Of all of the numbers that have been tossed around, like the blindingly obvious one that Hillary cannot get the required number of delegates required of the current primary election system, there is one that was used on a cable network last night that seemed telling of the mentality of supports of each campaign.
In exit polling done with supporters of each group, each was asked a questions: If your candidate did not receive the party nomination as presidential candidate, who would you then vote for in the general election in November?

The results: 53% of Clinton supporters said they would vote for Obama if he was chosen, while 70% of Obama supporters said they would vote for Clinton if she was the nominee.

My read on it: Clinton supporters are out for their own girl as they have been from the go. They were handed the de facto nomination over a year and half ago and then Captain Charismatic came along and stole her cookies. In reaction to this, her supporters, who also have that veiled sense of entitlement since they have been on board with history from the start, no matter their gender, seem to be reacting in a retaliatory manner. Rather than think of the good of the party and want the Donkeys to win in November over John "The Gray-Haired Version of Bush" McCain, they would not vote for Obama out of spite. A very mature reaction to be sure.
While it seems that his supporters would vote with their party in mind and not the pettiness of a losing electorate thinking of the big picture instead of, oh look out for that word ... bitterness.
It is a sad statement on the state of the party and the thinking of voters on both sides of the Democratic primary, but worse, it bears out what seems to inevitable after two candidates have this much hand-to-hand combat over this long of a span: divisiveness. That kind of fissure months before the Convention and after almost two years of jousting is not encouraging.

People want to put someone new in office. They want a change of direction in all phases of the presidency: leadership, a level of truthfulness that is slightly higher than Bush/Rove/Cheney, and 13 other things that George Bush is not. They crave it like nothing else in politics in years, but the Democratic accomplishment list in Congress since the 2006 election has been minimal at best and pathetic at worst. They bragged of change, got their wish and then stood pat as their spines all evaporated.

For something of this magnitude they are willing to overlook that for one more election, but all but the hardcore electorate have been emaciated by this arduous campaign "season" and the results are on display with Obama and Clinton. Whoever takes the nomination for the Democrats they will stand on the podium in Denver looking like they had been mauled by the proverbial bear with a shredded suit or pantsuit, disheveled hair, multiple cuts and bruises and the energy level of a coma patient. It is a shame, but in the end, totally watchable.