My great compromise

I read a post on the DailyKOS blog the other day suggesting that Michigan and Florida's delegates be split 50-50 between Hillary and Obama.

More background here.

Here was the suggestion that I offered as an alternative:

I'm in the camp that thinks "they knew the rules" and it's not smart to change the game mid-play.

But I'm also reminded of the founders' Great Compromise (the states have equal representation in the Senate but representation based on population in the House).

Rather than turn this into a bitter fight, perhaps a compromise can be negotiated such that:

• the uncommitted delegates in Michigan go to Obama (since his name wasn't on the ballot)
• the number of delegates from Florida and Michigan are cut in half (or some other percentage)

Hillary still gets a net increase in delegates. The net increase, however, is reduced to reflect the fact that no campaigning took place, as agreed to by both Clinton and Obama.

Clinton seems to be the "winner" in the compromise, but if Obama proposes such a compromise he cements his position as the candidate who can bring people together and avoids a convention fight.