The fundamental problem with your scenario is that conventional wisdom had Candidate A running alone as the presumptive nominee by this point in the Democratic primaries. Candidates B through E weren’t even supposed to be a factor any longer.

IF that wisdom had played out, the seating of the MI and FL delegations wouldn’t have been an issue. They simply wouldn’t have been needed to push Candidate A over the bar, so they’d have been seated and no one would have cared.

From my reading of the DNC funding numbers, they don’t have enough money to run caucuses, so they’re asking the states to fund them. At least in MI, the Governor is a Candidate A supporter, so you probably won’t see a new caucus happen (why take the chance?). I haven’t looked at FL closely to see how things are aligned there.

Frankly, the MI Democrats are ending up with exactly what they deserve here. They knew what the punishment for moving up the primary was going to be but they did it anyway hoping to push the national committee into accepting an early MI vote to “get our voices heard”.

How’s that working out for them?

In the end, I think the superdelegate question is going to be far more interesting than whether the MI and FL delegations get seated. Can the Democratic party possibly stomach the possibility that the winner of the popular vote loses to the winner of the delegate vote? After 2000, it’d be high comedy!