In another effort to control a big news day with a news-making attack on the Obama campaign, the Clinton campaign just now accused the Obama campaign in a conference call of actively blocking a re-vote in Michigan and passive-aggressively stymieing another primary in Florida.
Harold Ickes said “we understand on very, very good authority” that Michigan legislators believe both campaign’s consent would be necessary for a re-vote. He said that since the Clinton campaign was publicly in favor of a re-vote, the Obama campaign must be blocking the effort.
“Exhibit A,” Ickes called it, adding, “The only thing we can conclude is that the Obama campaign is working key legislators.”
Phil Singer said that in Florida, where a re-vote now seems very unlikely, “what is going on right now is a passive-aggressive effort on behalf of the Obama campaign to disenfranchise the voters of Florida.”
Ickes continued to fight for a re-do primary there, saying that the Clinton campaign was open to a mail-in ballot, and “hiring professional organizations that does these sorts of things.” Later, he vented, “It’s suddenly becoming impossible to hold a vote in Florida” in the twenty-first century, even with two months’ preparation. “I mean give me a break.”
He said not seating Michigan and Florida was “goofy” and “dangerous” and called on the Obama campaign to come out publicly in favor of a re-vote.
UPDATE: Obama campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor responds with the following statement.
“We understand that when it comes to counting votes, the Clinton campaign favors whatever they think will benefit them. But on a day when Michigan legislators themselves have indicated that there isn’t enough legislative support for a re-vote-and when Senator Clinton’s own Michigan co-chair said that a re-vote ‘wouldn’t make much difference’-it doesn’t make any sense for them to point fingers at our campaign. As others in Michigan have pointed out, there are valid concerns about the proposal currently being discussed, including severe restrictions on voter eligibility and the reliance on private funding. Local election officials have indicated that they may be unable to discharge their responsibilities under the timetable this law sets. We have raised these concerns, as legislators in Michigan did today, and we’re waiting to see if these issues can be resolved by the legislature.”