For Your Info :::>>> SYATC! - Democratic Underground

indimuse

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-25-08 03:36 PM
Original message

For Your Info :::>>> SYATC!

Edited on Sun May-25-08 03:48 PM by indimuse

http://bp3.blogger.com/_Sit4XCRo-rw/SDmi7mBqofI/AAAAAAAABNU/OiqZnbv8bS4/s200/obama+michigan.jpg

Sunday, May 25, 2008
Campaigning for Obama to Lose in Michigan
Caption? "Electioneering"
May 8, 2008, article It's all the way to the convention floor, Sen. Obama, the following January 21, 2008, post from MyDD goes into more detail about Sen.

Barack Obama (D-Ill.)'s Michigan primary campaign by proxy. It is reproduced here with the author's permission.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is Getting Out The "Uncommitted" Vote—i.e. campaigning to lose—any less of a political campaign than a GOTV effort to win an

election?

Background: The battle began, so it is reported, based on "a fight between Michigan's leading Democrats, including Sen. Carl Levin and Gov. Jennifer Granholm, and

the Democratic National Committee. Frustrated that Iowa and New Hampshire were getting so much attention, Michigan's political elites in both parties changed their

Feb. 9 caucus to a primary and bumped it to Jan. 15." http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/09/voters_face_confusion_in_michi.html

On October 9, 2007, a spokesperson for Michigan Secretary of State Office said that Democratic presidential candidates Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), former Sen. John

Edwards (D-N.C.) and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who had already agreed to not campaign in Michigan "because it broke" Democratic National Committee

rules by moving its primary date ahead of February 5, 2008, filed paperwork to boycott the ballot.

"Five individuals connected to five different campaigns have confirmed -- but only under condition of anonymity -- that the situation that developed in connection with the

Michigan ballot is not at all as it appears on the surface," Lynda Waddington reported in the Iowa Independent, adding that the Obama campaign, "arguably fearing a

poor showing in Michigan, reached out to the others with a desire of leaving New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as the only candidate on the ballot. The hope was

that such a move would provide one more political obstacle for the Clinton campaign to overcome in Iowa."

On November 21, 2007, the Michigan Supreme Court okayed the January 15, 2008, presidential primary date, after which the DNC stripped Michigan of its delegates

for the national convention.

As pledged, none of the Democratic candidates was to run a GOTV (Get Out The Vote) political campaign in Michigan.

Vote "uncommitted": It was projected that, if "uncommitted" were to get at least 15 percent of the primary vote, there would have to be "a separate delegate selection

meeting to determine who the uncommitted delegates should represent," according to Mark Maynard, who cited the following from the Washtenaw Dems in his blog:

The 2008 Michigan Primary will be on Tuesday, January 15th. Voters registered before December 17, 2007 are eligible to vote.

You will cast your vote in your usual polling place. If you need information, please go to the Washtenaw Votes website. At the polling place you will be asked for

identification in order to vote, but if you do not have ID, you will be asked to sign an affidavit, and are still eligible to vote.

On this Democratic primary ballot the candidates are: Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd (has withdrawn from race), Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich. There are also lines for

uncommitted and for write-in candidates. If you want to vote for Barack Obama or John Edwards you must vote the "UNCOMMITTED" line! NO WRITE-IN VOTES WILL

BE COUNTED FOR ANY CANDIDATES!

If "uncommitted" gets at least 15% of the vote, there will be one or more delegates elected at the Congressional District Convention which will take place on March

29th, 2008. In order to be eligible to vote at the Congressional District Convention, you must be a member of the Michigan Democratic Party. To join, go to Michigan

Dems dotcom and then to the membership tab. If you want to be eligible to influence who is elected as uncommitted delegates, join the MDP and attend your

Congressional District Convention!

Campaigning to lose: The Denver Post reported January 10, 2008, that Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Detroit City Councilwoman Monica Conyers, both Obama

supporters, produced and aired campaign ads urging voters to cast 'uncommitted' ballots in Michigan's Democratic presidential primary:

MALE: THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IS CONFUSING. I WANT TO VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA BUT OBAMA'S NAME IS NOT ON THE BALLOT.

FEMALE: THERE IS NO ONE ON THAT BALLOT I WANT TO BE PRESIDENT. (((Hence...Hillary!!)))

MALE: WELL, THESE FOLKS CAN HELP US. EXCUSE ME, CONGRESSMAN CONYERS AND COUNCILWOMAN CONYERS, WE NEED YOUR HELP.

FEMALE: HOW CAN WE VOTE FOR OBAMA ON TUESDAY?

Rep. Conyers: YOU CAN'T. YOU CANNOT EVEN WRITE IN OBAMA'S NAME. IF YOU DO YOUR VOTE WILL NOT COUNT BECAUSE OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN

CHOSE NOT TO PLACE HIS NAME ON THE MICHIGAN BALLOT SO AS NOT TO VIOLATE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY RULES.((((LIAR!!)))) BUT YOU

CAN VOTE UNCOMMITTED

Councilwoman Conyers: IF AT LEAST 15% OF THE PEOPLE VOTE UNCOMMITTED, THE STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY MUST SEND THAT PERCENTAGE OF

DELEGATES TO THE NATIONAL CONVENTION UNCOMMITTED.

Rep. Conyers: MY WIFE AND I ARE VOTING UNCOMMITTED. WE WILL WORK WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO MAKE SURE THAT UNCOMMITTED

DELEGATES GO TO THAT CONVENTION TRULY UNCOMMITTED SO THAT OBAMA CAN COMPETE FOR THEIR VOTE. ((( I BET YOU WILL!! )))

MALE: THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN CONYERS AND COUNCILWOMAN CONYERS. I WILL JOIN YOU AND VOTE UNCOMMITTED ON TUESDAY.

FEMALE: ME TOO - AT LEAST MY VOTE WON'T BE WASTED

Councilwoman Conyers: THIS TRUTH IN POLITICS MESSAGE WAS PAID FOR BY FRIENDS OF MONICA CONYERS http://bp2.blogger.com/_Sit4XCRo-

rw/SDmhYWBqoeI/AAAAAAAABNM/qnywsQCamw4/s320/vote+uncommitted+Michigan.jpg

Michigan for Edwards blogspot, January 12, 2008.

Early warning: Lynda Waddington's October 2007 report was confirmed January 10, 2008, by Nick Bunkley, who wrote in the New York Times' The Caucus blog that

the Conyers urged voters "to vote 'uncommitted' to help them gain momentum and to deal a setback" to Sen. Clinton." New groups, including Michiganders for Obama,

Michigan for Edwards and the newly formed Detroiters for Uncommitted Voters, "campaign door-to-door, on the phone and at rallies, spreading the uncommitted

message."

Campaigning or not?: On January 14, 2008, the day prior to the Michigan primary, the Detroit News reported:

The Obama and Edwards campaigns are urging voters to opt for "uncommitted." ... Sen. Buzz Thomas, D-Detroit, co-chairman of the Obama campaign in

Michigan, said there is no organized effort to push the uncommitted vote here.

He said word of mouth and letters to the editor are the main methods of communication he's using to reach Obama supporters. He said he knows of no phone banks

set up to coax uncommitted voters to the polls in the last two days.

This raises the question of whether or not Sen. Obama was actually running a political campaign in Michigan through surrogates pressing for an "uncommitted"

vote, particularly when it is clear that, contrary to what Michigan Sen. Thomas stated, there was an "organized effort to push the uncommitted vote" in Michigan.

It also raises the question as to whether those who were voting "uncommitted" understood that they were being used as pawns in a political game that skirted on the

edge of FEC rules on what constitutes electioneering.

These questions appear to not have been raised. They certainly have not been answered.

<<<SNIP>>>>>

The campaigns of Sen. Barack Obama and former senator John Edwards are urging their supporters to cast ballots for "uncommitted," according to state Democratic

party chairman Mark Brewer. The Obama campaign says there may be "grass-roots efforts," but that the Chicago-based campaign is not involved.

In an effort to signal that Clinton cannot stroll away with the state's delegates, even in a largely uncontested race, Michigan Rep. John Conyers and his wife, Detroit

city council member Monica Conyers, taped a radio advertisement Wednesday afternoon. In it, they called on Obama backers not to surrender their vote.

They say on the radio spot that they intend to vote "uncommitted" and give Obama a chance to compete for those delegates in Denver.

An "uncommitted" vote would take the place of a write-in, which is not permitted.

http://bp2.blogger.com/_Sit4XCRo-rw/SDmhYWBqoeI/AAAAAAAABNM/qnywsQCamw4/s320/vote+uncommitted+Michigan.jpg

"People are already frustrated here in Detroit because they can't cast a ballot for Obama. Many on their absentee ballots many have tried to write in Obama, but they

have spoiled the ballots," said Sam Riddle, Monica Conyers's chief of staff. "We know we've got to educate the voters in a hurry." ((((He means "Campaign"

BUT THE "UN-Campaign KIND" The "Get Out The UN -VOTE KIND"...The "Get Out The UN-COMMITTED-VOTE-IS-A-VOTE- FOR-OBAMA -KIND"...TheThe MR.UN-

COMMITTED -UN-CALLED OUT CHEATER KIND"....))))
Ah, the authoritative MSM has spoken again and the Obamites howl at the moon. Did Grand Pooba Timmah say it was over again, too?

Odd how Obamites want insider SDs to vote now as the deciding factor ahead of real voters in the remaining states.

Lessee, after KY what will it be? Losses in 7 of the last ten races? How embarrassing for the presumptive nominee!

If a year ago anyone had said the the Dems would nominate the candidate that lost PA, Ohio, and FL, not to mention NY, CA, and NH, they would have been laughed

out of the room.

They still may be in the fa

That Florida delegates should be seated without compromise goes without saying. Both candidates had their name on ballot, barack Obama even broke his pledge

and aired ads through MSNBC in Florida and he still lost...overwhelmingly.

As for Michigan much has been made about how Obama took his name off the ballot in a gesture of fairness. But did he really? Today we have this being reported:

ll.

Sam Stein

But there is another facet to the story that -- while it doesn't change the basic facts -- adds a ripple to the debate surrounding who is to blame for Michigan's

quandary.

Obama never actually put his name on the ballot.

He didn't submit paper work or gather signatures so that he could compete. Rather his name, in addition to those of his primary opponents, was submitted by

Michigan's Democratic Party in accordance with state law.

"This was a standard procedure," said an official with the state's Democratic Party, "all the Democratic nominees that had declared for the race were put on the ballot

after we sent their names to the Secretary of State."

Ultimately, Obama chose to remove his name just prior to the deadline to do so. And his decision, political observers say, was likely driven by a desire to appeal to

Iowa voters (who were angered that Michigan had moved its primary up in the calendar) as well as the conclusion that he simply could not beat Clinton.

But the argument over what role he played in undermining the Michigan primary -- and whether or not his motives were purely political self-interest or respect for the

DNC -- is muddled by the fact that it wasn't technically his choice to participate in the first place.

So let's get this straight Obama did not even try to get on the ballot that he now claims he withdrew from.

Alright, to proceed further, after winning Iowa and then leading in polls in New Hampshire, Obama tried to block a Clinton win in Michigan. Again he broke the pledge

and campaigned through surrogates:

300x250
Detroit News

Blanchard said Obama and Edwards could have copied Clinton by leaving their names on the ballot, and that their unhappiness should be directed at the national

party for failing to recognize the Michigan primary.

Supporters of Obama and Edwards urged voters to vote "uncommitted."

If 15 percent of the vote in a congressional district is uncommitted, its delegates will be free to represent any candidate.

Bernard Parker, a Wayne County commissioner who supports Obama, said he was disappointed with Clinton for keeping her name on the ballot.

"I think she took advantage of the situation," he said. "If she hadn't done that, we would have had a different situation. Either all the candidates' names would be on

the ballot or none would."

Last week, Rep. John Conyers Jr., a Detroit Democrat who supports Obama, began running radio commercials imploring party members to vote uncommitted.

A newly formed group, Detroiters for Uncommitted Voters, which also supports Obama, has campaigned door to door and on the phone asking people not to commit

to any of the candidates listed on the ballot.

So Obama did not try to get on ballot, took his name off to pander to Iowa and NH and also because he felt he could not win against Clinton, then when he fancied

his chances he campaigned through his surrogates and still lost.

Now that people in Michigan are outraged by his political hypocrisy and when the Clinton campaign and MI delegates clamored to have their voices heard at the

convention what did he do? He blocked the re-vote in Michigan:

TO: Interested Parties

FROM: Robert F. Bauer

RE: Michigan Primary

DA: March 19, 2008

In the short time available, I have reviewed the proposed legislation to establish the June 3, 2008 primary, considering primarily those issues that bear on the central

question of whether this election can be conducted successfully without undue risk of legal challenges, including those challenges arising out of errors or other

breakdown induced by the schedule the State has proposed.

No one disputes that the election will have to be hurriedly prepared; and it is further accepted that it is, in material respects, unprecedented in conception and

proposed structure. Michigan will be, for example, the first to state to have re-run an election in circumstances like these, to redress violations of party rules, and it will

be the first to do so with the state supplying the legislative and administrative support but with private parties underwriting the costs with "soft money". Whether the

state can achieve its goals here depends on the nature and seriousness of the legal and administrative questions presented by this initiativeâ€"questions that, raised

after the election, could put at risk the running of the election, undermine acceptance of the results if the election is held, and in both cases effectively deny Michigan

voters, a second consecutive time, meaningful participation in the nominating process.

For the reasons discussed briefly below, there are such questions and they are serious both in nature and in their potential, if not likely, impact on the June election.

. . . proposal.

And if that is not enough he then wanted a 50-50 split!!

David Plouffe's statement:

"Senator Obama firmly believes that the Michigan delegation should be seated in Denver. A 50/50 split of the delegates is an eminently fair solution, especially since

originally Senator Clinton herself said the Michigan primary wouldn't 'count for anything.' It's now up to the Clinton campaign: they can agree to a fair resolution or they

can continue trying to score political points and change the rules. It's time to move forward. Senator Clinton should accept an equitable solution that allows Michigan

to participate fully in the convention."
snip>
Talk about the gall, the cynical audacity. Here we have a man who first did not put his name on ballot and then he withdrew because he wanted to pander to Iowa

and NH voters and also he did not fancy his chances against Sen. Clinton. Then when he did well in IA he decided to campaign through surrogates and lost. Now he

wants 50-50 split. That is vote stealing. That is the politics of the worst kind. Some people think he should get all the uncommitted delegates. After today's

revelation awarding him a single delegate will be a travesty. You cannot get what you did not want in the first place. I think awarding some Michigan delegates to

Obama will be a magnanimous act at the best. In any case Obama's case for denying the MI delegates their rights and the MI voters their voices is

disenfranchisement pure and simple. He did not want their votes from the very beginning and to say or behave otherwise now is cynical and malicious.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/23/20153/1235

This is WHY Hillary Clinton WILL take us all the way to the Convention in Dever, to finally release ALL the lil' UNFORTUNATE Unknownz...Unfortunate, to Obama that is! NO wonder THAT "Titalwave " of SD's have simply...?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlATFrHhMQc

Let's see if we could try and discuss this civilly... and leave the childlike insults ("ADULT" for that matter. ) in your ...well, just not here. :)