Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • Tags
  • RSS Feed




  • RightMichigan.com

    Twitter Feed

    Is the joint primary dead? Mark Brewer and John Edwards sure hope so...


    By Nick, Section News
    Posted on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 07:29:41 AM EST
    Tags: (all tags)

    Just a quick note on the save-the-primary process...

    The Senate yesterday overwhelmingly approved an updated bill that would save the January 15 joint primary but there's a catch.  Without a procedural move granting the bill "immediate effect" it won't go into effect until March.  Kinda late, don't you think?

    The Dems all walked away from the immediate effect vote.  That way they can claim they voted for the joint primary, that they didn't WANT to disenfranchise millions of Michigan voters and that they aren't really in the pocket of Big Labor when in reality they are.  

    So what's the next step?  Well, the House could vote on similar legislation and send it over to the Senate which would give them another shot at it while a few Dem heavy hitters like Debbie Dingell try to round up support but Andy Dillon said he's not really thinking about doing that right now.  Too eager to get out deer hunting, I guess.

    The preferred electoral option for the Democrats is a closed caucus system that's run by the unions and will give John Edwards his only real shot at winning the state.  

    So what if millions of voters are disenfranchised, as long as you can cook the books, right?

    < Dillon's Dems pass new 33% tax hike and violate the Constitution for good measure | Friday in the Sphere: November 9 >


    Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit


    Display: Sort:
    So what does all this mean? (none / 0) (#1)
    by DMOnline on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 09:18:51 AM EST
    I thought the January 15 joint primary was a done deal.  Further, I thought their was a lock on at least the Republicans holding their primary on this date.  Has this changed?

    There was talk in an unrelated article by a different author speculating that the Michigan Republicans may hold a convention instead of a primary.

    Can you (or anyone else) shed some light on this?

    Thanks.

    DMOnline


    Some Republicans want a convention (none / 0) (#3)
    by Ed Burley on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 10:47:13 AM EST
    What if, God forbid, the voters here in Michigan chose someone who isn't the "party frontrunner"? What if Ron Paul should win the primary? A convention can effectively overturn that. That's what this is potentially coming to.

    Each state, according to the Constitution of the US, has within its legislative power the authorization to set the rules for electoral elections. This judge in Ingham county is a total and absolute idiot. It's unconstitutional for the major Parties to interfere with the legislative authority of each state, not the other way around.

    We should go ahead with the primary, and let the parties try to interfere with the results. That should be taken to the Supreme Court, and argued vehemently. This is similar to what happened in 2000. Ignorance aside (you know, the ignorant masses who think that what Florida courts did was legit), the decisions are to be made in the legislature - NOT THE COURTS or even the parties. The legislature ultimately elects the electors. That's why the Florida Legislature was correct in saying that, even if the Florida courts, who were using unconstitutional means to "elect" Gore, allowed the recounts to continue, they had the ultimate say as to who would get their 25 electoral votes.

    The Michigan legislature, in whom the power resides, has decided on an early primary. Everything else is prideful propaganda. Let's vote, and get it over with. Then we can stop arguing about who is running, and elect a president. If the Dems ignore the primary in Michigan, they do so legally at their own peril. The legislature in Michigan COULD vote to give all our electoral votes to a Republican, or even a Libertarian in the general election as payback.

    Here's what our Constitution says about ALL elections, in Article II: section 4;

    Sec. 4. The legislature shall enact laws to regulate the time, place and manner of all
    nominations and elections, except as otherwise provided in this constitution or in the constitution
    and laws of the United States.
    The legislature shall enact laws to preserve the purity of
    elections, to preserve the secrecy of the ballot, to guard against abuses of the elective franchise,
    and to provide for a system of voter registration and absentee voting. No law shall be enacted
    which permits a candidate in any partisan primary or partisan election to have a ballot
    designation except when required for identification of candidates for the same office who have
    the same or similar surnames.
    History: Const. 1963, Art. II, §4, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964.

    This is what the US Constitution says:

    The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

    The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

    The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

    The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

    Ratified: June 15th, 1804.

    • Ed... by Nick, 11/09/2007 10:50:45 AM EST (none / 0)
    Primary (none / 0) (#5)
    by Calhoun Kid on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 12:21:54 PM EST
    For once in my life I find myself supporting the Clinton camp on an issue and it's leaving me with a really dirty feeling.

    The facts (none / 0) (#8)
    by Conservative on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 04:03:24 PM EST
    People, if you think the GOP didn't have anything to do with this, just as much as the Dems, I challenge you to go read the bill that was reintroduced.

    In it you will find that the original issue that the Judge ruled unconstitutional was not even addressed. It was NOT EVEN ADDRESSED! No changes, nada. It was never the intention to change it, but to waste our time and money.

    The MIGOP already had a backup plan for holding a convention, and had changed party rules to exclude new delegates from joining the party. Thankfully, I am already a delegate, but if the whole point was to make this completely open, why all the changes? Why the changes BEFORE we knew about Dem candidates pulling out?

    Before you let our leaders tell you that "oh, it's just unfortunate... we tried." I challenge you to look at the facts.

    Good Grief (none / 0) (#9)
    by DMOnline on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 04:05:05 PM EST
    So all this time I've been working under the assumption we would be having a January 15 primary - period.  End of discussion.  Somehow I missed the news over the idiot judge turning our constitution on its head.

    So if the primary doesn't happen and a convention does - help me out here, this is an area of ignorance for me - it's at that convention that the state GOP party bosses will decide which Republican candidate win's our state's support?  Not the rank and file Republican primary voters?

    I'm going to be extremely P.O.'d if that's the case.

    Please continue to educate me on this.

    Thanks.

    DMOnline

    • DM online by Conservative, 11/09/2007 06:03:30 PM EST (none / 0)
    Here's What Sparked My Curiosity (none / 0) (#10)
    by DMOnline on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 04:12:49 PM EST
    When I read this quote attributed to Rudy Giuliani today as reported by Byron York, it obviously caught my attention:

    "...and we'll see what Michigan does, if Michigan has a primary or not. If Michigan doesn't have a primary, if it has a convention, then we probably wouldn't increase our schedule there."

    Not to put too fine a point on this but if the decision of who the Michigan Republicans will chose as its presidential nominee is decided by a handful of delegates, well, I'll just spit!

    DMOnline


    Display: Sort:

    Login

    Make a new account

    Username:
    Password:
    Join the RightMichigan.com Facebook Group HERE!
    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!

    Related Links

    + Also by Nick
    create account | faq | search