A re-vote in Florida?

If Florida hadn't moved its primary, it would be a crucial part of Hillary Clinton's "firewall" strategy right now; the Sunshine State was originally scheduled to vote next Tuesday, March 11. Instead, the state is part of Hillary's cynical "throw out the rules" strategy. But could it become a legitimate firewall again, assuming Hillary survives Tuesday? Maybe. Talk of a Florida re-vote picked up steam this weekend after Republican governor Charlie Crist said the state would pay for a new primary. (Crist, a prominent McCain supporter, would doubtless love to play a role in prolonging the Dems' fight.)

From what I understand, the Democratic National Committee edict that stripped Florida and Michigan of their delegates specifically encouraged those states to reschedule their primaries, holding re-votes if necessary. So I'm inclined to think that a new primary or caucus in either Michigan or Florida would be legit and -- unlike Hillary's just-count-the-delegates gambit -- would not constitute "changing the rules in the middle of the game" (since the "rules" specifically allowed for this). As I see it, the Florida and Michigan primaries became illegitimate and irrelevant the moment the DNC stripped them of their delegates, so this wouldn't really be a "do-over"; it would be the first valid opportunity for those states' residents to cast votes in this primary fight. So regardless of whether Clinton or Obama would be favored, I'd be inclined to support this.

Comments

[Joe Loy]

" ...this wouldn't really be a 'do-over'; it would be the first valid opportunity for those states' residents to cast votes in this primary fight."

Correct. You cannot Do Over that which you have not yet Done.

"...I'm inclined to think that a new primary or caucus in either Michigan or Florida would be legit...so regardless of whether Clinton or Obama would be favored, I'd be inclined to support this..."

Ah Ha, me boys :}. To support Which? A free-&-fair-&-fullscale Primary in these mighty megastates, whose party rules clearly Call for one (albeit a Preemie :) for to maximize the enfranchisement of The People, particularly since the publicspirited Charlie Crist will pay the Tab out of the goodness of his Heart :) ~~ OR, the lame & elitist Subsitution of a passel of Precinct Caucuses which will be Dominated by a tiny ideological-activist Minority of the party & which Obama, quite coincidentally, will Win? :]

OKOKOK! So, I'm just Poking at ya, here, far be it from Mee to suggest that you are Totally in the Tank for Barack Obama :>. Yes, the Rules permit either method and I'm sure you'd support either mechanism as preferable to the current Conundrum, and so would I. / I Do think the Primary is preferable, especially given the large size of the Electorates in question.

One Caveat, though: I'm prettysure that this cannot happen unless the respective State Parties apply for it. I believe the deal is that the Rules allow for state party Resubmission of a corrected, compliant state Delegate Selection Plan when the first one has been Rejected, as here. If the State, due to factional political infighting, backstabbing & fratricide firmness of philosophical principle :} cannot Agree on a New Plan for submission, I don't think Doctor Dean can force on upon them.

But I say both Sanctioned States should put all Quibbling aside and submit their perfected Plans for fullscale Primaries to be held on April 22. / Yeah, realistically that's actually Tight re the administrative logistics ~ sucks to be a Florida Election Official but hey, they're Used to it ;> and Michigan can acquire a sharp Learning Curve ;} ~ but even so, why should Pennsylvania get all the Glory? :)