Warning: this diary (like many) will be a little fact-starved but strong on speculation.
I believe that momentum will continue to grow to hold meaningful and fair primaries in the states of Florida and Michigan. The reasons are well known. Both states matter too much in the Fall to risk the possibility that sullen disenfranchised voters would take out their pique on the Democratic nominee. Moreover, voters in every state want to participate in this epic contest between Clinton and Obama. They should. What's going on is too significant to leave out voters from any state, let alone two big states.
And the point of barring delegates from the DNC-banned primaries was to show that states can't override the party's rules on scheduling the elections. It wasn't to punish the voters. The DNC has made its point. Early primaries will not count.
So the question becomes, how to organize meaningful and fair elections now and who's going to pay for them. The last point seems to have become overriding. A new Florida primary might cost $24 million; a Michigan one $10 million. Neither state governor wants taxpayers to pick up the bill.
Now Sen. Bill Nelson has put his weight behind suggestions to have a mail-in election. This makes sense, if only because caucus-phoibia in Clinton's camp means it's unlikely they'll ever agree to anything that's called a caucus in either in state. I think that eventually both camps will agree to a mail-in. Given pressure from voters, the media, which wants to keep this story going and big names in both states, they'll have to.
If this is the case then the rules of a process that has never been tried in either state will be the focus of life-and-death three-sided negotiations between the states and both campaigns. Howard Dean will have something to say about this to, given that the DNC needs to continue to show it decides what's legal and what isn't. But the Obama and Clinton sides will come armed with switchblades and brass knuckles.
The biggest issue is likely to be, who gets a ballot. First of all, are they open primaries or not. There's probably no getting around the rules that were in place before: Michigan open and Florida closed. Each side has too much as stake to give ground here, although clearly Clinton wants a closed primary and Obama an open one. I don't like the idea of Republicans who hate us getting a voice in this decision. But this probably isn't the time to open up that issue for examination. I wish it were.
Then who will actually receive a ballot at home? Would voters have to request one? Would all registered voters get one? Only voters who voted in the earlier primaries? Voters who voted in the last general? The last presidential? Any of the last three elections? All of the last three?
What seems interesting is that given Obama's appeal to more highly motivated voters and Hillary's success with others, Obama will be put in the position of arguing for a less-inclusive election while Hillary will be able to take the high-road of "let everyone have a say." In the context of American politics Obama will likely take a Republican-ish position of locking out voters while Hillary will get to take a position that is both big "D" and small "d" Democratic. Much will be made of this.
I think it is ironic that strategically Obama will likely come down on the side of limiting the distribution of ballots in a mail-in election. There will be all sorts of justifications, but ultimately it will be about keeping potential Hillary supporters from voting. I don't suggest that the Clinton side isn't capable of equal or worse hypocrisy. It shows every day that it is. But in the end, in a street fight, I have no expectation that Obama's new politics will look much different from Clinton's old politics.