So whose pocket is the FL Congressional delegation in?  My guess is Clinton still trying to make the bid to seat Fl as is.  Not going to happen.  She is a loser.  If she weren't, she would be pushing as hard as possible for a re-do that she and he could contest.  After all, it is the trailing candidate who ought to what more chances to duke it out.  Not Hillary.  She would rather try and con her way into it.  Would you hire this woman for anything let alone president?  I wouldn't.  

"The (pro-Clinton) Florida Democratic Party leadership has floated a mail-in primary as the best-case-scenario for its candidate (after all, senior...

When the non-cheating states have had their say, and Obama still has a large enough delegate lead to beat Hillary even with Florida and Michigan's delegates, then the party can simply seat them and let them cast their votes. That's the obvious solution. These states made a deliberate, calculated choice not to affect the delegate race in order to affect the early momentum of the race. So once it's clear that seating them will not reward their chicanery with the ability to overturn the results from the non-cheating states, they can be seated and no harm done.

I would think a mail-in vote would be a wash for the candidates. Hillary has the seniors, but she also has the busy blue collars, and the mail-challenged rurals.. Meanwhile, Obama has the latte-sippers, who can fill out their ballots at Starbucks, then drop it in the box during the slow walk back to the office.

Rhubarbs,

It's not totally accurate to say "These states made a deliberate, calculated choice not to affect the delegate race in order to affect the early momentum of the race."  More precisely, they made a deliberate, calculated choice to trade some of their influence on the Republican delegate race for a huge influence on the early momentum of that race.  The Michigan and Florida primaries had little to no real impact on the Democratic race, since everybody (rightly) regarded them as meaningless.  Do you honestly thing Clinton got a momentum boost by beating uncommitted?

The important thing I think you're ignoring is that the people that are being punished because of this decision (Florida and Michigan Democratic voters) are not the people who made the decision.  I just don't think that completely disenfranchising people because of decisions beyond their control is an "obvious solution" to the problem.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that situation *is* the problem that people are working to solve.

Also, I'm a bit confused as to why the congressional delegation's opinion matters here.  Isn't this an issue for the state party?  I know it would be nice to have the whole Florida Democratic establishment on the same page, but ultimately, the congressional delegation has no real authority on this.  I'm surprised they're sticking to the old "no, the primary really did count" line, after even Nelson and Clinton have abandoned it.

"Obama has the latte-sippers, who can fill out their ballots at Starbucks,"

McDonald's now serves lattes

Obama's scared to death of any system in which lots of people get to vote.  After all, his entire electoral strategy is predicated upon running up outrageous margins in caucuses where three to ten thousand people participate AND then claiming that the delegates he won there are as democratically important as the same number of delegates Hillary won in a primary with hundreds of thousands of people participating.  And the media swallows this narrative hook, line, and sinker.

Obama would loose Florida and Michegan's primaries, mail or otherwise.  That's why he's got to fight any re-votes.

Nobody should be talking about "delegate math" at this point in the game, because it's obvious that nobody can win this election based upon the pledged delegates.  The only reason such pledged delegates would matter is if they gave Barack a MORAL claim to victory via superdelegates.  Problem is, Hillary will have that moral claim after the nationwide popular vote swings her way.

Then, all you Obamaphiles will try to take amnesia pills as you try to forget why you've long advocated for the "will of the people."

I am so freaking frustrated...  If the freshman, no-show, foreign affairs naif wins this thing, I'll cast a McCain vote so fast it'll make your head spin.  

Interesting theory Nturner, if only it were based in reality.  In fact, recent Miichigan polls suggest that Obama is basically even right now, and it he were to go and campaign there, he'd stand a good chance of winning.

www.slate.com/.../2175496

Florida isn't proving to be quite as close right now and, while, Clinton might win a re-vote, it would likely be a lot closer than the 17 points, if for no  other reason than John Edwards isn't in the race.

Your popular vote theory is also interesting, but doesn't look likely. Obama's current lead is almost 700,000 votes, Assuming he lost Florida by 200,000 (I doubt it would be that big) and spllit even in Michigan.  It is unlikely that he'd lose Penn by more than 200,000, if that, and that would leave him with a 300,000 vote lead, not including the other nine primaries, where Obama is likely to win a majority. Winning the popular vote isn't impossible but it would be difficult.

Fact is, pledged delegates alone won't get either candidate to the finish line....duh...with 20% of the delegates being superdelegates, that is almost a given in a competitive election, especially with proportional allooation. BUT, the key is that Obama will be much CLOSER tot he magic number, which means he'll need a much smaller percentage of supers than hillary would.

Exactly nturner.  Even with a re-vote in Michigan and Florida, Obama is coming to the convention with more delegates and more popular votes.  By then, you and Hillary will have worked out a new line.

nturner -

Your threat to vote for McCain over Obama is outnumbered in these posts by the exact OPPOSITE feeling by at least 10 to 1. In fact I think yours may be the first I've seen. The overwhelming majority of posters here will not vote for Clinton if she's the nominee, and that's the problem with her candidacy in a nutshell.

The "freshman, no-show, foreign affairs naif" is our best bet for winning in Nov. And I find him to be no more of a naif than HRC - honestly, she thought her Iraq vote was NOT going to lead to war there? Of course that was really naivete - it was cynical politics, plain and simple. I'll take Obama's naivete over her cynicism any day, thanks.

nturner- So Hillary's strategy wasn't to win caucuses?  I don't remember her railing about them before Iowa (or Neveda).  It isn't gaming the system.  Obama wins caucuses.  He also wins primaries, granted, in boutique states like Wisconsin and Virginia.

Wow- I got dumber just by typing that!  

It is an idiotic position to think Obama is somehow cheating int he same system used by all the candidates.  He is winning in popular vote, you delightful little knucklehead.  

And, if Obama wins the nomination, I somehow don't think the gap between him getting it and you voting in Novemeber would cause my head to spin.  

In a race so close, this isn't going to go away easily.

Hillary is going to be looking for any other votes she can collect after PA.  Obama is not going to let votes be counted in races he didn't contest.

Everyone will weigh in-- even the Republican governor of Florida has waded in deeply.

Bottom line, MI and FL will not be easily resolved.  And it will be another major area of contention in a race that's going to Denver in late August and will probably bleed into September before it is settled.

I'd be VERY surprised if there were a FL revote, or even a mail-in.  The state elected Dems don't want one, the Congressional House Dems don't want one, and Gov. Crist and the GOP legislature don't care, only that somebody else pays for it.  

As others have noted, even if they seat delegates from tthe 29 Jan vote, it doesn't improve HRC's chances much, if at all.

God, this is great fun!  Y'all are forming the firing squad circle earlier this year than in 2004.

Last night, as Isaac noted , Florida's House Democrats released a letter opposing a revote in the