I'm not an expert on election-year politics, nor have I ever wanted to play one on TV. (Have you ever seen any of those guys?)
But if you pretend I am an authority, this column will be much more interesting.
It's like a horror movie: You have to suspend disbelief so you can enjoy the horror, even though you know it's not real.
Anyway, John McCain is set to get the Republican Party's nomination in a few months, but the Democrats still have some sorting out to do.
Barack Obama currently leads Hillary Clinton among overall delegates, 1,603 to 1,497. I don't really get the whole delegate thing, and I can't even count to 2,025 - the number of delegates required to secure the nomination.
But the problem now is this: The race is so close that if Florida and Michigan's more than 400 delegates are not counted, it may be mathematically impossible to clinch the nomination without superdelegates.
The superdelegates can endorse whoever whenever and even change their candidate after an endorsement. Many have already said they would follow the will of the voters, but that "will" seems awfully close to ambivalent.
Democrats in Michigan are finalizing a plan to hold a new primary in early June, allowing its delegates to be seated at the party's national convention this summer in Denver.
But our Sunshine State doesn't seem to be making as much progress.
Republicans and Democrats in the Florida Legislature voted to hold the primary on Jan. 29, and the Democratic National Committee refused to count the state's votes because the early date violated its rules.
Still, voters took to the polls.
Of course, Clinton's preference is to count the votes - she won in both states - though she is not opposed to a revote.
But here is the context: The party did not sanction the primaries, neither candidate officially campaigned in the states, and Obama didn't even put his name on the Michigan ballot.
Meanwhile, Obama wants to evenly split the disputed delegates with Clinton. Either alternative is far from any semblance of democratic process. I would never expect complete fairness or anything crazy like that, but at least the appearance would be nice.
As I see it, a revote is necessary. The January results reflect an electorate that probably knew its votes weren't counting. Perhaps people didn't go to the polls for this reason. Perhaps those who did vote didn't take their decision seriously.
People are saying that a mail-in vote would be risky because we've never done it before. Admittedly, Florida seems to have a bad reputation when it comes to managing elections.
Though it would probably be more expensive (possibly as much as $25 million), I think a full-fledged primary should be held to avoid disenfranchisement.
Alas, money is a problem.
However it would happen, a revote could cost at least $10 million, and the Democratic Party doesn't want to pay, preferring to focus funds on the general election. But because the state paid for the January primary, it's time for the party to pick up the bill.
It's a relatively small expense to create solidarity within the party. Besides, donors have already withdrawn money, and more are threatening to do the same if the issue isn't resolved.
If the Democratic Party wants to win in November, it needs to unite to let Democrats know how much their votes count.
Vincent Massaro is a journalism senior. His column appears on Mondays.
