[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/03/19/art.hc.troopshome.gi.jpg caption=" Sen. Hillary Clinton delivered a speech on Iraq at George Washington University, Monday in Washington DC."]
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Hillary Clinton is challenging Barack Obama to a rematch in Michigan and Florida.
Clinton made a last-minute trip to Michigan today to emphasize her support for a re-vote there, saying it's "wrong, and frankly un-American" not to have delegates from the two states seated at the convention. She also is suggesting that the outcome of the general election may be at stake if Democrats don't count these delegates. Of course, the DNC penalized both these states for moving up their primaries.
Obama, whose name wasn't on the ballot in Michigan, hasn't yet supported or opposed the plan, but his campaign has raised a number of questions about the proposal. They say that a revote wouldn't make such a big difference in the overall delegate count and that the Clinton campaign is trying to change the rules to suit itself.
As for Florida, plans fell apart over the weekend when the state's Democratic Party said there won't be any revote.
For Clinton, though, many see the revotes in the two states as a necessity. Big victories would help her close the gap with Obama when it comes to pledged delegates as well as the popular vote. Two more victories would also bolster her argument to superdelegates that she can deliver key states.
But the argument to seat Florida and Michigan's delegates based on results from January seems to lose some weight when you consider this: a new study by a Wharton professor suggests that about two million more people would have voted in Michigan and Florida if they thought their votes would have counted.
Here’s my question to you: If neither Florida nor Michigan holds revotes, where does that leave Hillary Clinton?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Dennis from Dallas writes:
I don't believe Michigan or Florida will get a redo in their primaries. Hillary will go on to win Pennsylvania, but not by enough to seriously put a dent in Obama's delegate lead. Whatever gains she makes will likely be erased in subsequent primaries. She'll then be left asking the superdelegates to award her the nomination.
Amy from Kalamazoo, Michigan writes:
Should the two states choose no revote at all, Hillary Clinton will come out behind in the delegate count, but still looking like the single person who fought for the people of these states, while Obama will look like the poster child for the establishment. Nice role reversal, eh?
Lenore writes:
If Obama doesn't quickly answer Hillary's challenge for those re-votes, he will certainly win the nomination, but lose the election. Clinton is counting on him not biting the revote bait and thereby being responsible for disenfranchising all those voters. Obama's people are right – she can't win enough delegates to catch him with a revote, but yet he's refusing. Just what is he afraid of?
Paul writes:
If Michigan and Florida do not revote, it forces Hillary to follow the original rules that she was more than happy to accept when she was the front-runner.
Minas writes:
Why do I bother to respond to this, your rather self-serving question? If Michigan and Florida don't get a revote, it leaves McCain in the White House in 2008, Hillary in White House in 2012, and Obama in the doghouse, with Reverend Wright as his mentor.
Carlo from Baker, Louisiana writes:
Where she should be: exit stage left.
David from Minneapolis writes:
One step closer to being forced to resort to throwing an actual kitchen sink.