How about we seat the Fl & MI delegates, with this caveat

[tkmorris]

We make them super delegates. The Michigan and Florida "primaries" were against the DNC rules, so they don't count. The delegates therefore will be allowed full votes toward the nomination, but are not bound by the results of the non-conforming primaries. Ergo, they can vote for whomever they wish to.

I don't think anyone can argue that the primaries in either state were conducted fairly. In the one, several candidates were not on the ballot and in the other, the candidates were not allowed to campaign. Thus, any primary results are flawed. My solution allows the delegates to be counted without anyone being able to argue that the primaries were unfair, since they will now be considered non-binding.

We have to solve it somehow; otherwise whomever gets the nomination will carry a very Bush-like asterisk next to their name. That cannot be. What say you DU?

[ColbertWatcher]

1. One problem...

...next year every state will not follow the rules they agreed to so everyone will be Super delegates.

[napi21]

3. I agree, Thats why I don't think they should be seated at all,

If there's no penalty, the rules mean nothing.
We will end up with primaries in November and January of the year before an election!

[tkmorris]

6. I don't think I agree

What would be the point of holding an early primary if the results didn't matter?

[Raine]

2. I think the delegates should be divided

equally among whatever candidates were still in the race at the time of those primaries. If it was Obama, Clinton and Edwards then they should be divided among the three. If Dodd, Biden, Kucinich and Gravel were still in then the delegates should be divided among seven. I think that would be the most fair to the voters and ALL the candidates since the candidates had agreed not to participate in those primaries.

[JVS]

4. How about with the caveat that we burn down their hometowns!

Or we could just follow the rules

[sandnsea]

5. Delegates aren't bound either

So FL & MI will be seated after Hillary finally concedes - and they'll vote for the winner along with the rest of the delegates. If Hillary weren't such a fucking conniving liar, this would already be the 'solution' because nobody would be pretending there was a disenfranchising problem.

[barack the house]

7. If we had made SC superdelegates would you of gone for that . My guess no.

[TexasObserver]

8. No! First, exclude ALL of their superdelegates from voting on anything.

The party leaders of both states are responsible for this mess, so the superdelegates from each state should not be allowed to vote on the nomination at all.

Second, the delegates from the states should be allowed only if they are split down the middle, half for Obama and half for Clinton.

[TheDoorbellRang]

9. They need to be punished. Not rewarded

Making all thier delegates super delegates would not only reward them, it would COMPLETELY discount the voters in both states.

My solution:

1) Make each pledged delegate worth half a vote
2) Give uncommitted delegates to Obama in MI
3) Super delegates from both states receive NO vote, as they are the ones responsible for the whole mess

MI pulled this very same crap back in 2004, and after some blustering, McAuliffe had them seated at the convention with no penalty. This year, MI and FL BOTH pulled this crap. Why not? There was no penalty for MI in 2004. If they don't penalize them both, even more states will jump on the ME FIRST bandwagon in 2012.