On that conference call earlier, Hillary spokesman Howard Wolfson signaled what will be the Hillary camp's main argument when the spin wars over super-delegates start in earnest: Neither candidate can win this race without super-delegates.

Wolfson repeated variations of this point multiple times on the call.

Just doing the math quickly on this, NBC calculates that Obama leads Hillary in pledged delegates, 1,078 to 969. To get to the required total of 2,025, Obama would have to win virtually all the remaining 1,000 or so non-super delegates. So, yes, the winner will obviously need super-delegates.

The Obama camp will frame the coming argument, then, by saying that as a whole, the supers should follow the will of the people and back the leader in pledged delegates. The Hillary campaign will counter that super-delegates should be left to make up their own minds as to who they think can better lead the country.

But the argument is going to get messy.

The Hillary campaign will point out that Obama appears to be arguing that super-delegates in states that backed Hillary should go with him because he won the overall pledged delegate count. How, the Hillary camp will ask, can Obama make that case without saying that super delegates should defy the wishes of their state's voters, if not the nation's?

The point is that while the winner of the pledged delegate count will start the super-delegate argument out with a clear advantage, there are complications that could make this debate less clear cut -- and not quite as easy to win in the spin arena -- than it might appear right now.

Of course, if Obama has an overwhelming lead in pledged delegates at the end, Hillary's arguments will get much, much tougher to make.