After the Michigan court ruling that the state primary will be on 1/15, what effect will it have?

[Stop Cornyn]

Is Michigan now just a beauty contest?

Will any of the candidates campaign there?

Will Michigan get any delegates?

Will the result in Michigan have any effect on the Nevada caucus just 4 days later or the South Carolina caucus 11 days later?

[Debi]

1. Hasn't SC requested the DNC waive the rules and allow them to go

1/19 along with Nevada? I though b/c Florida moved up to the 29th that they did. Anybody??

[sabbat hunter]

3. I think

both the DNC and the RNC have said that florida will not get its delegates because it moved up its primary, against party rules that its state parties agreed to, same with Michigan.

[Debi]

6. Right, I know about Florida

But SC was inside the 'window' and already was holding an early primary. I think they wanted to move their's up to the 19th b/c Florida's being held on the 29th was knocking on their back door. I thought SC had asked the DNC to allow them to move up and share the date with NV.

Any clue?

[bain_sidhe]

9. I read that somewhere too

but I can't remember where, and so can't vouch for the validity of the information. But yes, I read something about them going on the same day just recently... like in the last couple of days. It was in a thread about the MI SC ruling, but it could have been here, at Michigan Liberal, or dKos. Sorry.

[JDPriestly]

2. This is getting ridiculous.

The point in the early primaries is that they take place in states that could go blue or red and that the voters in those states get an up-close view of the candidates without the candidates investing the resources required for a national campaign. States like Michigan and Florida are ruining it. Frankly, I don't think anyone will pay much attention to the outcomes in those states. All that will matter in those states is name recognition. Holding the earliest primaries in more than three states at once is too expensive. It will weaken the financial base of the party for the presidential election. Frankly, I don't have much money to give to my favorite candidate. If I give now, I can't give later. Rogue states like Michigan and Florida are weakening the party and should be punished. They should not be allowed to vote on the first round at the national convention.

[sabbat hunter]

4. both parties

need to adopt either the Delaware or the California plan.

That will resolve this stupid leapfrogging once and for all.

[cyclezealot]

5. The whole primary system is so screwed - some one

must challenge it. Most pols and media here in Mich call NH arrogrant. It would matter anyway in the money game. NH is the show state. Millions are spent there and then it's off to Calif. and the game is over. Whether Mich or Fla had the primary in Jan or Feb. their influence is minimal. Four states make or break the president. lots of Mich people are fed up. We don't go to Denver. So be it. Our voices would be minimal anyway- in choosing the nominee. The Detroit Free Press in today's editorial called NH unrepresentative. They are so right.

[madfloridian]

7. MI and FL challenged it at the wrong time....and it will lose us two big states

because of the "me first" syndrome.

[Stop Cornyn]

10. What do you mean "lose us two big states"?

[madfloridian]

11. Hard to explain FL, but they took their names off the ballot in MI

Except Hillary.

Florida....it's a Hillary state over all, particularly the party leaders. She was leading everyone here for a while, but now the GOP...I think Rudy is ahead of her.

The names are on the ballot, and I have seen varying percentages of who will or won't vote in the primary. I am one of the won'ts because I am totally not caring this year.

It will hurt with the independents especially, and I think many will stay home. One poll I posted said just 7% would stay home, but I have seen subsequent ones saying higher.

The votes will count for the electoral, but not for the delegates.

Florida knew that when they voted 115 to 1 to move up the primary, with the Dems totally involved and supportive.

[cyclezealot]

12. same with MI dems.

Even after the legal challenge of the new primary . all the way to the Supreme Court. To this very day, they still support it. Does not matter, after Iowa, the candidates are off to California.

[Stop Cornyn]

14. But haven't the Repubs basically done the same as the Democrats in Florida and Michigan?

[bain_sidhe]

8. Very little, IMHO

It could actually hurt Hillary, if the storyline became that it was a "rigged" primary, which it very well could. But winning it won't help her, because it's really the only possible outcome. Perhaps if Dodd or Kucinich does better than expected, it might be more than a "news brief," but I doubt it, because neither of those two get much attention anyway. Again, it's main potential is to hurt Hillary, at least in the media-sphere "horse race" reporting.

To me, the main value of this mess is that it may provide incentive change the schedule for next time. Iowa and New Hampshire should not be permitted to retain their "first" status. Maybe we can come back to them in a few years, but it's unfair for the same two states to have so much power over who gets the nomination, cycle after cycle. And it's not just the election cycle, either. Because it's become a "tradition" for those states to go first, anybody who's considering running for President considers their "issues" in whatever political actions they take, (especially if they're in Congress).

As much as I respect the people of Iowa and New Hampshire, it's time for some other issues to have a greater influence on who becomes our nominee. IMHO, of course. And as I've said elsewhere, I don't really want or hope that Michigan becomes the "early" state. I DO want industrial/manufacturing policy, and also urban policy, to play a greater role in our nominating contest, though. My pick for getting those issues addressed is Ohio, although there are probably other states that would do as well.

**edited for inept pre-posting editing**

[cyclezealot]

13. As the Free Press said yesterday,

NH is unrepresentative . I'd say provincial. We don 't need first states. We need all voices openly heard by the nation at large. Think Hillary has an industrial policy. She just voted for admitting Peru to Cafta. We all speak with forked tongues.