Michigan primaries

[JMO]

I haven't seen this talked about lately. here is the latest that i have seen. if anyone has any information that would be great. this is a travesty to the election process if the peoples voice is not heard.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071116/NEWS06/711160413/1008

Court hears appeal over Michigan primary election

November 16, 2007

BY DAWSON BELL

FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

A three-judge panel of the Michigan Court of Appeals expressed skepticism about the legal standing of Michigan's imperiled Jan. 15 presidential primary at a hearing Thursday afternoon. But the judges also indicated they need more time to decide whether to overturn a lower court decision to block it.

The judges closely questioned lawyers representing Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, the state's chief elections officer, about the justification for restricting access to voter lists generated by the election to the Democratic and Republican parties, a practice the Ingham County Circuit Court found to be unconstitutional.

Advertisement
click here
Lawyers defending the primary law said the Legislature could restrict access if that was deemed necessary to make the election possible and secure the participation of several million voters who would not participate if the two parties used a caucus or convention nominating process.

The appellate trio -- Chief Judge William Whitbeck and Judges Patrick Meter and Donald Owens -- also pressed state lawyers, who had requested a decision by today, for a few more days to consider the case.

Elections officials said they need a decision as soon as possible so that absentee ballots can be ready for distribution 45 days before the election as required by law.

The lawsuit was filed by East Lansing political consultant Mark Grebner and a group of citizens and activists that included former Free Press political columnist Hugh McDiarmid.

After Thursday's hearing, Grebner said the plaintiffs have no objection to the primary, only to the method for handling the voter lists that was devised by party leadership and muscled through the Legislature.

"If some method can be devised which allows the primary to proceed, while rejecting the idea of election records as property of the two major parties, the plaintiffs would be very happy," he said.

[pcosmar]

We are waiting to see how it will go.
It could be done already if it was not for the political (Democrat) games.
I hope we will have the opportunity to vote.
We are all watching and waiting.

[M.Bellmore]

How's "we're screwed" sound? :mad:

Hm. Dems raise taxes, drive out businesses. Dems block primary. Bad day for MI.



BREAKING: Court of Appeals says NO to primary

By Nick, Section News
Posted on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 06:09:34 PM EST

The Court of Appeals literally just issued their decision on the MRP and MDP appeals to protect the January 15th joint primary. Unfortunately, they said NO.
Details are just starting to emerge. Looks like it was a 2-1 vote with Chief Justice William Whitbeck the dissenting voice.

So where does this leave us? Not in a good place. Absentee ballots have to be in the mail by December 1st. If they're going to go out they have to be printed. What we're looking at is an unofficial Tuesday deadline for the legislature to come up with a fix.

The Senate already acted but the Senate Dems blocked the measure, effectively killing it. That means the House Democrats hold all the cards. If they want a primary they can make it happen Tuesday. If they want to disenfranchise millions of Michigan voters they can refuse to act.

I'm not holding my breath.

If they fail to act then the Dems will caucus and the GOP will go to a convention in late January. National attention will wane significantly and Michigan suddenly loses it's last bit of national clout. Nice, huh?

So, Andy, what are you going to do?

[JMO]

How's "we're screwed" sound? :mad:

Hm. Dems raise taxes, drive out businesses. Dems block primary. Bad day for MI.

Michigan voters need to flood the office with calls saying this is not acceptable.

[pcosmar]

From Saul's Site.

http://migop.blogs.com/blog/2007/11/mi-court-of-app.html


MI Court of Appeals reviews Presidential Primary

The fate of the January 15 presidential primary will be decided by the courts, not by the estimated 2.5 million Michigan voters who would participate in this election, and not by their elected representatives, the Legislature. The Ingham County Circuit Court questioned the validity of keeping private which Party's primary each voter participated, and turning over this list only to the Democrat and Republican Parties. So because of a list that could be purchased from the Secretary of State for less than $100, 2.5 million Michigan voters could be deprived of an election if the Ingham County Circuit Court ruling is not reversed or modified.

How is it that a list that does not even exist yet can possibly be the basis to prevent an election? Using a legal term called "ripeness", are not we putting the cart before the horse here? Is this not like two children fighting over dear Dad's Estate when Dad is still alive? According to the United States Supreme Court, a claim lacks "ripeness", and there is no justiciable controversy, where “the harm asserted has [not] matured sufficiently to warrant judicial intervention ....” This list does not exist until after the January 15, 2008 election, so how is this case "ripe" for review by the courts? Why not have the election and then determine the fate of this list? At least then, 2.5 million Michigan voters could participate in an election.

As the Michigan Republican Party pointed out in its pleadings filed in this case, a presidential primary has never been enjoined in the history of the State of Michigan.

Because of the devastating consequences of eliminating the presidential primary and the undisputed harm to the public interest that this action could cause, perhaps an intermediate step that the courts could take would be to put this list issue "on hold" until after the January 15 election. Remember, only if the new presidential primary law is found to be invalid will the primary be eliminated. Putting the issue on hold to analyze this in more detail or to give the Legislature more time to provide a legislative fix, is a sensible alternative to depriving Michigan voters from participating in an election.

Posted by sanuzis on November 16, 2007

[freelance]

State by state, they're going to disenfranchise people!

[westmich4paul]

This could be really sad for all of us that have spent tireless hours in Michigan canvassing, rallying, and promoting Dr.Paul to the general public. The issue is not dead yet and we as grassroots supporters will not give up spreading the word. The biggest issue right now is the time factor. They need to rule on this quickly because the longer it takes the chances get slimmer for Jan 15th primary.

I urge all Ron supporters in Michigan to become delegates. It is as easy as getting ahold of your local meetup group and they will guide you through it. Although I am new to this and I am not sure if is too late now or what to participate as a delegate in the convention if it should come to that. They have talked about a Feb primary and at the county GOP meeting when Saul was there trying to explain all of this he said they would support a primary for either date but then like two days later he said if Jan was done in a primary was done because Republican would move to convention. I am not sure why the sudden turn around in stance but this is the reality of it.

For those in other states let Michigan be a rally cry to step it up a notch and really give it a big push in their states before their Primary's to help Ron if the Michigan convention ends up hurting him.

[Thomas Paine]

What's ironic is that the Democrats decried the U.S. Supreme Court's purported disenfranchisement of millions of voters in 2000 when it ruled in favor of President Bush in Bush v. Gore but today the Democrats certainly don't have a problem using the courts to disenfranchise millions of voters in Michigan from having a say in who the nominees will be for both major parties.

[pcosmar]

Bump, as a warning to others.

[westmich4paul]

Ok here is the lastest news on this. Appeals court voted to uphold lower courts decision to cancel the Jan 15th Primary. They could take it to the Supreme court but as it stands now there just isn't enough time. So it looks like Michigan goes to a convention. Unless some kind of miracle takes place.

[MsDoodahs]

State by state, they're going to disenfranchise people!

Yep.

[Naraku]

I suggest Michigan meetups flood the phones of any of their state officials to get legislation on this NOW! As an open primary Ron Paul stands a very good chance of winning, in a convention, he may not stand a chance.

[pcosmar]

I have sent E-mails. Many others have also. This is in the hands of the judges.
This is DIRTY politics. They (Democrates and Republicans) don't want our voice.
Period. !

[MsDoodahs]

Is there any other kind of politics in this country anymore?

[walt]

We are waiting to see how it will go.
It could be done already if it was not for the political (Democrat) games.
I hope we will have the opportunity to vote.
We are all watching and waiting.

How do you know that guy that tried to ban ron paul from the debates isn't behind this? You don't.

There is one party the Money party and it has two different divisions.

[MsDoodahs]

How do you know that guy that tried to ban ron paul from the debates isn't behind this? You don't.

There is one party the Money party and it has two different divisions.

Azuni's revenge?

[pcosmar]

How do you know that guy that tried to ban ron paul from the debates isn't behind this? You don't.

There is one party the Money party and it has two different divisions.

Your right, I don't. My local GOP chair is openly and rabidly Anti-Paul.
The Dems. are not even campaigning in Michigan, They have anointed Hillery and don't care.
The GOP as a whole has not been helpful. They have been in oposition from the beginning.

[MsDoodahs]

My local GOP chair is openly and rabidly Anti-Paul.


Same here.

[pcosmar]

Same here.

And yet we get a dozen threads telling us we have to group smooch the GOPs ass. :mad:

[paulitics]

This is BS.

[Badger Paul]

Thanks to all the Ron Paul supporters in Michigan for all the hard work they've done. Its not your fault you elected leaders acted like jack-asses. They're all to blame is you ask me. Do the best you can with the convention system. Hopefully it will come in late January and by then RP will have so much momentum the delegates will vote to jump on the winning bandwangon, our.

Good luck Michiganders, Godspeed!

[amakris]

This is not good news.

Good night.

[Bradley in DC]

Michigan voters need to flood the office with calls saying this is not acceptable.

Flood the office of the courts? :rolleyes:

[Bradley in DC]

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Court+rejects+Michigan+prima ry+law%3b+NH+still+waits&articleId=b9bb9d6e-99fc-41a1-bf45-b48eadc5ece9

[pcosmar]

This was in my E-mail,


Re: [ronpaul-1167] Court rejects early Michigan primary‏
From: ronpaul-1167@meetup.com on behalf of Pete Mackin (xxxxxxxxxxxxxxcom)
Sent: Fri 11/16/07 8:47 PM
Reply-to: ronpaul-1167@meetup.com
To: ronpaul-1167@meetup.com
Adam,

I've been on the phone and net all day. After I contacted our Sec. of State and A.G. about rule changes at the state Republican caucus level - which will essentially lose the race for Ron Paul - I was told that "if you continue to push this, it will have ramifications for any future bids you may have for office."

First they ridicule you...

Pete

A fair assesment of our political climate.

[JohnCrabtree]

This is a sad day. I have spent hundreds of hours passing out slim jims at events and door to door,making signs, putting up signs, and just the other day I put up 25 nice official RP signs. I don't regret any of this time, but this state needs a revolution.

I am not going to say that it is a conspiracy to steal the vote from Ron Paul, I believe it to be true arrogance and bullheadedness of this michigan legislature and court. I warned the people in a letter to the editor NOT to let our primary be moved up to the 15th. Those in power KNEW that this would cause us to loose half our GOP votes and ALL of our Democrat votes at the convention; they passed it any ways.

Now because we have ALREADY been dienfranchised, they don't want to spend the money on a primary, and so will hold a caucus instead.

But I will not give up and I hope others will not either. I will continue to spread the word about Ron Paul and maybe, just maybe, the delegates who do get to vote will vote for Ron Paul,



-John Crabtree Michigan Congressional District #6

[pcosmar]

I am not going to say that it is a conspiracy to steal the vote from Ron Paul, I believe it to be true arrogance and bullheadedness of this michigan legislature and court. I warned the people in a letter to the editor NOT to let our primary be moved up to the 15th. Those in power KNEW that this would cause us to loose half our GOP votes and ALL of our Democrat votes at the convention; they passed it any ways.

I am not saying it is a "conspiracy"either.
This is an organized and transparent effort.

[pcosmar]

I am just one of many.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/226/524049696_5ad0f15010.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1227/710880456_3b813c3ed2.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1062/1422386259_f252866bfe.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2137/1936999620_69d0d42d6d.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2026/1936163197_8d6d8bc44a.jpg

To say I am angry with the recent events is an understatement.
Getting Dr.Ron Paul elected has given me some hope for this country and for my future.
To be denied the opportunity to vote here is quite disheartening.
I only hope that this can be salvaged somehow.

[westmich4paul]

I suggest Michigan meetups flood the phones of any of their state officials to get legislation on this NOW! As an open primary Ron Paul stands a very good chance of winning, in a convention, he may not stand a chance.

This has been being done all week.

[susano]

Could you guys give me a simple version of what hapened? A time line. Was it the Dems who moved up the primary date? Spell it out for me.

[pcosmar]

There is no simple answer.
The timeline was moved up earlier this year. Well before the Mackinac Conference, but I'm not sure offhand the exact date. It has been known for quite some time.
The Democrat Party is boycotting Michigan and none are campaigning here.
The Republican party has been at odds with them over Taxes. They want to spend more and raise taxes. They did raise our taxes this year but not enough to suit them. We have a record High Budget and the highest unemployment in the nation.
The Primary is a small problem that could be corrected with the stroke of a pen.
It is being held up by a power struggle. The Dems. are in power here.
We are screwed.

[pcosmar]

You can add this to the problem. The GOP Chair is Saul Anusis and he was the one that wanted to keep Ron Paul out of the Debates.
I don't know if he has anything to do with this, but in my eyes the GOP is suspect.
I was at the Mackinac Conference and saw the reaction there.
The whole thing stinks.

[susano]

So, it was the Dems who moved up the primary date, or was it the GOP and Anuzis? I recall when they did it, but not who or the reason given.

I'm not clear on this voter list at issue.

Dems are also not campaigning in Florida. If I were a Democrat, I wouldn't be happy, either.

Is it possible to bring a lawsuit and force a primary?

[susano]

You can add this to the problem. The GOP Chair is Saul Anusis and he was the one that wanted to keep Ron Paul out of the Debates.
I don't know if he has anything to do with this, but in my eyes the GOP is suspect.
I was at the Mackinac Conference and saw the reaction there.
The whole thing stinks.


What reaction to what did you witness at the conference?

[pcosmar]

What reaction to what did you witness at the conference?

Shock and Awe at Ron Paul's support. And at the same time denial of Ron Paul's support.
He upset their apple cart.

[susano]

If we can sue over paper ballots, why can't we sue to force a primary?

Could the Dems (for instance) just caucus, and the Republicans hold a primary?

[RobS]

I am so fkin angry right now... I have been spending hours upon hours campaigning in west michigan for Ron and now every bit of that is for naught.

How can this be legal? I can't vote for the candidate I want for President? I'm about ready to cry...

[pcosmar]

If we can sue over paper ballots, why can't we sue to force a primary?

Could the Dems (for instance) just caucus, and the Republicans hold a primary?

Reposted from the first page,

MI Court of Appeals reviews Presidential Primary

The fate of the January 15 presidential primary will be decided by the courts, not by the estimated 2.5 million Michigan voters who would participate in this election, and not by their elected representatives, the Legislature. The Ingham County Circuit Court questioned the validity of keeping private which Party's primary each voter participated, and turning over this list only to the Democrat and Republican Parties. So because of a list that could be purchased from the Secretary of State for less than $100, 2.5 million Michigan voters could be deprived of an election if the Ingham County Circuit Court ruling is not reversed or modified.

How is it that a list that does not even exist yet can possibly be the basis to prevent an election? Using a legal term called "ripeness", are not we putting the cart before the horse here? Is this not like two children fighting over dear Dad's Estate when Dad is still alive? According to the United States Supreme Court, a claim lacks "ripeness", and there is no justiciable controversy, where “the harm asserted has [not] matured sufficiently to warrant judicial intervention ....” This list does not exist until after the January 15, 2008 election, so how is this case "ripe" for review by the courts? Why not have the election and then determine the fate of this list? At least then, 2.5 million Michigan voters could participate in an election.

As the Michigan Republican Party pointed out in its pleadings filed in this case, a presidential primary has never been enjoined in the history of the State of Michigan.

Because of the devastating consequences of eliminating the presidential primary and the undisputed harm to the public interest that this action could cause, perhaps an intermediate step that the courts could take would be to put this list issue "on hold" until after the January 15 election. Remember, only if the new presidential primary law is found to be invalid will the primary be eliminated. Putting the issue on hold to analyze this in more detail or to give the Legislature more time to provide a legislative fix, is a sensible alternative to depriving Michigan voters from participating in an election.

Posted by sanuzis on November 16, 2007

[FreedomLover]

I really, really doubt ron paul would be one of the reasons to cancel the michigan primary

[pcosmar]

I really, really doubt ron paul would be one of the reasons to cancel the michigan primary

Why? :confused:

[MsDoodahs]

How will MI delegates be chosen?

By the GOP machine?

[FreedomLover]

Why? :confused:

Because this issue goes back to 2000, and it was the democrats that were responsible for getting the primary cancelled.

[M.Bellmore]

Michigan is just a microcosm of the federal problem:

1. Excess spending
2. 2 party iron grip control

Unfortunately as stated before, MI has the worst economy of any state right now.

[susano]

I'm not a party insider and don't know how this stuff works. Help me out.

A) Was it the Democrats who moved up the primary date?

B) Remember, only if the new presidential primary law is found to be invalid will the primary be eliminated.

What is the new law? Does it say that the voter list is available to the two parties, exclusively?

C) Does anyone know if the vaoter list was (in the past) available to anyone besides the two parties?

D) The ripeness issue: These lists have always existed and have been used by campaigns. The coming list is the same thing as the past lists. Not sure if the coming list is a separate issue, or not.

E) Could party members (of either or both) sue to force a primary?

[pcosmar]

Because this issue goes back to 2000, and it was the democrats that were responsible for getting the primary cancelled.

That may well be too. Most of the GOP machine up her is pushing Mitt and Rudy, but everyone (90%) that I talk to don't care for them. They are not Conservative and folks know it. They like Ron Paul as soon as he is presented.
Ron Paul would win Michigan by a landslide, and have a good chance of beating Hillery.
The GOP is actively anti-Paul.

[susano]

Because this issue goes back to 2000, and it was the democrats that were responsible for getting the primary cancelled.

Are you saying that the Democrats were responsible for inserting the public access restriction to the voter list, in order to create this outcome of a cancelled primary?

[susano]

Jeez, this is important and it's not getting much action. I'm really angry about this. What can we do about it?

[M.Bellmore]

The Michigan GOP is still fighting it. Won't know anything until next week. I would hope our RP coordinator would be all over this, but there has been silence.

[susano]

If the issue is over the damn list, then the people should sue the parties to make the list public. This is bullshit.

[susano]

Here's the site of the guy who set this in motion: http://www.grebner.com/

[susano]

Some stuff I pulled up:

According to sources inside both parties, the two state parties in Michigan have agreed to move the state's primary -- legislatively -- to Jan. 15. This is a compromise date out of respect for Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, who really wanted to move the primary to Jan. 8. Others wanted the primary on Jan. 22 as a way to, essentially, play ball with the other early states. There was a nice window being created for a Jan. 22, 2008 event. But by moving to Jan. 15, this will put pressure on the other early states to either entertain a December event or lobby the two national parties to not sanction Michigan at all.

The state senate is going to move a bill next week and it will be legislatively driven; the state will pay for the primary, not the two parties.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/08/17/321548.aspx

***If the state is paying for the primaries, then this is an issue beyond the parties, isn't it? Wouldn't the taxpayers of Michigan have a legitimate say so in when the primary is held? Why couldn't there be a lawsuit over this?


Michigan Makes Primary Move Official
The calendar chaos continued today, with Michigan's governor, Jennifer Granholm, signing the legislation to officially move her state's primary to Jan. 15.

In a statement, Granholm said the early primary will "lead to greater emphasis on issues that matter to all Americans." It will also no doubt bring a greater emphasis on Michigan, which is exactly what she wanted.

But the ramifications are likely to be huge: Michigan is now officially a week before the New Hampshire primary -- a fact that the Granite state officials cannot, by law, abide. Their primary will soon be moved.


That will force Iowa to move, though just how early the caucuses will be is uncertain. The betting right now is that Gov. Chet Culver will hold the caucuses sometime in the first week of January.

The leading Democratic candidates have all pledged to ignore Michigan, Florida and the other states who have scheduled votes before Feb. 5, in violation of the party's rules. They did so under threat from the party of losing any delegates they would win in a violating state.

But Republican candidates have no such rules to violate, and several have indicated they plan to campaign vigorously in those states. Former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani, for example, has promised to campaign heavily in Florida for its Jan. 29 primary.

Today is technically the Republican National Committee's deadline for states to inform the party of their voting schedule. Any state voting earlier than Feb. 5 -- including New Hampshire and Iowa -- will lose 50 percent of their delegates to the party's 2008 convention. It's a penalty the early states seem more than willing to accept. "If a state chooses to go outside the window, they are automatically penalized," said one RNC official. "It's not a may, it's a shall."

But in both parties, there's a belief that whatever penalties are meted out will be voided when the conventions gather next summer. The hope is that party leaders will want unity, not division, going into the general election.

"The will of the convention in our system is paramount," the RNC official conceded. "We are a creature of the convention of the grass roots of this nation."


http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/09/04/michigan_makes_primary_move_of.html

Uh, did that say what I think it did??? States with primaries prior to 2/05 lose HALF of their delegates at the convention? Can anyone please explain why any state would do that?

[susano]

Are there any lawyers here?

[paulitics]

my blood is boiling.

[westmich4paul]

At our meetup tonight this of course was the hot button topic for obvious reasons. I will try to give you the deatials as I have heard them and if anyone knows anything differen't feel free. This is kind of long and drawn out so bare with me.

When the legislature proposed the law to move the Primary Date up to Jan 15th they had it worded in the law that there could be a list generated of voters and that this information would be privy to both party's. This would be considered private information and since it was funded by the state that had to make it public information. Well a company out of Lansing challenged this in court because they wanted the list for their own reasons unsure by me saying that because it would be funded by the state that essentially the list would have to be disclosed publicly. Well apparently this was taken to court where the local courts ruled that in fact if it was (the primary) funded by the taxpayers the list would have to be made public or the law would be unconstitutional. This was appealed to the Appeals board in Lansing where again it was ruled by a 2-1 margin that it was unconstitutional. Where it sits now is that in order for the Jan 15th primary to still be held a new law must be drafted and passed through both houses of the state with the proper wording this time and signed by Granholm in order to keep the date. They have about a two week window of opportunity to get this introduced and passed because the county clerks are allready crying saying they will not have enough time to get out the absentee ballots and that it will cost too much.

Whew! Yeah. Ok now for the shady part of it all as I have heard. On Monday Nov 12th at the Kent County GOP meeting (this was before the appeals hearing)
Saul was there trying to explain to all of us what was going on and their stand on this issue and what direction they were going to take it At that meeting he told everyone that the GOP wanted a primary over a convention and this was their intent to make this happen. He said at the time that if the Jan 15th deadline couldn't be met that a Feb date was also being talked about and that that would still be fine by the GOP to keep a primary. I was there I heard him say it (have since asked others whom were there and they have confirmed that I was not hearing things). Two days later They go on t.v. stating that they are trying very hard to keep the Jan 15th primary date open but this is the only date they will accept for a primary and if it doesn't go through then they will opt for a convention. I was like hmmm thats not what he just said 2 days ago.

So tonight at our meetup I learned that over the summer the GOP switched it's rules up a little bit and that usually if there is a convention held any vacant delegates seats that remain open can be filled by any one that wants to do it just has to have signed up to become a delegate within the appropriated time and then request to fill that position at the county conventionto now if there is an open delegate spot by county convention time they will not be refilling that delegate seat and it just goes empty for that district.

So basically my spin on it and this my own opinion is that the GOP knew after the South Carolina debates in May that Paul might pose a threat the the "ESTABLISHMNET" and essentially worried about the flood of new party members joining up from the dienfranchised dems to the Libs to the Ind coming into their party and messing up status quo. So they started enacting rule changes so that only the good- ole boys of the party would be able to participate. We all know how Saul has felt about the Paul campaign from the beginning. I mean come on they draft up up this legisaltion all the time. It's hard im my opinion to believe that something would be drafted that would be wordered in such a way as to make it unconstitutional and this would have been overlooked especially dealing with a presidential race. Plus factor in the GOP CONVENTION "RULE CHANGES" enacted recently and it just smells of dirty politics.

Now I have also heard that on the Dems side there has been some problems with this primary too so maybe for once they were able to get bi-partisan support on something.

Now on to RobS statement about doing all the canvassing for nothing and the frustration that is going on now with the supporters in Michigan. I say it means we now must canvass harder, we must double our efforts to get Ron's name out there to the general public. Why? Since there is no election for nomination? Because the campaign can still win a majority of the others and all ron supporters are donors and voters and we need each and every one of them so IF YOU LIVE IN MICHIGAN DO NOT GIVE UP! Spread the word harder now, work with states like N.H. and Iowa to help their chances. Whatever it takes. Just because Michigan might go down doesn't mean the campaign is over. Suck it up and trudge on mighty patriot!

[Duckman]

Any chance of this happening on other states that moved up their primary dates in defiance of the Democratic/Republican party rules, such as Florida? Last I heard, both the Democrats and Republicans had cut off our voting rights, with the pundit on TV saying "don't worry, I'm sure it will be sorted out soon." Yeah, though oligarchic caucus schemes. This is BS.

[jgmaynard]

This shows how partisan politics can take the power of voting away from people for political gain.
If Michigan does not reinstate their primary very soon, the people of that state should have a VERY large, VERY loud demonstration on their capitol steps and not leave until the primary was reinstated.
The people of NH would never stand for such a travesty of justice and neither should the people of Michigan.

JM

[susano]

WE NEED A LAWYER

The primary was to be paid for by ALL Michiganders, not just party members. That means ALL Michiganders have a claim, here. We need to sue to make the list public and hold a primary. I believe a good attorney could also show collusion between the two parties to cut out the people of Michigan.

The guy who sued over the list is a Democrat. He buys the lists and compiles data to sell to campaigns. Hard to say if he just wanted access for business puposes, or if he sabotaged the primary as part of a concerted effort. It shows what ONE challenge can do, though, and WE SHOULD SUE.

[Austin]

Can someone give me a quick summary on what has happened and why?

[Austin]

Can someone give me a quick summary on what has happened and why?
Bump

[american.swan]

Ok here is the lastest news on this. Appeals court voted to uphold lower courts decision to cancel the Jan 15th Primary. They could take it to the Supreme court but as it stands now there just isn't enough time. So it looks like Michigan goes to a convention. Unless some kind of miracle takes place.

Convention? What does that mean? If that means what I think it does, that means that the Delegates are all that Michigan has left. Am I right? So that means that what everyone is already harping on. Other states have caucuses and votes, but the delegates are what matters, so here we are, Michigan has no vote only delegates so you have to get every Ron Paul supporter to be a delegate in MI.

Am I right? Is there any local news coverage on this on youtube?

[xerigen]

I live in Michigan and NEVER hear about this!!!! WHY?! This is the most absurd thing I've ever heard in my entire life and I can't believe we could be without a primary! If anyone has any ideas of what I can do I will go out right now at 2:30 in the morning and do something because this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. If I don't get a vote I will be protesting in Lansing.

[The Plan]

I live in Michigan too and never hear about this either. It's really fucked up. But you know what the really fucked up thing is..... Michigan is a major state to win in an election, no offence to New Hampshire or Iowa but WTF!!!! Michigan has a ton of interest in the way this election goes, i don't know if any of you have been to Detroit lately but i go there every day and this is the worst i'v seen it. These free trade agreements (Not really free trade BTW) have to go. The rest of the country should watch Detroit very closely because this is your future in your city in the next 15 years if things keep going this way. Detroit for most of the 20th century has been the barometer of the health of this countries economy because so much manufacturing happens here. We absolutely have to get sombody in office in washington that is going to kill these trade agreements or Detroit is going to look like a scene out of Mad Max. Michigan needs to step farward and demand we have a say in this process of who gets to run, we have far too much to lose.

RON to tha muthafukin' PAUL 2008

Demand to be heard Michigan!!!!!

[scrosnoe]

a friend, not a Ron Paul supporter, called me the other day to let me know the changes occuring in Michigan and saw it as a good thing for the Ron Paul people.

I tell you this not because I know it is good for Michigan, but to ask you to consider the possibility of making it work for you instead of against you.

In many ways caucus states seem to me to be more grassroots driven than primary states. Caucus = whoever shows up makes the decisions - oversimplified but that is the essence. Primary = vote/select delegates according to rules.

However, in both cases, you simply must have people who understand the rules and turn out the people and take over the process. It sounds to me like the worst thing that can happen to you is the party hierarchy sensing a win for RP and cutting the delegation in half to reduce RP numbers by moving up the dates.

Most importantly, a key target should be the replacement of Saul Anuzis - he has been nothing but trouble on many fronts. Do the rest of us a big favor and fix that problem this cycle - please! I am guessing you could get national support to run someone against him for the RNC!!!!!

Please do not be discouraged and stay on top of this - you may see a way to make it work for you and turn this apparent lemon into lemonade. Many times when 'they' try to do something really wicked - it exposes their hand and their operating style to others and is the beginning of their end.

Hang in there!;)

[Voice]

Not if they're not accepting new delegates...:mad:

[brumans]

Yeah this is complete B.S. Ron Paul has a lot of support here, too.

[xerigen]

a friend, not a Ron Paul supporter, called me the other day to let me know the changes occuring in Michigan and saw it as a good thing for the Ron Paul people.

I tell you this not because I know it is good for Michigan, but to ask you to consider the possibility of making it work for you instead of against you.

In many ways caucus states seem to me to be more grassroots driven than primary states. Caucus = whoever shows up makes the decisions - oversimplified but that is the essence. Primary = vote/select delegates according to rules.

However, in both cases, you simply must have people who understand the rules and turn out the people and take over the process. It sounds to me like the worst thing that can happen to you is the party hierarchy sensing a win for RP and cutting the delegation in half to reduce RP numbers by moving up the dates.

Most importantly, a key target should be the replacement of Saul Anuzis - he has been nothing but trouble on many fronts. Do the rest of us a big favor and fix that problem this cycle - please! I am guessing you could get national support to run someone against him for the RNC!!!!!

Please do not be discouraged and stay on top of this - you may see a way to make it work for you and turn this apparent lemon into lemonade. Many times when 'they' try to do something really wicked - it exposes their hand and their operating style to others and is the beginning of their end.

Hang in there!;)

That's all fine and dandy, but as far as I know, there will be a convention, NOT a caucus. This means that only party officers may vote, meaning precinct delegates and state and local GOP officials. Please correct me if I'm wrong, and thanks for the heads up for the other issues.

[scrosnoe]

see what Pat Robertson was able to do in his race in Michigan in 1988 (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE5DB1331F936A25752C0A96E9482 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print). . .

make it work for you!;)