Last month I posted about the possibility of Obama/Clinton ending in Court because of a looming conflict over the Michigan and Florida delegates. This Thursday, the New York Times political blog, The Caucus, ran a post about the controversy of the FL/MI delegates that received over 1200 comments, almost 10 times as many as I’ve ever seen for another post there. This is clearly an issue that the American people, particularly Democrats, are interested in seeing resolved quickly and justly.
But will it? One the one side are FL and MI Governors Crist and Granholm who think that either (1) the delegates from their states should be seated (despite their own admission of breaking party rules) or (2) that there should be a re-do that is not funded by state taxpayers. On the other side is DNC Chairman Howard Dean who vows that (1) the DNC will not seat the delegates and (2) that the states will have to foot the bill for a re-do. Party leaders like Nancy Pelosi have stepped in to try and resolve the impasse and avert what could be protracted legal fight over these delegates.
I think this issue has already given the Democrats a black-eye of sorts because it has exposed how deeply divided the party is over Obama and Clinton. Does anyone think, as many of the NYT commenters have argued, that these delegates should be seated as is? If the funding issue for a re-do cannot be resolved, does anyone think that it the DNC and the Democratic Party are to blame for voter disenfranchisement (rather than FL and MI themselves)?