WASHINGTON (AP) - The drive for a second Michigan presidential primary collapsed Thursday, and a fresh dispute broke out between Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton over the fate of the state's 156 national convention delegates.
Obama's campaign said a fair resolution would be to split them evenly with Clinton. Aides to the former first lady instantly rejected the idea and said they would consider a mail-in primary - even though Obama has raised concerns about the security of a vote by mail organized so quickly. ...
Hmmm. I wonder how "fair" Obama would think that idea would be if HE had won a majority of the votes in the primary, and thus a majority of the delegates. In other words, he wants to avoid having the Michigan dems get any more upset with him, by allowing the state's delegation to be "seated" at the convention...so long as half of them are his people, resulting in a wash in terms of the delegate count between him and Hillary. They can come, as long as they don't matter.
And what's this business with a Democrat worrying about ballot security?? Since when? Oh, since you don't want them to count. Hillary's supporters are none to happy...
Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who has endorsed Clinton, said in a statement that she was deeply disappointed the June 3 do-over was no longer a possibility.
"We will turn our attention to other options," she said. "There is no road to the White House that does not go through Michigan" ...
We'll see. Meanwhile, more "split the baby" rhetoric from Obama's folks...
Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, an Obama supporter and former presidential candidate, promoted the idea of evenly splitting the delegates between Obama and Clinton. "The best outcome is to come to an arrangement where the delegates are apportioned fairly between Senators Obama and Clinton, so the Michigan delegation can participate fully in the Denver convention," he said in a statement. ...
Again, "participate"...as long as they don't matter. Hillary's take?
"I do not see how two of our largest and most significant states can be disenfranchised and left out of the process of picking our nominee without raising serious questions about the legitimacy of that nominee," Clinton told reporters, referring to Michigan and Florida.
See, there are still some "let every vote count" Dems afterall.
So why not vote again? Just One Minute [6] nails it:
Is there any doubt why Obama is resisting the re-vote in Florida and Michigan? Try to picture him losing those two states as well as those listed above and then trying to persuade the superdelegates of his inevitability.
That being after they've already begun to have second thoughts in the wake of the Pastor Wright business. Get out the popcorn. This will be entertaining.
