They without a doubt should.

From now on they should enclose the presidential elections to Florida. Nothing else matters.

I think they bungled it from the start. Republican's had the right of it, and I think they should allow the states to re-vote.

Helps kill that 6 week span of nothing.

It would be unfair to just hand Hillary the delegates...but I do think the states should have a say. Though possibly inconvenient, a re-vote is the only real fair solution.

I'd like to see how they're gonna make Howard Dean scream again.

Re-vote!

Considering he couldn't campaign there and that's where he makes up the large leads she has on him before both arrive, they would need to re-vote that as well.

None of the democrats campaigned there besides Clinton, that's why she won. And they didn't campaign there because all of the democratic candidates including Clinton had signed onto the agreement by the DNC asking them not to campaign there. Florida had moved it's primary up too early and they were trying to, rightly or wrongly, impose some discipline. Holding it again is silly and will make the Democrats look bad. It will also cost an estimated 18 million to hold the primaries again.

they broke the rules. If they are going to let the delegates count though, there should be a revote. You cant just hand them to hillary.

I agree the best compromise is to revote, whether it's a primary or caucus (more practical and realistic) style. The ironic thing will be that by allowing revote, the two states in fact become the most important ones, the status they were trying to seek by defying party rule and moving their dates early; hardly a punishment, I'd say. Maybe revote and seat only half of the delegates?

I agree with that. When I said they shouldn't run them again I meant they should just ignore those delegates or divide them equally. If it comes to revote or give them to hillary yeah they'd have to revote.

They don't have to divide them equally but they could cut their value in half. Give them half as many seated delegates. They deserve a penalty, otherwise it encourages other states to break the rules if you let Michigan and Florida get off scott-free for doing it. I do understand the possibility of splitting the delegates in Michigan since Obama wasn't on the ballot, but in this case it's best to either re-vote or just not give them any seated delegates.

If you let Michigan and Florida have a re-vote, you're essentially giving them MORE importance, how the hell is that any kind of penalty?

Yep. I think you follow the mold of the Republicans, strip them of 50% of their delegates, allow 3 weeks notice and put the primaries on the same day in early April.

Not necessarily 50%, but 25% would be a good penalty. Either that, or allow them to seat the delegates based on the current results and take away 50% of the delegates. Bigger penalty for holding an illegal election and counting those results. A re-vote does still need some kind of penalty. Timayd is right that it would make them even more important than they ever would have been if you allow them to re-vote with 100% of the delegates in play.

Clinton should release a statement like:

"In the interest of Democracy, my campaign would like to offer to pay for 50% of any costs incurred to facilitate a re-vote in Michigan and Florida. Because of Mr. Obama's firm belief in the power of the democratic process, I believe you will find him equally willing to pay the remaining 50% of costs."

She did not. But I do agree that they should be counted only if there is another vote. And I think there should be. Ultimately the ones punished the most are voters. Nearly 2 million Democrats showed up at the polls just in Florida despite knowing that their votes would probably not end up counting. That's a lot of people to ignore...

doesnt look like anythings happening soon...



Look, everybody knows its unfair to supress voters. Unfortunately, it is still more unfair to go back and redo as if the rules did not count. The other 25+ states that have voted followed them.

EITHER WAY some gets screwed-if they count, Obama does, if they dont, Hillarey does. No way is really fair.

HOWEVER, coming to the conclusion by following the rules is more fair than coming tothe conclusion by ignoring them. That is the most logical solution and seems to be the most likely.

obama getting "screwed" does not in itself mean its unfair. i guess, for that matter, if you believe it's too late to go back and change things is not acceptable, hillary losing out on the possible delegates in itself does not make not counting the states unfair.

while i do agree that no way of going about is ideal, you're making the assumption that hillary would take the states in a re-vote. i think, michigan, at least could go to obama. i say let obama try to convince the voters he is the best candidate. he has done it in other states so it's not out of his reach to do so in FL and Michigan as well...

We all know if Obama took either state Clinton would claim the first time votes should count instead

he has a virtually insuramountable lead in total votes, and she needs to win 585 of the remaining delegates to close the gap.

So no, its VERY likely Obama wins both of them.

As we learned today, its unlikely there will be a re-vote and one would expect it would be significantly closer given how much ground Obamas gained since these 2 happened. It is more than likely that should revote, she still wouldnt have more-

correction: even with the tallies as they were counted, SHE STILL WOULDNT BE AHEAD.

And florida has a very large black population along with latino. my guess isa 8-10% loss like cali, hardly enough for her to gain any significant ground.

Wow Corpse...

Could you be any MORE of Hillary's bitch?

They were very naughty boys and they deserve to be punished by having their delegate candy removed.

Let this slide and what next? They'll be having polling days on the Moon!!

I didn't read what you said after "Clinton" and assumed what you "quoted" was what she actually said, and I was like "ohhhhhhhhh snap!!"