I wonder: the DNC chairman (Dean) repeatedly said Michigan and Florida will be seated. Shouldn't all media organizations update the nominating threshold up to 2208? If not, why not?

There's no confusion on George's part or anyone's.  If the majority of the pledged delegates go for Obama, and a greater majority of superdelegates goes for Clinton, then the superdelegates will have overturned the will of the pledged delegates.  The logic is sound.  

Now there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.  The superdelegates can choose whomever they want.  It seems to me that a lot of superdelegates think they should go with the pledged delegates leader.  It is a question primarily of politics (and political consequences) and secondarily a question of the ethos of the individual superdelegate.

I don't think there are many of us out here who are genuinely confused about this.

The media pushes this false narrative all the time, and further distorts the amount of support for Hillary by pretending that Florida and Michigan do not exist and will not be counted. Perhaps many of the Obama supporters have bought into this false narrative that has been provided by media which are actively rooting their candidate on. Fortunately, the public is pretty smart and Hillary will get the nod at the convention, pick Obama as her running mate, and win the White House.

Even if a person decides that the vote of the people should be irrelevant in the superdelegates' decisions (which I don't), the math just doesn't add up for her.

In order to win she would need to win 60% of the rest of the pledged delegates in every single contest from here on out, AND 59% of the rest of the superdelegates.  Every time she fails to win a state by 20% of the delegates her task becomes more and more difficult.

Again, this is a case of media narrative vs. the actual rules.  It seems the only people who actually understand the gravity of the Michigan/Florida situation are the rules gurus on MyDD.  

The rules don't call for excluding Michigan and Florida mandatorily.  They give several committies the option of incorporating their votes with a suggested penalty of a 50% reduction in pledged delegates (note that superdelegates would likely end up seated and voting because of the way the rules and DNC charter are written).  

The RBC is meeting at the end of May to handle the first appeal.  The committee's composition leans Hillary so I'd expect to see something very favorable emerge in her favor at the end of May.  It will be perfect timing too.  Almost no one understands exactly how the rules effect MI/FL and by the end of May, Hillary will be shining from a huge string of successes.  

I don't think most Americans want to see Florida's votes suppressed again and they don't want Michigan to be disenfranchised either.  The only people who want to suppress the votes are people who love Barack Obama and are upset that he lost those states.  The media was in his back pocket all Winter, hence the coverage of this issue being wildly (and unrealistically) in his favor.  

The winning number fluctuates around 2024 to 2025 because superdelegates are added (such as Foster and Cayazoux winning Congressional seats) and lost (deaths, resignations, etc.)

It is currently at 2024.5 to win.