Count every vote, yada yada yada

Now that their votes are a mere technicality, Obama wants the Michigan and Florida delegates seated in full.

This will raise eyebrows and cause some snark and snickering on the right, but really, it's precisely what everyone always expected would happen: the presumptive nominee would insist that all the delegates be seated, with full votes. The only glitch was that the "presumptive nominee" took so long to determine, and it seemed for a while like there might be a floor fight (i.e., the delegates' votes might actually matter, and thus, the delegate-stripping penalty might actually mean something). It would have been totally unethical and wrong to give Michigan and Florida full votes in such a floor fight, given that they willfully broke the rules knowing that delegate-stripping would be the consequence, and the voters in those states acted with that knowledge. However, now that there won't be a floor fight (indeed, Hillary won't even be nominated), there's no compelling reason to maintain the penalty. At this point, it just doesn't matter.

I have a question, though. What about the various states that the Republicans penalized in precisely the same way the Dems ultimately penalized Michigan and Florida, by cutting their delegations in half? This has gotten almost no notice in the press, because it didn't spark a huge controversy, but the GOP did this to not just Florida and Michigan, but also New Hampshire, Wyoming and South Carolina. Will McCain insist that they be seated with full delegations? (Possible answer: no, because those states actually adjusted the number of live human beings selected as delegates, rather than giving each delegate a "half vote," as in the Dems' ad-hoc penalty. I don't know if this is true, but I bet it is, and if so, it might not be feasible to retroactively double the delegations' size. But I'm just guessing. Does anyone know?)