It's a closed primary, so for Michigan people who aren't used to select a party ballot will have to do so if they want to vote. That information will be used to fill your mailbox with lots of crap. This will likely deter folks who otherwise would've voted, and may skew what remains to the extent it's not already skewed. Amidst much last-minute hijinks, we decided to move our primary date ahead of when it was supposed to have been, which fucks us in the ass in unusual ways.

The primary IS a joke if you choose the Democratic ballot. Obama and Edwards aren't on the ticket. You have your choice of Hillary, Uncommitted, or minor candidates in various stages of dropping out. None of Michigan's delegates are slated to be seated at the Democratic convention. If our delegates don't make a difference one way or the other, and the Democratic candidate wins, our dumbass bid to be an early primary state is a total fucking bust. If they make a difference, it will be considered a total crock of shit because that means it'd be close apart from Michigan, and Michigan folks never had a real choice.

This is MOSTLY a joke if you choose the Republican ballot. Michigan's Republican delegate count has been cut in half because of our trying to go ahead of the pre-negotiated pack. Apart from the party ballot bullshit, this is a repeat of 2000 in many senses, where a lot of Michigan Democrats tipped the edge to McCain. Given a choice of "Hillary or the void" on the Democratic side, Democrats and indies might grab Republican ballots and vote Ron Paul (who wants to woo Democrats here) or some other minor candidates to fuck with them. The media coverage here could prove to be key.

So Michigan taxpayers get to pay 10 million bucks for a worthless primary? Sounds great. I wish I was there to vote undecided. I hope everyone does. I'll seriously puke if Hillary gets a bunch of votes and parades her ass out there to brag about winning by default.

Fuck undecided or uncommitted.

I'd rather take a Republican ballot, vote for Ron Paul, and see how much money the Republican Party can waste sending junk mail to me. I voted for McCain in the 2000 primary, to stick it to Bush.

I'll seriously puke if Hillary gets a bunch of votes and parades her ass out there to brag about winning by default.
Take pics if you do next to the tv while she's celebrating bug eyes and all. [smilie=heatsmiley2:

PiCqxKLIVDY

Oh, that's fucking funny.

I'll be voting Paul as I support the long-term fracture of the Licks over the short term, but good luck with that.

Nice video, hahaa.

Some columnist from the New York Times was on Tim Russert's show on Sunday (not MTP, his own show on MSNBC) and he claimed that all of the Republican candidates get along very well, they especially agree that they all hate Romney.

Romney 27.0% McCain 26.3 was the lates I've seen.

Lots of ass kissing going on there in Michigan, then those bastards forget about my home state as soon as they get elected.

that was the most convincing ad i've ever seen. im 100% for romney now.

food for thought, what impact did michigan's renegade primary vote in '00 have on prez bush's reaction towards the state? i mean, i know bush sucks at domestic issues (sorry tahoe) but can anyone name one good thing he's done for the state? as far as i know, hes pretty much encouraged the death of the labor unions, and hasnt exactly been friendly to the corporate side of the big three, either.

mccain doesnt strike me as being as spiteful as bush, but something to consider when you cast your derailment vote tomorrow.

Thats alright Diddy...I'm not tring to be tit4tat here, but that was my question for my cuzn's when I was back there.

But the difference was, if Clinton has done so much, why did Detroit looks pretty bad in lots of spots? It was all friendly jabs, but I thought that was good point. If Clinton was the perfect prez, why did Detroit look like hell in spots? He should have done something for Detroit in 8 years.

So now all the Reps are there talkin mess about what they are going to do. I sure hope so.

thats on coleman young. unless you think a president should comandeer a city, in detroits case maybe he should, cant really blame a prez for a city dying. he did enter into some treaties that didnt really help though.

Yea, prolly so. Its just that Clinton was credited with creating the most prosperous 6years...blah blah blah, but somehow Detroit was passed by.

Hillary talks about all the wealth that was created by her and her hubby, I say they should have had a "No city left behind" program.

But the difference was, if Clinton has done so much, why did Detroit looks pretty bad in lots of spots? It was all friendly jabs, but I thought that was good point. If Clinton was the perfect prez, why did Detroit look like hell in spots? He should have done something for Detroit in 8 years.
Clinton's Empowerment Zone funds and tax breaks to Detroit, helping a business-friendly reasonable mayor in Archer, were key to bringing in lots of investment into Detroit. Those casinos and new ball parks likely wouldn't have existed without it, and more suburban folks go to Detroit now than in the 1990s. Many Detroit-area businesses prospered during the late 1990s, including auto companies who boasted record profits and were attempting to diversify. There was definitely an upswing.

I certainly don't credit Clinton with miraculous healing powers, but he did what a president is supposed to do -- channel resources to administrations who'll do good things with them. There's only so much that even a President can do when it comes to big city politics, as anyone who's spent time in D.C. can attest. Cities have to figure out how to not empower the crackheads, the corrupt, the racist, the incompetent. Cities aren't entitled the same way that children, and have more choices on what they can do with themselves.

Clinton's Empowerment Zone funds and tax breaks to Detroit, helping a business-friendly reasonable mayor in Archer, were key to bringing in lots of investment into Detroit. Those casinos and new ball parks likely wouldn't have existed without it, and more suburban folks go to Detroit now than in the 1990s. Many Detroit-area businesses prospered during the late 1990s, including auto companies who boasted record profits and were attempting to diversify. There was definitely an upswing.

I certainly don't credit Clinton with miraculous healing powers, but he did what a president is supposed to do -- channel resources to administrations who'll do good things with them. There's only so much that even a President can do when it comes to big city politics, as anyone who's spent time in D.C. can attest. Cities have to figure out how to not empower the crackheads, the corrupt, the racist, the incompetent. Cities aren't entitled the same way that children, and have more choices on what they can do with themselves.
Best post I've read in awhile. This was a big factor in my support of Archer and Clinton back then. It also makes me more pissed the City Council screwed up alot of solid ideas Archer brought business wise to Detroit.

1% in, but

Romeny 39
McCain 34

cant underrestimate the derailment vote. fox news is saying based on exit polling the race between hilary and uncommitted is too close to call.

go uncommitted!

Rom 41'
McC 30%

kucinich getting bukdowed by uncommitted means...? i have no problem with anyone running 3rd party in the GE, but imo people running in the primaries should bow out gracefully when it becomes apparant that theyve got no traction.

get out of the way kucinich!

35 to 32 Romney over McCain...the lead is varying widely at the begining...ofcourse.

Michigan sure fucked this whole thing up, though. Are there a bunch of indi's voting in the Rep primary?

There is no sense trying to figure out a trend out of this primary.

Michigan sure fucked this whole thing up, though. Are there a bunch of indi's voting in the Rep primary?



My wife and I did.

My wife and I did.

Just a question... You wouldn't consider a Rep in the general election right?

heres an article about the 2000 primary that might shed some light on just how much non republicans fuck with their primary:


Eclectic electorate hands Michigan win to McCain
But will nontraditional voters hand him the GOP nomination?
By Amy Paulson/CNN

February 23, 2000
Web posted at: 12:50 a.m. EST (0550 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Michigan voters may have handed Arizona Sen. John McCain a victory in Tuesday's GOP primary, but CNN exit polls indicate that the majority of those who went to the polls were not Republicans, whose support the maverick senator will ultimately need if he wishes to remain viable in the November election.

Polls showed that of the more than 1 million voters in Tuesday's open primary, only 48 percent were Republicans. Independent voters comprised 35 percent of the electorate, while 17 percent were Democrats.

Exit poll results were from interviews of 2,284 voters in 45 precincts statewide. The margin of error was plus or minus 2.5 percentage points.

McCain captured a majority of the vote among first-time voters, independents, Democrats, low-income wage earners, union workers and veterans, while Bush was carried by a more traditional base: Republicans, conservatives and those who said moral values and abortion were among the most important issues of the campaign.

"I'm electable because independents and Democrats will vote for me," McCain told CNN's John King. "They know I'm a conservative Republican and why they voted for me is because they know I will restore integrity to the institution of government," McCain added. "I'll inspire them."

The Arizona senator has worked hard to broaden his appeal across the political spectrum in open primary states like Michigan. As a result, 83 percent of Democrats and 67 percent of independents who did come out supported McCain.

And, just as he has tried to motivate young voters, first time voters overwhelmingly supported McCain. Fully 64 percent of voters were participating in a GOP primary for the first time, and they backed McCain by a margin of 2 to 1.

View results of the Michigan primary

By contrast, Republicans strongly backed Bush -- 66 percent -- as they did in South Carolina and New Hampshire.

Self-described conservatives and Christian conservatives also threw their support behind the Texas governor, while moderates and liberals voted for McCain. Bush captured 45 percent of the conservative vote and 66 percent of the so-called religious right.

Unlike Saturday's contest in South Carolina, McCain captured the veterans' vote 59 percent to 36 percent for Bush.

Personality counted in Michigan -- but not necessarily Bush's or McCain's. Instead, it was the personality of Michigan Gov. John Engler who influenced a bloc of voters in the Wolverine state.

Although only 15 percent of voters said Engler, who ran the Bush operation in the state, influenced their vote a "great deal," the Michigan governor's involvement prompted 70 percent of them to vote for McCain.

Still, nearly half of voters said Engler's involvement did not matter.

On the issues, 62 percent of those who said abortion should be illegal all of the time went for Bush, and 66 percent of those who said it should always remain legal voted for McCain.

Both candidates maintain that they oppose the procedure, but Michigan Right to Life targeted McCain as being soft on the issue.

Moral values was the issue that mattered most to Michigan voters and 51 percent of those voters went for Bush, compared to 40 percent for McCain. Those who said abortion and taxes were the most important issues supported Bush.

But McCain edged out the Texas governor when it came to voters most concerned about world affairs and campaign finance reform, education, and reform of Social Security and Medicare programs.

McCain won among Democratic union households, 61 percent to Bush's 34 percent.

Most voters agreed with McCain's assertion that he is the "straight talker" -- 56 percent -- while only 40 percent said the same of Bush.

And fully 50 percent of voters said McCain was the "real reformer," a mantle both candidates have been attempting to wear since McCain won the New Hampshire primary February 1. Forty-one percent of voters maintained that Bush was the true reformer.

Among voters who waited until the last week of the campaign to decide on a candidate, 59 percent went for McCain and 36 percent backed Bush.

But despite the Arizona senator's victory Tuesday night, voters looking for a winner in November chose the Texas governor over McCain by 50 percent to 46 percent -- an indicator that he may face an uphill battle in the next round of primaries on March 7. Basking in what pundits called a "critical" win, however, McCain maintained, "I think we'll be competitive."

Just a question... You wouldn't consider a Rep in the general election right?


I will vote for Paul in some manner. My wife is a big govt. lib.

fox news referred to romney's celebration / press room as "the gay scene". lol.

I will vote for Paul in some manner. My wife is a big govt. lib.

If its Huckabee, I'm voting for BO. If its Huck and Hill, I'm voting Huck. McCain over BO though.

And the SC ass kissing begins already.

i wonder if ron paul has had enough yet. the republican party clearly doesnt want him, and he clearly doesnt need the party. to accomplish his realistic goals, he would be much better off withdrawing from the primaries, regrouping, and declaring 3rd party. of course, realistically, that was true months ago.

Which is why I started a thread about having another party. This 2 party system is screwed up. And the Reps and Dems love it.

Yeah, we need 4. The Christian/war/screw everyone else party, the anti-govt. party, the big govt. party, and a green party.

i wonder if ron paul has had enough yet. the republican party clearly doesnt want him, and he clearly doesnt need the party. to accomplish his realistic goals, he would be much better off withdrawing from the primaries, regrouping, and declaring 3rd party. of course, realistically, that was true months ago.

I disagree, Ron Paul is great for the Republican party. He is staying in there long enough to screw with the other candidates to take away vote. Furthermore, he is mopping the floor with these Republicans at debates. The last Republican debate, I felt the moderators were trying to avoid asking him questions just because of out of nowhere answers.

Ron Paul over Giuliani (sp?) and Thompson is a victory!

eh, getting single digit results really isnt proving anything.

i assumed that paul was staying in it if only to force the real candidates to embrace true concervative ideals, much the way nader said he campaigned in previous elections in order to force dems to shift more to the left, rather than constantly moving to the middle.

the problem with this thought is that it seems most republicans hate ron paul. bizarre, considering hes probably the only true conservative on the ballot. even if considered extreme, you would thing his message would atleast register with the party. it really hasnt seemed to.

btw, im 100000% in favor of the fall of the 2 party system. i think the first step towards achieving this is getting rid of the electoral college, which myabe could happen in our lifetimes.

Hillary couldn't break 60% here running against "Uncommitted", and that's with a LOT of Obama/Edwards supporters staying home (and admittedly, with a lot of overall Democrats not voting). I'm sure that it's being spun as a victory, but the beauty contest here isn't pretty by any means.

BTW, the point in voting for Ron Paul is just to give him enough votes to stay credible, to be a gadfly at the debates. It's sort of the reason that a Democrat votes for Kucinich, the difference being that Ron Paul has a helluva big war chest (which he hasn't used, despite his pledge of not running as a third party).

eh, getting single digit results really isnt proving anything.

i assumed that paul was staying in it if only to force the real candidates to embrace true concervative ideals, much the way nader said he campaigned in previous elections in order to force dems to shift more to the left, rather than constantly moving to the middle.

the problem with this thought is that it seems most republicans hate ron paul. bizarre, considering hes probably the only true conservative on the ballot. even if considered extreme, you would thing his message would atleast register with the party. it really hasnt seemed to.

btw, im 100000% in favor of the fall of the 2 party system. i think the first step towards achieving this is getting rid of the electoral college, which myabe could happen in our lifetimes.


Untrue Diddy, many like him. They just realize he can't be a true candidate for president, and the Licks are in the middle of the most important decision they've had to make since Reagan. Most every republican dislikes the present size of govt. (military industial complex excluded), and is frustrated with the lack of a small govt. candidate this year.

It's not just the military industrial complex. Old people skew Republican and cry for smaller government and a return to pre-Reagan spending, but heaven forbid you take away Medicare/aid and Social Security. They tend to feel "entitled", even though they're borrowing off the backs of their children, and don't see the hypocrisy at all.

The problem I have with the "size of government" argument is that most people don't take any great pains to map out what the size should be in any absolute sense. Most people couldn't list the top half-dozen cost centers for our government if they wracked their brains, let alone what absolute dollars goes to these things and what the big coverages are. They think "big is bad" based off some personal past dealing with the government they didn't like, like paying taxes. Some try to foist Reaganomics and the Laffer curve on people, saying every tax cut is good. But luminaries such as Laffer himself disagree, and taxes are only part of the "size of government" equation.

Yay Michigan Republicans. You voted for a dumbass who strapped a dog to the roof of his car for 12 hours for his family vacation who will flip-flop on any issue you pay him to do so. Be proud.

Replying to posts 14 and 15. It is a good post. I read it, but couldn't find an argument for it, so I ignored it. :) Sorry Mxy.