot?

What rule did Chris Dodd, the first signer of the pledge, break?

Neither is campaigning or has staff or is spending money in MI or FL.

Did Biden actually file paperwork to remove his name or simply say he will not participate since the record appears to be unclear?

[jillan]

43. Why are Hillary supporters so rude? I can chat and joke around with Obama supporters, Edwards

supporters, Dodd supporters and so on.

But it always seems that Hillary supporters are the ones trying to start rumors & act like they have something to prove.

Why is that?

[rinsd]

44. We've chatted and joked before and there's no reason we can't do so again.

But don't think I will sit here and let you misrepresent my candidate.

[jillan]

49. While you are trying to start a rumor that Biden didn't get his paperwork done in time and that he

only took his name off the ballot for Obama? What a joke.

[rinsd]

52. The media has been unclear about whether Biden filed his paperwork or not.

They have cited 3 candidates specifically as having done so, made mention of Biden's statement that he willnot participate and then talked about Kucinich's campaign muffing it.

And I didn't start the Biden rumor though I certianly brought it up in our discussion.

So did Biden file the paperwork or not?

[jillan]

53. here -

http://www.joebiden.com/newscenter/pressreleases?id=0189

[rinsd]

54. Unfortunately that provides no clarity

"Earlier today, the Biden for President Campaign announced that Sen. Biden would not participate in the Michigan State Democratic Primary and that formal steps were being taken to remove Sen. Biden’s name from the ballot in that state."

The deadline was 4pm EST on Tuesday. He either made the deadline or not.

[Froward69]

56. Yes super Joe Biden

Filed the paperwork. (Washington post I think, I read it somewhere) Ya know, Hillary, Obama are all senators. Joe Biden is getting stuff done in his current elected position... whats Hillary done cept made it more difficult to deal with Turkey and Iran?

[SaveElmer]

28. Pirhana...you usually do your research before you post...

So am giving you the benefit of the doubt here...

It is not...repeat not...a violation of the 4-state pledge to appear on the ballot in Florida and Michigan...

Hillary is completely within the rules to remain on the ballot in Michigan...

[jillan]

39. read my post #38

[SaveElmer]

40. Staying on the ballot is not covered by the agreement...

It simply is not...and Hillary has pledged not to campaign in Michigan...

[Semper_FiFi]

9. Makes sense. Kick and recommend. n/t

[zulchzulu]

33. "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything."

OK. So take your name off the ballot, which isn't printed yet anyway.

The point about Republicans campaigning as an issue clearly is missing the point. The DNC has rules and Michigan broke them. Clinton signed the Four State Pledge with others.

The soundbite "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything" will be used all over the place. It will hurt the Clinton campaign in the first four states and it will be used in Michigan by both Democrats and Republicans there.

Nicely played...nicely ployed...

[ihelpu2see]

42. does not make sence... she should stick with the party on this one and not

try to be the "Star" that she thinks she is.....

[AtomicKitten]

50. As a group effort, her decision to stay on the ballot

unilaterally rather defeated the point of the boycott.

[bain_sidhe]

57. But it wasn't a "group effort" to boycott

It was just some of the candidates pulling a stunt-- and one that may hurt the party's chances in the general election. Hillary refused to play that game and pander to Iowa and New Hampshire, and for that, I applaud her.

Note, I hadn't decided who I'd vote for in the primary --there are things I like and things I don't like about each of the candidates. But, I *was* leaning toward Edwards, because I liked the fact that he was focusing on the systemic problems that the less-than-affluent people in this country face.

Now I can't vote for him. Now, I don't *want* to vote for him in the primary, anyway.

[AtomicKitten]

58. I'm rather undecided on this and have no clue how it will play out.

The caliber of political theater determines if it is a stunt or a smooth move. To tell you the truth, this kind of stuff, used in this way, is sticky business. I guess I'm not really that interested in seeing who makes it to high ground in this matter.

This time around I am blessed with a clear indication of how I will vote. I want Gore to run. Then, about three miles later, I choose Obama over the other two reasonably viable candidates. The IWR and Kyl-Lieberman amendment are all I need to know about the candidates; I'm not interested in haircuts and other such nonsense. This choice really resonates with me.

[bain_sidhe]

59. I don't know either

but I wish those four candidates hadn't put Michigan's electoral votes at risk if one of them turns out to be the nominee. They could have honored the rules by not campaigning.

I'm glad you have been "blessed" this time around... last time I had that blessing (Clark was my guy, all the way), and it made everything a lot easier during the primary wars. Now, I have to be aghast at *all* the bashing, instead of just the bashing of *my* candidate. ;-) It's stressful!

**edit for tyop**

[AtomicKitten]

60. duck and cover

I think people are pissed off generically and it spills over into this primary. Elections bring out the sycophantic nature of some people, and it's tough to debate issues when there is such disagreement.

This craziness is on the precipice of an epic battle ahead, and it is that that binds us together. Hopefully people won't piss each other off irretrievably between now and then.

[bain_sidhe]

61. generically pissed off... I like that!

And I can see where, if you think that we're on the edge of the precipice, and *your* candidate is the only one who can save us, you might be willing to pull out all the stops in advocating for them, and against the ones you *don't* think can save us.

My "failing" is that I think "the stops" have a value... Whoever wins the primary, WE (Dems) have to win the election. The thought of another four years of publican rule is just too horrible to contemplate.

I read some of these bash-posts, and I want to go all Rodney King on their ass. And that goes for the bashing of ANY of the candidates. ANY ONE OF THEM could, and would, be a good president, IMHO. And ANY ONE OF THEM would be better than ANY of the publicans.

IMHO. Of course. (Only it's not really all that humble...)

[AtomicKitten]

62. I think it only takes 5 minutes of a GOP debate to know -

without a doubt that the family dog could run the country better than a Republican.

It's been a long-ass seven years, eh? Cheers.

[bain_sidhe]

63. a long, depressing and frightening seven years.

There's a part of my psyche that has succumbed to cowering under the covers and moaning, "please, please, please make it stop."

I go on about my business, of course, and strive to stay involved... but still, I can hear the moaning in the quiet moments. It's annoying, but I've learned to live with it. Like having neighbors who play (insert music you don't like) too loud at all hours of the day and night. You learn to tune it out and get on with your life.

[IndianaGreen]

64. The DNC erred by punishing the voters of FL & MI, and jeopardizing those states in November '08

In their irrational and reckless defence of Iowa and New Hampshire always being first come Hell or high water, the DNC decided to disenfranchise the Democratic voters in Florida and Michigan by taking away the credentials of any delegate they were to choose in their respective primary elections. The crazy DNC vote, which included the one from Donna Brazile (that should have been a BIG RED FLAG), hurts the voters and our prospects in the general election. Adding insult to injury, the DNC decree that while candidates could not campaign in the "renegade" Michigan and Florida, they could still go to those states to raise money. Raise money while telling the voters to go screw themselves!

While the rest of the candidates turned tailed and fled Michigan and Florida for fear of antagonizing Chairman Dean and his DNC clowns, Hillary has taken a more sensible approach that recognizes the pitfalls of being too attached to bureaucrats and their rules.

I hope that come convention time, the delegates will be wise and sensible enough to let the delegates from Michigan and Florida take their seats at the convention.

As to those that demonize respected politicians in Michigan and Florida for daring to buck an idiotic and undemocratic primary schedule, let their heads explode at hearing Hillary's words.

Next time let's do it right. Replace the Iowa and New Hampshire first in the nation, with a rotating system of regional primaries.