This will never happen.

 

The only fair way to do it is re-vote; and Jennifer Grandholm, the Governor, is a staunch Hillary supporter.

I have a feeling that Obama would win, since Hillary barely beat "none of the above" last time.

There are problems with any sort of revisionist solutions. Basically they will come down to a best guess as to what the voters would have done, and that can never, except by accident, by accurate.

 

Revoting has its problems as well. Cost comes to mind. Lots more new information. But I have forgotten, wasn't the issue that voted too soon anyways? WOuld they not now be doing what the DNC wanted them to do?

The DNC decided, in their effort to balance out Iowa and New Hampshire and their, um, bleached whiteness compared to the rest of the party and country, that they were going to allow 2 other states to move up to try to create more balance. They said that they'd allow it to go Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South carolina, but that any other state that wanted to go before Feb. 5 would be penalized (The RNC did the same thing but only stripped half the delegates from the state, the DNC voted, including pro-Hillary folks, to strip them all as punishment).

 

So after the vote, the DNC indicated they'd be more than happy to recognize the results of anything done after Feb. 5. Whether it was a caucus, a new vote, whatever. But there was never really an agreement about how things could get done, no one wanted to put up the money except Hillary supporters, and you can't have private supporters of one candidate financing an election.