40 percent in Michigan support uncertainty over Clinton

So, evidently Hillary Clinton was not running by herself. Of the 592,798 Michigan Democrats who took part in the state's primary, 236,723 (40%) voted for uncommitted, rather than for Clinton. For an explanation of the Michigan primary and uncommitted voters go here.

This in many ways represents a defeat for Clinton. Not only did 40 percent of voters select uncommitted, essentially conceding the influence they have over their vote, but another 3,835 Michigan Democrats voted for Chris Dodd, a candidate no longer in the race.

This only furthers the argument that Clinton is unelectable. It has been stated and restated that in a general election 50 percent of voters said they would not vote for Clinton, but what does it mean when over 40 percent of Democrats wont?

Some speculate that Clinton's lead in Michigan was so large that had Obama and Edwards been on the ballot, Clinton would have still prevailed. Bill Ballenger, editor of Inside Michigan Politics, estimates that had the other two front-runners been on the ballot, 30 percent of the uncommitted vote would have gone to Obama and 10 percent to Edwards, still giving Clinton a comfortable lead.

But because no candidate, including Clinton, campaigned in the state, these numbers are speculative at best.

The 40 percent uncommitted is an impressive number, but in Clinton's defense, these numbers were probably inflated by the efforts of groups advocating the uncommitted vote and powerful state Democrats. Detroiters for Uncommitted and Michiganders for Uncommitted, both Obama backers, actively informed Michigan Democrats about their ability to vote uncommitted. And Rep. John Conyers, also an Obama supporter, urged voters to select uncommitted.

In the absence of a real Clinton campaign, these pseudo-Edwards and Obama campaigns really resonated with Michigan Democrats, thus 40 percent choose uncommitted.

However, despite this, the results in Michigan do represent a bit of egg on the face of the Clinton campaign, nothing earth shattering, but an embarrassment nonetheless.

A video put out by 'Mr. Uncommitted'

How Michigan Democrats can best use their votes

When Michigan's Supreme Court decided it was alright for the state to hold its primaries on Jan. 15, the move was against party rules and the state paid for its sins. In response to the state's early primary, Republicans lost half their delegates, reducing their number to 30. While state Democrats lost all of their 157 delegates.

As a result, the only candidates on the ballot for the Democrats are: Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, uncommitted and write-in, an overwhelmingly unimpressive collection. Because of this, Michigan Democrats face some interesting questions. Should they stay home if their Democratic candidate is not on the ballot? Vote for another Democratic candidate? Or use their vote to help try and sway the Republican results in way favorable to Democrats?

Many speculate that Michigan's delegates will eventually be seated. But because of the uncertainty, the Michigan Democratic Party is encouraging state Democrats to vote uncommitted. An uncommitted vote sends delegates to the national convention which are not bound to support a specific candidate. Rep. John Conyers, an Obama supporter, has begun running radio ads telling Obama supporters to vote undecided. Both pro-Edwards and pro-Obama groups have been hitting the ground going door-to-door and promoting the undecided cause. Reminiscent of Richard Pryor in Brewster's Million..."Vote none of the above."

The two campaigns are gitty about uncommitted, because according to Michigan law if over 15 percent of voters statewide, or in any district, vote uncommitted, the corresponding percentage of delegates can back any candidate. Both campaigns are hoping that Michigan's delegates will be re-seated, thus giving them a chance to get Michigan delegates without spending anytime, or money, there.

The Michigan Democratic Party is also behind the uncommitted push.

But, is that's what is best for Democratic voters in Michigan? There is no assurance that an uncommitted delegate will vote for who you support. Would it not be better to cast your ballot for who you think is second best, Democrat or Republican (remember, its an open primary), and have some influence over the impact of your vote? Rather, Democrats in Michigan are asked to vote uncommitted, potentially creating a delegate that is in no way bound to the voters will, in essence, creating another super delegate. It actually seems like Edwards, Obama and MDP are advocating an option that is contrary to voter interest.

Another angle may also lurk here. If enough voters vote for uncommitted, rather than for Hillary, it could be seen as a victory for the Obama and Edwards campaigns. Voters throwing their vote away in place of voting for Clinton, yeah that's a win.

I can not tell anyone what to do with their vote, that is for them to decide. But one thing I would recommend is do not cast your vote based on what Obama, Edwards or MDP says, look at the ballot decide who you think is next best and control your vote. Or just vote uncommitted, whatever.

An informative, yet boring, explanation of Michigan's Democratic Primary by Democratic Committee Chair Mark Brewer: