Despite my prediction Michigan Democrats would win their fight with the DNC over their move to a January primary, Howard Dean flexes his muscles and gets five candidates to withdraw their names. Marie Horrigan reports for Congressional Quarterly:
Five Democratic presidential candidates have withdrawn from Michigan's Jan. 15 presidential primary, the latest effort by the party's contenders to assist the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in its attempts to rein in the aggressive "front-loading" of the presidential nominating schedule by individual states.Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, the party's front-runner, is not among them -- though she says she stands with her rivals in opposing the early primary date, which violates a Feb. 5 threshold that the DNC set for nominating contests in 2008.
The withdrawal actions were taken by Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and Barack Obama of Illinois, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Ohio Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich in response to a state deadline of 4 p.m. EDT Tuesday for candidates to strike their names from a list of ballot-eligible presidential candidates submitted by state Democratic Party officials to the office of Michigan's secretary of state.
Read the rest at the link above. Chris Dodd, like Clinton, didn't formally withdraw but cited his pledge not to campaign in the state. It remains to be seen who will win this battle. If Michigan voters turn out in force and "write in" their candidates, the DNC will become irrelevant as I suggested in the first post (linked above). If they don't turn out well, it will be considered a win for the DNC - BUT if they don't reschedule it and votes are cast, I presume Hillary and Dodd will get the lion's share of delegates (and those for the eventual winner will be seated at the convention).
Kudos to Howard Dean for pulling it off, though.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2008 Presidential Race, Democrats, Michigan, Primaries
Tags: Democrat, DNC, Michigan, presidential campaign, primaries
Comments (7)
Are Pauliacs Deaniacs?<br /... (Below threshold)1. Posted by kim | October 10, 2007 9:11 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Are Pauliacs Deaniacs?
======================
1. Posted by kim | October 10, 2007 9:11 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 10, 2007 09:11
2. Posted by Lee Ward | October 10, 2007 9:51 AM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
The motive that Michigan and other states have for leapfrogging and moving the primaries earlier is to get a larger share of the campaign cash spent on primaries. The earlier primaries are more important because they help shape perceptions and create momentum in the primaries that follow, and a lot of campaign spending goes into those early races.
By dropping several candidates from the Democratic primary ballot and making the Michigan Democratic primary "no-contest" campaign spending in the state drops to nothing or very little. That's "the club" the DNC (and RNC) have to slow the leapfrogging, and the club is only effective if you're willing to use it -- and you have to use it in this instance or other states will just leapfrog Michigan and the cycle continues.
All of the Democratic candidates benefit, and now that the candidates have the cash they would have spent in Michigan available to deploy elsewhere, where that money will be spent instead is a very interesting question.
2. Posted by Lee Ward | October 10, 2007 9:51 AM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 10, 2007 09:51
3. Posted by kim | October 10, 2007 10:41 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The Celebrated Moonjumper from WizCalaveras County takes practice hops. Why are only frogs of a certain ilk allowed at WizBlue?
=====================
3. Posted by kim | October 10, 2007 10:41 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 10, 2007 10:41
4. Posted by kim | October 10, 2007 10:59 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Much more insidious and effective is to neutralize two states that are up for grabs, Florida and Michigan(?). The Dems don't have to batter each other in big, important, states. They're getting smart enough to go back to smoke-filled rooms.
Pauliacs are Deaniacs all hallowed out.
============================================
4. Posted by kim | October 10, 2007 10:59 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 10, 2007 10:59
5. Posted by Jim Addison | October 10, 2007 1:48 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Actually, Lee, the main reason states were/are rushing to the front is to have a greater say in choosing the respective nominees.
The bulk of campaign spending goes to media which, more often than not, is owned by out-of-state-based corporations.
5. Posted by Jim Addison | October 10, 2007 1:48 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 10, 2007 13:48
6. Posted by Lee Ward | October 10, 2007 4:30 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Not true, Jim. Local radio and TV stations, newspapers -- they all benefit from big-time. And the campaigns themselves spend buckets of money.
6. Posted by Lee Ward | October 10, 2007 4:30 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 10, 2007 16:30
7. Posted by kim | October 11, 2007 7:49 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
I'm banned at WizBlue.
=======================
7. Posted by kim | October 11, 2007 7:49 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 11, 2007 07:49