Yesterday, Hillary Clinton said that "she absolutely would not accept a negotiated apportionment of Florida delegates." [Washington Post] Of course she wouldn't because her "win" would give her another 38 delegates and at this point, both candidates are scrambling for every one they can get.
"In my view there are two options: Honor the results or hold new primary elections."
I'd like to mention a third option:
HONOR THE DECISION OF THE DNC THAT BOTH FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN WOULD BE STRIPPED OF THEIR DELEGATES FOR VIOLATING PARTY RULES. No one gets any of the delegates.
It is inconceivable to me that either state would be allowed to seat their delegates. They were warned of the consequences; all candidates agreed to forgo campaigning in those two states, and Barack Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan. Why? Because he was playing by the rules.
So aside from the shouted option above, the only "fair" way to do this is to split the delegates 50/50 just to shut everyone up. But if the delegates are seated, thus proving that there is no real punishment for a violation of DNC rules, what's to prevent any state from moving their primaries to the September or October the year prior to the the next general election? In that case we'll all have to be doubly grateful that email is easier to get rid of than direct mail.