The article suggests that Obama would suffer by the seating of Florida delegates because of the wrongdoing of Florida Democrats. However, the advancement of the date of the Florida primary was the result of the vote of a Republican-controlled legislature in Florida -- the Democrats could not prevent the earlier primary, nor could they stage an unofficial primary later on. Senator Clinton and Senator Obama were on an even footing in Florida -- they were both on the ballot and both did not campaign there -- and Clinton won the state by a large margin. It therefore seems both illogical and unfair to punish Florida Democrats and Senator Clinton for a problem which was caused by Republican legislators.

This is not true. Both Democrats and Republicans in the Florida House and Senate voted overwhelmingly to support the earlier primaries. The bill was cosponsored by several Democrats, and the only state Senators to vote against it were Republicans.

I heard that it passed unanimously. The reason was that the bill contained election reform measures regarding touch-screen voting and the Democrats knew that they couldn't get this reform if they didn't support this bill.

It was the state GOP that forced the early primary. They had to give up half of their own delegates, but the Dems had to give up all of theirs. Easy calculation for one of the most corrupt state legislatures in our nation.

Clinton did campaign in Florida.

If they both campaigned she might have still won -- BUT we don't know.

The Dems were "only" supposed to lose half of their delegates too. They tried to call the DNC's bluff and it backfired bigtime.

While Hillary didn't officially campaign in Florida, she spent quite a bit of time there on fund raising trips. Given her superior name recognition and her fund raising efforts, it is clear that she was campaigning indirectly.

Obama was behind in almost every state prior to Texas, and has to campaign hard to make up ground. The fact that he managed to defeat Hillary in so many states speaks to his strength and organization as a presidential candidate.

Thus, Florida was hardly a fair contest. Hillary won on her front runner status, name and history. Obama never got a chance to bring his message to Florida voters.

The Democratic Committee here in Florida played fast and loose with teh primary date because EVERYONE here was convinced that Hillary was a shoe-in and that the primary race was a foregone conclusion. No one would have supported teh decision if they had thought Obama had a real chance, or if they thought this how it would look.

For months all we (Democratic voters) heard was how this was a GREAT decision for Florida and how this was a GREAT opportunity for Florida. One of their mottos was "No pain no gain" and if we suffer the "pain" now (in a meaningless primary) we will reap great GAINS in future races when it will matter.

During the last 2 months these same Florida Democratic "leaders" have been virtualy silent. I get an anemic email once in a while asking for a donation, but bascially they are all sitting around with egg on their faces.

Funny thing about democracy - it works if you work it.

Let her have Florida and Michigan she still would be behind in delegates and popular vote. It's over folks. Let it go and move on.

If they do allow the Florida delegates then they will need to allow the Michigan delagates. However, they can't allow the Michigan delegates as they currently are because Obama wasn't even on the ballot. Hillary only received 55%, uncommitted 40% (Kucinich, Dodd & Gravel < 6%).

What makes Hillary think she can maintain her 55% in Michigan with a revote when it is clear that Obama has or will have adequate delegates to get the nomination anyway? People like to vote for winners or it will be a low turnout (what's the point).

If they let the current percentages stand in MI and FL (giving the uncommitted in MI to Obama) then Clinton nets 191 delegates and Obama gets 131. 60 more delegates for Hillary won't put her over the top.

Why shouldn’t Florida and Michigan be allowed to have their Primaries when they want? Aren’t All States equal in the country or do some states seemed to have more rights than other? If the other states want to move their Primaries they should be allowed to this is supposed to be a democracy after all.

As the saying goes, 'The nomination aint over until the fat super delegates vote . . .'

My own leanings are towards Obama, but I won't count Hillary out until she conceeds or the math is 100% sure. Who knows that kind of backroom deals are yet to be made. One thing that we know about Hillary is that she is a shrewd politician, and not one to go down without a fight.

Hilarious....now the Democrats go into the expected, "It ain't our fault. The Republicans did this to us."

And sme wonder why they can't get a Democrat into the White House, even with a Republican there who has the highest disapproval rating in history.