Conventional wisdom says the contentious battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will go all the way to the August convention.

But Democratic National Committee chairman Dean wants the delegate mess over well before that, possibly before the 10 remaining primaries are even done.

The Washington Times‘ Donald Lambro believes it’s likely.

The scenario Howard Dean and fellow party leaders fear most is a bitter political floor fight in Denver that will divide their own party and send a message to the country that the Democrats can’t even govern … themselves!

His plan calls on remaining undeclared superdelegates (350 or so) to break their neutrality sooner rather than later, providing enough votes to give someone the 2,025-delegate magic number needed to clinch the nomination.

“There is no point in waiting,” Howard Dean said recently, adding that he has been in the process of “talking to a fairly significant number of — by and large — nonaligned people about how we might resolve this.”

Howard Dean hopes the rest of the superdelegates will follow his advice and declare their preference during the coming weeks and effectively end the race.

If Barack Obama can hold his lead, as is likely, he will be close to 2,000 delegates, allowing the superdelegates to possibly him over the top.

As for the Florida and Michigan quagmire, Dean is making it clear that once the nomination race is all but over, there will be a deal in place to seat both of the delegations under a proportional formula … still to be worked out.

Whatever Dean has in mind, it had better happen fast.

While this has been going on, John McCain has tapped strategists and fund raisers, uniting the party and basking in his U.S. personal biography tour.

It may take months before the Democrats entirely get their act together, and how unified it will be remains a huge question.

Meanwhile, John McCain has actually pulled even or ahead in polls, and a once vulnerable GOP believes it can defeat a divided opposition.

With Florida and Michigan delegates in limbo and Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama still fighting, worried Dems are looking to Howard Dean.

They’d better not hold their breath.

The former Vermont governor has tried to carve a neutral path so far, and while his efforts are admirable, something’s gotta give eventually. His take on it:

“I have to chuckle a little bit - the people who are complaining that I’m not taking a stronger role - when you drill down on that a little, I see what you mean. You’d like me to be a strong leader and adopt your point of view and ram it through the DNC. I’m not going to do that - for either side. There are going to be supporters on both sides that are mad at me. I’m going to play this one by the rules.”

Which… pretty much leaves us where we were all along. Man. What happened to the hard-charging Howard Dean? While it would be great theater, there can’t be a second ballot scenario? The longer this drags on, the worse it gets.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean may be treading too carefully.

Meanwhile, Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan proposed a plan earlier that would take into account the January primary and the total popular vote nationwide.

Under the proposal, Clinton would receive 47 delegates, while Obama would be awarded 36 delegates based on votes awarded to “Uncommitted.”

The rest of the Michigan delegates would then be divided according to nationwide popular vote after all primaries are completed. Right now, that would give Obama a slight edge, as he’s won 2.6 percent more total votes nationally.

Obama leads Clinton in delegates, 1,626 to 1,486, but neither will win the 2,025 needed to capture the nomination via primaries. Superdelegates will therefore determine the Democratic nominee, be it later or … much later.

Dean proposed having superdelegates weigh in by July 1 so the party can rally behind a candidate before the convention, beginning August 25 in Denver.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, a neutral superdelegate himself, said Tuesday that he would support such a proposal. We’ll see.

The next battleground is the Pennsylvania primary, which is scheduled for April 22. Clinton is expected to win, although Obama is closing hard.

Indiana and North Carolina, termed the new Pennsylvanias because they may ultimately tip the balance of superdelegate support, follow on May 6.

The Democratic party faces three clear options for settling the quagmire of the narred, potentially disenfranchised Florida and Michigan delegates.

The problem according to Bloomberg News’ Albert R. Hunt, is that these three choices range from cataclysmic to problematic:

1. The Clinton forces muscle the votes on the party’s credentials committee and seat the full slate of Michigan and Florida delegates, 366 in all, based on the results of January’s primaries. Given her wide victories in these contests that did not count, she would pick up a large number of delegates. Many, including Nancy Pelosi, have called it unacceptable that delegations which broke the rules decide the outcome of this historic race. A large number of Barack Obama supporters might be (justifiably) inclined to walk out if a Michigan primary in which “Uncommitted” won 40 percent of the vote factored into the nomination.

2. Michigan and Florida are denied seats at the convention, or the party could pick its own representatives from those states. Even though Florida and Michigan broke the rules and that justifies this move, it would be a disaster. Stiffing crucial states (44 combined electoral votes in November that John McCain will already be in good position to capture) would be political suicide.

3. The party can require new elections in both Michigan and Florida. This is as controversial and complicated. Unfortunately, it also looks inevitable.

The Barack Obama campaign would love Michigan and Florida caucuses, where they would be more successful because they are better organized.

The Hillary Clinton camp wants primaries for Florida and Michigan, which would be costly and for which no one seems willing to foot the bill.

The Democratic National Committee could foot the bill for the re-votes, but in a display many are calling incompetence on the part of chairman Howard Dean, it is lagging in fundraising and doesn’t have the money.

Perhaps the only logical course of action is for convention chairman Pelosi and her party leaders to take this out of the hands of Clinton, Obama and Dean to designate an arbitrator or small committee to resolve the matter. Quickly.

Former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell would be an ideal choice, as every such panel he’s headed has been lauded as credible and successful.

Other respected figures who aren’t in either camp might include former Vice President Al Gore or former President Jimmy Carter.

Despite our belief that these states broke the rules, therefore should be barred and are simply adding hysteria by demanding a do-ever, this is not going to happen and we all need to come to grips with it. Someone fair must settle it.

The only practical solution is some combination of caucuses and primaries, fewer delegates than slated but a respectable percentage, with the two campaigns sharing the cost with the state parties and private donors.

The clock is ticking. The party leadership needs to get a plan in place quickly, if at all, lest we hand these states over to John McCain early.

Forget the inflammatory remarks, the controversial statements or “The Scream.” A political pundit close to AfterW.org recently developed the theory that Howard Dean’s 2004 campaign for the White House was doomed from the start. Why?

He’s short.

Not freakishly short, but certainly not tall. At 5′8″, Dean is still in the ballpark as far as American men his age are concerned. But, according to our analyst, that’s not exactly presidential. AfterW.org founder, M. Levi Bluefield, concurred, stating:

“You can’t be president if you’re 5′8″.”

Can you?

Dean lost the nomination to John Kerry, who towered over him at 6′4″. Coincidence? Probably not. Howard didn’t exactly help himself by remarking that the capture of Saddam Hussein didn’t make the U.S. safer (correct as he was) or numerous other gaffes in the days before the Iowa caucuses.

But the Presidential Height Index suggests there’s something to this hypothesis. Since the rise of television in American homes, the tallest candidate has won the popular vote in every election but three: the 1972 defeat of 6′1″ Sen. George McGovern by 5′11″ Richard Nixon, the 1976 loss by Gerald Ford, a six-footer with two inches on Jimmy Carter, and Kerry by George W. Bush, who’s also an even six.

If you consider 1960 the dawn of televised politics - as our expert does, claiming the tube almost single-handedly delivered the election to John F. Kennedy - the taller candidates are 9-3. Not a shabby record. What does the theory hold for 2008, when only the strongest of the contenders in this marathon campaign are left standing (pun intended)?

Currently, the candidates with the biggest height disadvantages are, interestingly, the early frontrunners in both parties. The Dems’ early leader in the polls, Hillary Clinton, is listed at 5′6″ or 5′7″, depending on what you read, while Republican John McCain is only 5′7″.

Not sure if these Senate heavyweights would relish a debate against the other, but at least height would be a non-factor. Interestingly, if either wins the White House, they’ll be the shortest chief executive in an even 100 years (Teddy Roosevelt, who served from 1904-1908, was 5′8″).

As for Dean, the former Vermont governor and current DNC chairman, he says he never had a complex about his average stature. He actually mentioned his height on the campaign trail in 2003:

“I’m 5′8″ … almost 5′9″ … actually 5′8″ and three quarters. But the reason I don’t tell anybody about the three-quarters is that it sounds like I’m very sensitive about my height. And I’m not!”