Michigan was stripped of it's delegates as punishment for moving up it's primary date, a move that was not protested by any of the Democratic candidates at the time.
Many Democrats in Michigan stayed home on that day feeling there was little point in voting in a contest where the results would mean little, if anything without delegates. Those who did show up were given three choices; Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinich or Uncommitted.
Voter turnout has been astoundingly high in all contest, including Florida. This was despite the fact that voters in Florida had also been stripped of their delegates. But in Florida, unlike Michigan, all the candidates names were on the ballot.
When you look to Michigan you will see that the voter turnout was low in a primary season when every state, including Florida, was voting in record numbers.
I think the answer to the question of why voter turnout was low in Michigan was not because of bad weather or solely because of the states stripped delegates, but also because of the lack of choices on the ballot.
So you can imagine my outrage when the Clinton camp began to try to make the case that the delegates from Michigan should be seated as they stand.
After the contest was over Hillary Clinton voiced concerns that voters in Michigan may be "disenfranchised" if the states delegates were not seated as they stood. Apparently Hillary had given no thought to the voters who were already disenfranchised at the ballot box when they were unable to cast a vote for their preferred candidate.
There may be a case for seating Florida's delegates as they stand, but there is no absolutely no case for seating Michigan's delegates as they are.
The contest in Michigan cannot be deemed fair because the voters were not given a fair choice. To declare otherwise is undemocratic.
The party rules should stand and the state should not be allowed to seat it's delegates OR Michigan voters should be given the opportunity to vote again in a contest that has both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on the ballot.