Will Florida hold another democratic contest to seat their delegates by June 2008?

Well it seems Florida is at again. It seems to cause trouble whenever it gets its hands in something. The problem faced right now is with the following markets:

http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_F...
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_a...
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_F...

Now whats happened is that the Florida DNC is stating that they will not hold any new primaries or caucuses. But even though they have stated they won't hold new ones, the DNC might attempt something, but very doubtful. Here are news stories related to the news story:

http://apnews.excite.com/article/2008...
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/...
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/1...

What I plan to do is settle the markets stating that no new primaries/caucuses will be held due to the Florida Democratic statement. How do people feel about that?

Regards,

Ryan
Hubdub US Politics Content Editor

http://getsatisfaction.com/hubdub/topics/how_should_markets_regarding_the_florida_re_do_primaries_be_settled2

Ryan: Could you clarify your Tibet death question? See the comments

Why have you changed from thedoctor? pics4ded or spitzered? :-)

I would rather see this question go until June. I put that date on the question thinking that it could be that late until a final decision is made based on how the final primaries end up turning out.

What's the rush? There are many competing interests at work here and it could take some time to clear up the matter definitively. Is there some harm done if the question remains open for quite some time?

Just to add a differing viewpoint - I'm for closing them. I think its less interesting to have questions around which are sitting near 99% (which these will be as soon as you open it up again). Questions so heavily skewed are ripe for gaming and don't tell you much in the terms of a prediction market.

On the other hand, if indeed the DNC was able to pull something out of its... um.. hat... it would be really significant. So I guess I'm ok either way.

Do not settle this now. Just because they issued a statement today does not mean circumstances could not change. Let the question run until June. What happens if the circumstances change, a new solution is proposed and Florida decides in April that they can organize a mail in vote or a caucus? Then you have people arguing that you settled this improperly. This is still a very fluid situation and there is going to be tremendous pressure for the Democrats to sit delegates from Florida or fear alienating the state and losing it in November.

Current Options:
1. Use the existing primary to seat delegates either fully or punish by 1/2 like the Rebublicans did.
2. Hold a new primary
3. Mail in primary
4. Caucus
5. Party convention
6. Split the delegates 50-50
ETC, ETC,

It is too early to settle.

The Florida DNC has spoken. They will not do options 2, 3, 4, 5. Options 1, and 6 do not matter in this question. This question states will FLORIDA hold ANOTHER contest, Florida has said NO. Hubdub should settle based on the settlement details.

Believe it or not a statement by the Florida DNC does not eliminate the possibility that Florida will still have a contest. It represents their position at this time, which could certainly change if the national DNC does not accept the results of the previous primary. The Florida DNC is leveraging for this, it is taking a hard line because the screwed up. However the Democratic voters in the state are demanding to be heard and represented and the state DNC will have to accomodate those demands. Sell out your bets if you want but don't deny others their opportunity to bid on what we still see as an open question.

When I placed this question, I really thought it would take until June to get a real decision. If I had not put June on the question, I could see a better argument for settling. I have this same question on Michigan, that if you see the head lines today, I guess you could say it should be settled as well. These are the only two questions I have placed so far as I wanted to see how it all work out. I admit I am a little perplexed.

You are correct that a final decision on Florida may take until June. I don't see a solution before PA votes in April. What the National DNC would love is to be able to make a decision that appeases the voters in FL but doesn't alter the process of selecting the candidate. However, if Clinton closes the gap and FL delegates could make a difference, they will have to include them at the convention through some method.. Leave the question open.

Okay here is the link to the Florida DNC statement for readers to read for themselves: http://www.fladems.com/content/w/party_statement_on_primary_situation
Here are a couple of things I thought were relevant:
1)We researched every potential alternative process - from caucuses to county conventions to mail-in elections - but no plan could come anywhere close to being viable in Florida.
2)Last week, the Florida Democratic Party laid out the only existing way that we can comply with DNC Rules - a statewide revote run by the Party - and asked for input. Thousands of people responded. We spent the weekend reviewing your messages, and while your reasons vary widely, the consensus is clear: Florida doesn't want to vote again. So we won't.
Third and finally this should settle it decisively: A party-run primary or caucus has been ruled out, and it's simply not possible for the state to hold another election, even if the Party were to pay for it. Republican Speaker of the Florida House Marco Rubio refuses to even consider that option. Florida is finally moving to paper ballots, which is a good thing, but it means that at least 15 counties do not have the capacity to handle a major election before the June 10th DNC primary deadline.

Could this be more clear. The only decisions left to make are what to do with the delegates chosen with the first election. No decision could be made in which this question would be settled as a Yes.

Well lets see what happens with the lawsuits that are going to be filed by disenfranchised voters.