What is more likely to sway a primary election than a few people changing primary election rules? I suggest not even talking heads in mainstream media have this much influence.
Michigan leaders decided to move the primary to January 15th. Typical Michigan voters might think the reason is for increased national influence by becoming an early state to make their choice. After all, why should our friends in Iowa and New Hampshire always get to choose the likely nominee? Perhaps another motive is in play.
When Michigan primary voters go to the polls in January they will choose a Republican or Democratic ballot. According to the Michigan Democratic voter’s guide, Democrats will have 6 choices:
“A vote for “uncommitted” is a vote to send delegates to the Democratic National Convention who are not committed or pledged to any candidate. Those delegates can vote for any candidate they choose at the Convention.”
“Supporters of Joe Biden, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson are urged to vote “uncommitted” instead of writing in their candidates’ names because write-in votes for those candidates will not be counted.”
Are you kidding me? So why is “write-in” even an option? How many primary voters do you think will know that their write-in choice will be ignored?
Maybe Hillary Clinton enthusiasts in Lansing are behind this. Maybe not, but I imagine most voters supporting Obama, Edwards, or Biden will NOT know that the only chance their choice can possibly be counted is if they go to the poll, vote “uncommitted, “ and HOPE whomever Michigan sends to the convention will vote on their behalf.
This is silly and seems unconstitutional. However, I am no lawyer – only a voter with a duty not to make a commitment.