The first problem of the super delegates - elected officials and party officials - is that they are likely to be called upon to make the decision as to who the nominee will be. The likelihood is that Obama will be leading in the number of states won, the popular vote and in the number of pledged delegates, while Clinton will be leading in the number of large states won. On the strength of this, analysts have suggested that since the party is divided straight down the middle, it should be open to “arguments” over who gets the nomination.
  
One argument that Obama might make is that besides leading in all of the relevant categories except having won the largest number of big states, the public opinion polls consistently show him beating Republican nominee Sen. John McCain. Clinton is said to draw out the largest number of Republicans because of her high negatives, but Obama had attracted an appreciable number of Republican votes in his victories.
  
An argument Hillary may make is that she has proven her “toughness” and that will be essential in facing Republican McCain where she can match him with her “commander in chief” credentials and fight back against the proclivity of Republicans to mount mean, dirty and nasty attacks; such as the “Swift boat” ads it launched against John Kerry in the 2004 campaign. Obama has fought back, but some feel he has not been decisive or strong enough. He is beginning to mount his attack on Clinton’s credentials, asking her to reveal just what she did to earn them. 
  
While this is going on, the governors of Florida and Michigan, Republican Charlie Chris and Democrat Jenifer Granholm, have called for the delegates in their elections to be seated, regardless of whether they violated the rules of the Democratic Party in holding the elections when they did. Because of the 366 delegates between them, Howard Dean has said he cannot change the rules all Democrats agreed upon last year, but is willing to hear proposals to resolve the problem. Thus far, there is no consensus on a plan that features “do-over” elections to seat those delegates selected in the original elections. 
  
The Obama campaign will not agree to seat the delegates selected in the original elections because although his name was on the ballot in Florida, he did not campaign there and his name was not even on the ballot in Michigan where 40 percent of the vote went to “undecided” most favoring Obama. Clinton wants the delegates to count because she came in first in Florida and Michigan.  Yet the rules of the Democrat party say: “A presidential candidate who campaigns in a state where the state party is in violation of the timing provisions of these rules, or where a primary or caucus is set by a state’s government on a date that violates the timing provisions of these rules, may not receive pledged delegates or delegate votes from that state.”
  
I think that the only fair proposal is that there be a “do-over” election that is agreed to by both campaigns, and the campaigns and the national party should all pay the cost.  Although this will legitimize a rogue action by the two states, it may save Democratic prospects for the fall by not alienating so many voters, prompting them to stay away from the election and throw the election into the hands of John McCain. 
  
Black voters especially smell a rat and are lining up to stay home or vote for Gwen McKinney on the Green party’s ticket, or for Ralph Nader or anyone else but a Democrat.  This should be handled this very, very, carefully.

Dr. Ron Walters is the Distinguished leadership Scholar, director of the African American Leadership Institute and professor of Government and Politics at the University of Maryland College Park. His latest book is: “Freedom Is Not Enough: Black Voters, Black Candidates and American Presidential Politics.” (Rowman and Littlefield Press)