Of course, Florida republicans will do anything for a re-vote.  Then, they can engineer confusion, chaos, or they would be far less participation than January vote (quite likely) and they get to laugh at democrats one more time.

In other words, no one watches it.

Let's start from the beginning.

I'm not sure who pushed the idea of these pre- Feb 5 early primary dates, but we know the logic of it: they wanted their states' contests to mean something, and I'm sure there was an economic element as well - candidates coming to town and all the ad dollars means a boost for local economies.

They wanted it early even knowing that at that stage of the game, it would be impossible to know as much about the candidates - but they never expected the race to still be undecided this late.

After a lot of back-and-forth, and attempts by the Dems in Florida to work something out, the legislature tacked it on to another bill, and the thing passed unanimously.  The penalty was, the delgates wouldn't be seated, and the agreement with the candidates was they would not campaign.

As I understand it, they could not take their names off the ballot in Florida unless they had withdrawn from the race, but they could in Michigan - and Obama and Edwards did so as a tip-of-the-hat to Iowa and NH, hoping that move would boost their performances there.  Clinton stayed on the ballot in Michigan.

While no one campaigned in either state, I'm pretty sure the citizens of Florida and Michigan have TVs, radios, newspapers and computers, and were able to follow the race and make some decisions about which candidates they supported.

They went to the polls in record numbers - the most votes cast in any Democratic primary in Florida's history.  That's a pretty big turnout of voters who thought their votes were not going to count because there would be no delegates allocated.  Something tells me - and it's just conjecture - that a lot of people may have thought that the higher the turnout, the greater the argument that the votes should count; conversely, low turnout would say, "well, it didn't matter anyway."

There is no question in my mind that, given the opportunity to vote again, some people would vote differently based on events that have occurred since their January primary - why should they get the chance to change their minds when no one else who voted in early primaries - or caucuses - will get that chance?

Seat the Florida delegates as is, based on the January results.

Seat the Michigan delegates by giving Clinton the ones allocable according to her votes, and make some formulaic allocation to Obama based on the uncommitted count.  Whatever leftover delegates there are should be seated as uncommitted delegates, who can choose to be seated with the candidate of their choice.

I hate to say that, but that's my suspicion.

If you're a registered voter, you receive a ballot.  You vote, place your ballot in a sealed envelope.  The sealed envelope is placed into another envelope with your name and signature on it.

All are verified before counting.