What importance will any decision about MI and FL actually have? How much is a fight worth?

Setting aside all the silliness and (arguably valid) concerns about following rules put in place by the relevant authorities and rules that you have agreed to. or disenfranchizing voters (both those who voted and those who *didn't* because they were told - by HRC among others - that their votes wouldn't count), what would/will the outcome be in terms of actual delegate count and the nomination?

Not much. Not even if you assume the very *best* possible outcome (from the Clinton point of view) from here on in. That would require:

-- Michican being seated with 73 delegates for Clinton and none for Obama (the 55 'uncommitted' delegates would not be pledged to any candidate and thus become "free" delegates),

-- 105 FL delegates being assigned to her and only 67 given to Obama (rather than the actual balance of 80, creating another 16 'free' delegates),

-- Obama gets no more endorsements from Edwards delegates beyond the 12 he already has, creating another 6 'free' delegates,

-- no more Clinton delegates switch to Obama,

-- none of the 257 currently uncommited superdelegates endorse Obama,

-- Clinton wins Puerto Rico by 63% to 35% and Obama wins SD and MT by only 55%/45%, resulting in the following delegate splits: PR 36 C, 19 O – MT 7 C, 9 – SD 7 C, 8 O.

Starting with MSNBC's current pledged delegate count of (1502 for Clinton and 1647 for Obama), by June 4 the pledged delegate totals would be:

CLINTON 1730 OBAMA: 1750

If MI and FL are counted, the 'Magic number for a majority of pledged delegates would be 1784, (Note: this still includes the 6 Edwards, 16 FL and 55 MI "free" delegates for purposes of calculating the magic number, although one could argue for a lower number.) And with MI and FL in the mix, the total needed to clinch the nomination would be 2209. (Without MI and FL, the ‘magic number’ for pledged delegates is 1627 and the number needed to clinch is 2024.)

Current Superdelegate (and committed 'free' del) count is:

CLINTON 281.5 OBAMA 309.5 + 12 Edwards = 321.5

Thus, their total delegate count as of June 4, under this 'best for Clinton' scenario would be:

CLINTON: 2011.5 (197.5 needed to clinch)

OBAMA: 2071.5 (137.5 needed to clinch)

The balance of their delegates would have to come from the "pool" of 334 remaining delegates (257 SD + 6 Edwards + 16 FL + 55 MI).

To win, Obama would have to get 41% (137.5/334) of those remaining delegates to support him ------- For Clinton to win, she would have to convince 59% (197.5/334) of them to turn their back on the majority of the pledged delegates (and number of contests won and popular vote, if counted fairly) and chose her over Obama.

So, CAN she win? Theoretically yes, Will she win? No, not even under the absolute best-for-her scenario, which will be a little bit less positive the minute another SD endorses Obama, or another Edwards delegate annouces, or another Clinton SD switches, or he does better than projected above in any of the remaining contests.

I'm sure that even Clinton herself knows this by now, and it must be absolutely "crazy-making" for her to have to get up every day and go out there and pretend otherwise. (In fact, that is probably the true explanation for her recent gaffes and, well, "crazy" statements.) That strength and determination is, without doubt, impressive. It would be admirable IF she was acheiving anything positive by it. If it really makes a difference to her supporters that she "finish the course," then perhaps it is worthwhile (the endurance, not the nastiness). I’m a woman, so please don’t try to tell me that women somehow need her to make such an effort. If she could do it with class and dignity, maybe.  But I - and others - are embarrassed and frankly humiliated by the way she is carrying on this fight.  Most of us want real equality, which in this case would mean that no one would be tolerating her current behavior.

For Obama to clinch the nomination on June 4, even under this 'best-case-for-Clinton' scenario, he would need to receive the endorsement of 137.5 more delegates, 41% of the available pool.

Other scenarios:

If he's given the 55 MI delegates, he would need 82 more superdelegates (24% of a 'pool' of 279)

If FL and MI delegates (pledged and super) are split 50/50, he would need 48 more superdelegates (8% of a pool of 263)

If FL and MI aren't counted at all, he would need 20 more superdeletages (9.8% of a 'pool' of 208)

My preferred scenario (borrowed from a poster on another blog) is this:

MI and FL *pledged* delegates are seated as won by Clinton with the balance for Obama (giving him MI 55, FL 80). But the 50 *super* delegates from those two states are NOT counted. To clinch under this scenario would require 2183 delegates, and Obama would need 79 more of the remaining superdelegates (30% of a 'pool' of 263).

Yes, this proposal would require him to do more than he would under any of the more reasonable scenarios. He would, however, be just 2 delegates short of the ‘magic number’ (1783.5 pledged delegates) at the end of the contests and I'm confident he could meet the goal, just as he will be able to meet the 41% goal in the ‘worst case' (for him) scenario.

Seating the pledged delegates but not the super delegates from MI and FL, would have a number of advantages: 1) honoring, more or less, the voice of the voters of the two states; 2) penalizing the SDs, at least some of whom contributed to this mess as much as anyone; and 3) leading to the quite "delicious" (sarcasm) sight of Clinton immediately pivoting and start to champion the Need and Right for the "undemocratic elite" to be heard! (I wonder if there is a Zimbabwian parallel?)

Since Obama can, I'm confident, achieve any of the necessary percentages of SDs after the contests are over (8% up to 41%), that means the ONLY importance of the May 31st decision re: FL and MI is going to be the message DNC wants to send regarding the 'disobedience' of those two states and the impact any decision will have on upcoming election, in which the states' votes will be needed. Only if it is badly mis-managed, so as to allow Clinton to further embarrass us (women and all Democrats) with lawsuits and similar insanities will it make any difference at all.