Thank you for posting this, Stein. I think Hilary supporters are very quick to wave the "Un-disenfranchise FL and MI!" flag, yet few if any media outlets want to logically consider the implications of including MI and FL.

You are also right to point out the near-impossibility of 75% of the remaining delegates going to Clinton. Every news outlet that has mentioned Puerto Rico has estimated that Obama will win big, which makes the likelihood of a Clinton victory even more remote.

Earlier in the election cycle (closer to Super Tuesday), someone had done a story on Las Vegas oddsmakers giving Clinton something like 10 to 1 odds and Obama 2 to 1 or somesuch. Does anyone know if those numbers have been updated?

Back in late April, Sen. Carl Levin, UAW President Gettelfinger, U.S. Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick and DNC committeewoman Debbie Dingel suggested a 69-59 split of the Michigan pledged delegates. I expect something very close to that will be the final deal. And, as this article points out, if the Florida results are accepted "as is", there is a less than 50 delegate gain for Team HRC from both states.

It's time to agree to seat those delegations and remove it as an issue in this contest.

Hillary had to win Pennsylvania by double digits and she did! as predicted when there was only 1% of the vote in. Those guys must be magic.

Hillary HAD to win at least Indiana, to stay viable. Not enough votes in. Too close to call. Those guys aren't so magic after all. A suspicious media pretended to insinuate foul play - an unapologetic and unseen mayor repeated the same excuse four times - not enough time to count the quadruple votes. (It didn't occur to them to call in the vote in increments or count the absentee ballots before the polls closed or they were
not able to work a computer- - the reasons were not clear.)

The gap kept closing, and the media uncharacteristically did not want to predict the end result. But the uncounted county saved the day at the last minute (well, the last 5 hours), and despite a precinct full of Obama's core groups, the bumbling like major reported late Tuesday night that yes, Hillary did win enough of Lake County to keep her ahead and therefore she won Indiana.

And therefore she is still in the race and the democratic party that is being sacrified for one obsessive ego can go on and on and the sponsors can gleefully dance around at the thought of all the products they can sell to the television addicts foolish or simple minded enough to believe their mind boggling scam - and that's all that counts.

Hey dy, she's been getting the benefit of the doubt for months now, she had a near zero chance of winning before Texas and Ohio and she has even less of one now. She should have given up long ago, why do her supporters refuse to see it?

In the matter of the delgates from Michigan and Florida, I have the following comments: First, it rpobably won't matter for either candidate whether these delegates are seated, but there is the larger issue of "principle". It seems decidely undemocratic to ignore the efforts and wishes of the voters in those states. However, it also seems absurd that these two states would have disregarded the Commitee's rules and now expect that they can get seated via the argument that they "should" be seated. It was these states' choice to have their residents' votes disregarded; not the candidates, not the voters. The voters are being penalized for their states' missteps, and that is very unfortunate. However, the states made their choices and now should have to live by those choices and remain unseated. In addition, it is totally unreasonable, in the case of Michigan, to seat delegates who have been pledged via an election where only one of the two current candidates was listed on the ballot. This is one of the most ridiculous things Ive ever heard of in American election history; and that says a lot. Michigan not only disregarded the rules, it also held an election that was completely absurd. The results of that election cannot be taken seriosuly, nor can they be considered a legitimate result in this primary. Florida is another story, although I don't see how those results can be legitimized either since it was held so early in the primary season and the candidates did not campaign there. Regardless, both Michigan and Florida KNOWINGLY disregarded the rules of the Commitee, and by doing so, WILLINGLY GAVE UP their right to be seated at the convention. I cannot understand how any reasonable person can see any other side to this argument. What is the point of having rules if they are not enforced? What will happen in subsequent election years if these rules go unenforced?