Does anyone know the exact pledged delegate counts if Michigan and Florida

[Bread and Circus]

had not received any penalties and if Obama had not been awarded any delegates at all from Michigan?

By the rough math in my head, I still think he would be ahead but I just want to be sure and see if anyone has crunched the numbers.

It seems to me that this would be the biggest talking point of the day considering there's the meme that Clinton was somehow robbed. However, if she had NO chance of winning the pledged delegate scenario under any circumstance, then that meme needs to be thoroughly and forever put to rest.

[hokies4ever]

1. The magic number would have been 2210

How do I know this? Because Hillary's camp was trying to push this number onto the media. Chuck Todd reported last night that even if you redo the numbers this way, Obama had that nomination scenario sealed as well. It's even more in the bag today as more superdelegates have come his way.

[Aloha Spirit]

2. Obama would still be ahead by 34, I think.

[Aloha Spirit]

3. 34 pledged delegates.

Current pledged delegate lead = 126
Michigan +73 for Clinton
Florida, an extra +19 for Clinton

[Bread and Circus]

4. Thank you. So even under the most biased pro-Clinton scenario, Obama wins...

Thank you for the quick response.

[Aloha Spirit]

6. Yep, and Obama also won the popular vote.

By about 0.15%, if you ignore the IA, NV, ME and WA cacuses.
Which is coincidentally the same margin by which he won Guam
In Guam, Obama won by 7 votes out of 4,500.

Not that the popular vote is a real number, but here's the details
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

[Hamlette]

7. No. Clinton, at one time at least, wanted ALL of MI delegates, her second position was

she would take 73 (as voted for her) and the 55 remaining would have to go to the convention as unpledged delegates. That is what Ickes argued to the committee last Sat.

If you remember, after the MI primary, there was a state convention and it was reported she went with a slate of "her" delegates to get them nominated for the "undecided" or "unpledged" delegates.

So, it was her plan to force the committee to seat the 55 as unpledged delegates. How would you "pick" unpledged delegates? who knows, but she had a slate of Clinton supporters ready to run as unpledged delegates in MI. Or so it was reported here.

[Bread and Circus]

8. That would have been bizarre and unreasonable, it's not even worth consideration.

To get more than the 55% that actually voted for her would not stand up to the scrutiny of even a 5 year old's sense of fairness.

[Hamlette]

11. that's what she argued...since she was the only name of the ballot...here's a great response:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10505

Clinton’s camp insisted Obama shouldn’t get any pledged delegates in Michigan since he chose not to put his name on the ballot, and she should get 73 pledged delegates with 55 uncommitted. Obama’s team insisted the only fair solution was to split the pledged delegates in half between the two campaigns, with 64 each.

(read the whole post, and if you're not reading John Cole daily, do. He's hysterically funny and very smart. He doesn't post tons of posts so you can do it in a few minutes a day.)

[WeDidIt]

5. Right now, if there were no penalties and it was as the vote went

Obama would have 2196, 14 delegates shy of the magic number.

Clinton would have 2016.5, 193.5 delegates shy of the magic number.

[WeDidIt]

9. And as of now, it would be 2200 Obama 2015.5 Clinton n/t

[WeDidIt]

10. As of now it would be 2203 Obama 2017.5 Clinton n/t