Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Heading to Detroit to Press Delegate Issue

Updated 11:09 p.m.
By Anne E. Kornblut
LANCASTER, Pa., Mar. 18 -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is making a hastily arranged trip to Detroit on Wednesday morning, her advisers announced tonight, as part of an increasing push by the campaign to force Democrats to either seat Michigan's delegates or hold a revote.

"She will press the case that every vote has to count," Clinton spokesman Mo Elleithee said. It was not immediately clear who her audience would be, only that it would be orchestrated to bring attention to the standoff over how to handle the state's delegates to the Democratic national convention.

Clinton was the only Democrat not to take her name off the ballot after the state defied national party rules and moved up the date of its primary. Discussions are underway in the Michigan legislature over whether to hold another primary with private funds. Clinton won 55 percent of the vote; "Undecided" "Uncommitted" came in second place with 44 percent.

The 9 10 a.m. appearance in Detroit, sure to draw more attention than her scheduled stops in West Virginia, will come on the same day that the National Archives is releasing 11,000 pages of documents from Clinton's time as first lady.

By Post Editor  |  March 18, 2008; 8:18 PM ET
Categories:  Hillary Rodham Clinton  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: John Murtha Endorses Hillary Clinton
Next: McCain Mobbed by Crowds at Western Wall

Comments

I think it's only right to reinstate Michigan and Florida. These states are part of the USA also. It was not right the way our states were treated. What happened to Freedom Of Speech? My concern is each states should be treated equal. By Michigan and Florida being penilized disgraced our citizens which was uncalled for especially in the time of crisis. I hope theres a resolution soon. May no other state go through this. Next time Lets ALL vote on Super Tuesday! That way every state has a chance to vote for all candidates on the List. It's only right for states who vote later to have equal opportunity to vote on ALL candidates on the list.

Posted by: angelpoo12 | March 19, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Clinton needs to give it up, for the good of the nation. Agreeing to the rules and then breaking them has a name: cheating. She cannot bring new voters to the polls, and she cannot keep the new voters Sen. Obama has brought into the process.

Posted by: chouteau | March 19, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

I THINK IT IS FUNNY, AFTER MAKING THAT BIG SPEECH ABOUT RACSISUM, AND MAN VERSES WOMEN ALL OF YOU HILLARY HATERS CAN BACH HER BUT CANNOT TAKE A STAND ON HIS RACIAL ACTS? I WOULD BE FAIR FOR BOTH OF THEM TO HAVE THES VOTES RETAKEN, AFTER ALL IT WAS NOT HILLARY'S FAULT, IT WAS THE BIG WIGS ON THE DNC! AND GUESS WHAT, AS OBAMAS PREACHER SAID "THE CHICKENS WILL COME HOME TO ROOST! IF OBAMA WOULD NOT WIN THE ELECTION, WHICH IT COULD HAPPEN, THEN HOW WOULD YOU FEEL! WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER. I HOPE THAT OBAMA SAID A PRAYER TO WHOMEVER HE PRAYS TO NOW, GOD I HOPE THAT THESE TRIALS AND TRIULATION DON'T COME OME TO HAUNT HIM> HE SAYS ONE THING AND DOES ANOTHER, THAT IS WHEN HILLARY IS INVOLVED! AND YOU PEOPLE THINK HE IS NOT A RACSIST? OPEN YOUR EYES AND MAY "MY AMERICA" ALWAYS BE MY FIRST NATION UNDER GOD!!!!!!! I LOVE AMERICA I DON'T HAVE TO WAIT TILL MY ADULTHOOD, IT HAS ALWASYS BEEN THERE FOR ME

Posted by: JBRACALE | March 19, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

I THINK IT IS FUNNY, AFTER MAKING THAT BIG SPEECH ABOUT RACSISUM, AND MAN VERSES WOMEN ALL OF YOU HILLARY HATERS CAN BACH HER BUT CANNOT TAKE A STAND ON HIS RACIAL ACTS? I WOULD BE FAIR FOR BOTH OF THEM TO HAVE THES VOTES RETAKEN, AFTER ALL IT WAS NOT HILLARY'S FAULT, IT WAS THE BIG WIGS ON THE DNC! AND GUESS WHAT, AS OBAMAS PREACHER SAID "THE CHICKENS WILL COME HOME TO ROOST! IF OBAMA WOULD NOT WIN THE ELECTION, WHICH IT COULD HAPPEN, THEN HOW WOULD YOU FEEL! WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER. I HOPE THAT OBAMA SAID A PRAYER TO WHOMEVER HE PRAYS TO NOW, GOD I HOPE THAT THESE TRIALS AND TRIULATION DON'T COME OME TO HAUNT HIM> HE SAYS ONE THING AND DOES ANOTHER, THAT IS WHEN HILLARY IS INVOLVED! AND YOU PEOPLE THINK HE IS NOT A RACSIST? OPEN YOUR EYES AND MAY "MY AMERICA" ALWAYS BE MY FIRST NATION UNDER GOD!!!!!!! I LOVE AMERICA I DON'T HAVE TO WAIT TILL MY ADULTHOOD, IT HAS ALWASYS BEEN THERE FOR ME

Posted by: JBRACALE | March 19, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Several things: How is it that a Washington Post Reporter has NOT fact-checked her story?? THat is appalling.

The Pledge said NOTHING about not counting the delegates. Perhaps those who think it does should actually READ it.

Obama's campaign TOLD its supporters to vote "Undecided" - that was their gambit. It was a strategy he employed, and at which he FAILED. Clinton won MI, by a pretty good bit. Even with the Obama Campaign pushing against her. Don't kid yourselves that there wasn's some activity going on there by his camp. It has been WELL documented.

And, Obama campaigned in FL - he still lost, by a LOT.

Clinton has not just NOW wanted to enfranchise 2.2 million voters - she has for a while now. Maybe MORE people than just this reporter need to FACT CHECK before attacking Clinton. Just a thought.

Posted by: AJSamonds | March 19, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

It is Obama's prerogative to agree to let MI and FL votes be counted. However, if he doesn't, it runs contrary to his self-professed mantra of change and inclusion. If he doesn't, he is putting himself ahead of the party. Doesn't make him hyporcrite because he is precisely doing what he accuses Clinton of doing... trying to win at all cost.

Posted by: CPCook | March 19, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

(sorry this is a repost on my part)
Those people that bought into the "it's Obama's fault" thing really blow my mind.

#1 it's the STATE's and SUPERDELEGATE's fault this all went down.

#2 EVERY OTHER nomineed BUT Hillary publicly opposed the DNC's decision to strip their right to vote by removing themselves from the balot.

#3 HRC only decided to care when there was NO OTHER way to possibly win the popular vote.

She doesn't care about Michigan, Florida, or any other state. She only cares about herself, her own glory, and her own legacy. Truly, she makes me sick to my stomach.

Obama's response has been as simple as I'll let them decide their own fate and this is perceived as Obama "digging his heels in" just because Hillary said so???

For all you HRC supporters that go on and on about how we Obama supporters are blindly strayed by words, consider the evidence supporting HRC's own.

It doesn't exist.

Posted by: jencm | March 19, 2008 7:27 AM | Report abuse

Clintons,
Your work described by Bill Clinton to Greta is awe inspiring and reminds me of the creative economics of which you both are truly capable.

The current work underway in New Orleans and other Global Initiative work is so impressive, especially gathering ideas from young techies and applying them to help green up America and provide efficient housing, energy and University experience for our youth.

It's awesome seeing the Clinton creative economics at work again and in action, demonstrating they really are all about solutions. He talked about the English Billionaire, what's-his-name? who started Virgin Air?, who has donated and made a commitment to develop alternative fuel for jets for which none has yet been found.

Every one indeed has amnesia if they don't remember these creative solutions the Clintons are capable of initiating, which actually produce really positive results!

Posted by: thinktank | March 19, 2008 2:59 AM | Report abuse

She is only doing what anyone else in her shows would be. If Hillary gets MI and FL, then she likely wins the nomination- it is that simple;

Pennsylvania Primary- Hillary vs. Barack:
The Google Factor...

http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=57

Posted by: davidmwe | March 19, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse

JEFFBOSTE writes

"""....The time to press this was BEFORE she signed the pledge to abide by the rules. This is typical Clintonian history rewriting.....
If there was a revote, she would not win 55-45, maybe 52-48 at most, and gain 6 to 9 delegates. So why not save all the money and time and just cut a deal. """
Factually, the latest polls show a dead draw or a slight advantage for OBAMA.

scouseyank SCOUSEYANK writes

"""Worth pointing out that two new Pennsylvania polls show Clinton leading by massive margins: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2008/03/clinton-leads-in-pennsylvania-as-obama.html"""

The suddenly appeared PPP pollster seems not reliable. But Anyway:
1) There is no doubt that after todays brillant discourse of OBAMA, the black vote
will go nearly totally to OBAMA

2) Possibly, Obama was not able to dispel
the vicious Jeremiah Wright attacks, which would cost him some white male votes between the less educated population

3)If Hillary win by 12%, it would be ~
98/87 pledged delegates. i.e. 11 more for her.
4)Even If Hillary win by 25%, it would be ~ 103/82 pledged delegates. i.e. 21 more for her. The situation with quantity of votes would be equivalent.

Being the todays advantage for OBAMA 160 pledged delegates, ALL ThIS IS IRRELEVANT

And of course, the superdelegates, party elected individuals, will be CAREFULL AS HELL NOT TO REVERSE the voters decision
(following HILLARY ADVISE NOT TO DISENFRANCHISE VOTERS, BUT HERE WITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION AS IT EXIST IN FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN)

But they also will worry what would happen to their lush positions if they nominate HILLARY, millions of OBAMA supporters will not vote her in November and McCAIN will laugh his way to the White House !!

Anyway: if the self-destructive campaign AND SMEAR continues until the convention, there is no way the DEMOs can win the Election.

Caminito


Posted by: caminito | March 19, 2008 1:36 AM | Report abuse

I hate to be rude (or crude) but the woman seems possessed! Clinton is the woman I mean. The time to make MI votes count was prior to the primary! I understand that she feels entitled to the presidency; what is most baffling is why voters do not see her machinations and manipulations for what they are. And on a sidebar I notice that no matter our position in Iraq in 2009, she will pull troops out. That is certainly an irrational position, much as I'd like them all home...and it sounds too much like Bush who makes up his mind and sticks with it no matter how the facts and reason may contradict him. Why would any voter want more of that!?!

Posted by: elizabethjarrard | March 19, 2008 1:31 AM | Report abuse

55% against no one?? She did worse in many states she won where she wasn't alone on the ballot! Forget it Hillary, it's not fair to claim you won when no one else played. The rules were clear at the beginning. Michigan delegates would not be seated. Give it up, it's a cynical ploy and everyone sees it as that, no matter how you want to spin it.

Posted by: thebobbob | March 19, 2008 12:35 AM | Report abuse

Fact check please.

Clinton was the not the only Democrat who didn't remove his or her name off the ballot after the state bumped the primary date.

Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich were also on the ballot. (Kucinich tried to remove himself but didn't get his request in on time. )

Hillary won 55% of the vote. Kucinich, Dodd and Gravel won 5% of the vote. 40% were uncommmitted. Results are here.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#MI

Posted by: JeralynMerritt | March 19, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse

I guess that every vote didn't need to count in the months in between the DNC stripping Florida and Michigan of their delegates and today. But now that its a tight race and Clinton won the state, I guess they should count?

Posted by: perryair | March 18, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Worth pointing out that two new Pennsylvania polls show Clinton leading by massive margins: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2008/03/clinton-leads-in-pennsylvania-as-obama.html

Posted by: campaigndiaries | March 18, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

"She will press the case that every vote has to count"
The time to press this was BEFORE she signed the pledge to abide by the rules. This is typical Clintonian history rewriting. Watch out, she may cry tomorrow for the voters SHE helped "disenfranchise".
If there was a revote, she would not win 55-45, maybe 52-48 at most, and gain 6 to 9 delegates. So why not save all the money and time and just cut a deal. But, as soon as any deal to seat "her" delegates is close someone who wanted to vote for Obama will file a suit that they could not because he was not on the ballot.
DNC and the candidates brought this on themselves by not wanting to offend New Hampshire, now they just have to live with it.

Posted by: scouseyank | March 18, 2008 11:31 PM | Report abuse


In your opinion does Obama stand to lose more if he does not agree to a Michigan revote?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1898

.

Posted by: jeffboste | March 18, 2008 10:57 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company