The Democratic National Committee (a.k.a The Politburo) is considering changing it's primary schedule and processes in the hopes of 'improving' the method by which it nominates a Presidential candidate.
Because, you know, the old system was soooo wildly successful. If I were The Great Hopenchanger, I'd be outraged and insulted by the implication.
You can read about it, here. (Credit to CNN).
They claim that now is the time to change the system because...they don't expect a challenger to Obama for the 2012 primary season. Yeah, right.
I'll bet there's a whole mess of folks in the DNC right now who are absolutely flabbergasted that Hillary didn't win, and the reasons she didn't win need to be fixed, pronto, so that she can win next time. They want more control over the caucus system (which Obama dominated and abused), they want to settle the dispute about which states vote when (Michigan could have propelled Hillary, except that primary didn't count...and then it did, but then only partially...), and they want a winner take all system (because Obama somehow managed to still garner more delegates in several states that Hillary actually won).
Things are going to get very interesting over on the other side. I wonder when the last time a sitting Secretary of State ran against a Sitting Placeholder....err...President? Probably sometime back in the 1800's, for sure. It should be interesting to listen to Hillary use the Nuremberg Defense ("I was just following orders...I was a loyal to my Furher and Country...") when in the first debate about foreign policy she is asked to explain why she followed the Administration Line when her new diametrically-opposed-primary-focus-group-tested foreign policy philosophy first gets trotted out.