Michigan wants a "do-over" election

[Wretched Excess]

Déjà vote? Dems could do it again in Michigan

Interest in giving Michigan Democrats a second chance to pick a presidential nominee -- one that would be counted -- increased Wednesday after the Super Tuesday primaries failed to establish a clear front-runner between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

The tight race makes Michigan's 156 delegates -- blacklisted by the Democratic National Committee because the state's Jan. 15 primary violated party rules -- potentially more important and the prospect of holding another nominating event, likely a caucus, more attractive.

Advertisement
State Sen. Tupac Hunter, D-Detroit, one of Obama's top backers in Michigan, said Wednesday that he's keenly interested in the idea. Obama removed his name from the Jan. 15 ballot, while Clinton left hers. None of the major candidates at the time campaigned in the state.

"We don't want to go into the convention with Michigan and Florida hanging in the balance," Hunter said. "I think we need to settle it."

Florida Democrats, who also lost their delegates for the same violation of national party rules, are in a similar position. If the nomination isn't decided by the end of primary season in early June, the question of recognizing Michigan and Florida delegates could result in a nasty, unpredictable fight at the August convention in Denver.

The prospect of a train wreck over the bonafides of the Michigan and Florida delegations at a convention is enough to make even the Clinton campaign consider a do-over election, said East Lansing-based Democratic consultant Mark Grebner.

For Obama and DNC officials, who want to avoid conflict at the convention if at all possible, the idea is alluring, Grebner said.

"It could be done," he said.

Still, the potential pitfalls are legion. Many voters would resent being told their first vote didn't count, please try again. Practical considerations, like setting up hundreds of polling stations and poll workers, abound; a reasonably well-organized caucus could cost $1 million or more. Who would pay for it?

And, then, the Clinton-Obama race might be over by the time Michigan got around to holding a caucus -- allowing the bad memory of the tumult associated with the Democratic primary to be flamed by a more spectacular screwup in a hastily convened second-chance election. No one in a position to make a new Michigan election happen was jumping on board Wednesday.

Clinton, the only top-tier candidate who allowed her name to appear on the Michigan ballot, won the election with 55% of the vote. Forty-percent of Democratic voters marked their ballots "uncommitted."

Much More

oh, please.  this sounds as illegal as hell, although I certainly couldn't tell you what the specific legal argument would be.

and the governor of michigan is a strong hillaryite.  I am sure she will want to push to have michigan's delegation seated "as is".  Hillary already won it one time, why should she be required to win it again?

[Lauri]

why are they making this so difficult? why not just count the votes they already have?

of course, our govt cant do anything logically - but this does sound like a huge expense for gaining nothing.

they already have the votes; they merely need to declare if they are going to allow them or not. of course, the Dems are always the ones screaming about 'disenfranchised voters' the most.. this is going to be delightfully fun to watch..