He has about 67% of us above average folks in Minnesota and we're not particularly upscale or black. Obama actually does quite well in much of flyoverland. I do think he might have some difficulty where ethnic tensions overlap between African American and working class whites, Hispanics etc. but that's a reason to not vote for him? I think not. That just means Americans haven't yet turned into saints. But we can work on that.

It's a big night for Hillary because in every state she focused on, she outperformed the late polls, which were constantly showing an Obama surge. Obama's "surge" is no more.

If the numbers hold up in California, it's huge for her considering Obama threw his entire "kitchen sink" into California, including Oprah for God's sake.

Look at Hillary's wins in Tennessee and Arkansas, both recently red states. Bill Clinton carried these states in 92 and 96, and there's no reason to think Hillary wouldn't be strong there in a general.

So Obama racks up delegates in a number of western caucuses. States like Idaho that haven't voted Democratic in...how many years?

There's no doubt Hillary is a strong and well funded candidate with a significant base of support among many traditional Democratic groups. And yes, she deserves credit for withstanding the Obama onslaught of the past couple of weeks. And yes, the media is quite unfair to her most of the time---not all of the time, but most. And along those lines Obama is getting a pretty easy ride from the very same media most of the time---not all of the time, but most.

That being said, I personally find the basketball analogy not as offensive as I do just not pertinent.

While giving Hillary her props, let's take a moment to give Obama his due. Obama was coming from waaaay behind and closing fast on Hillary nationwide. While it's true that he didn't close the gap fast enough to overtake her in the key states of Massachusetts, New Jersey and California, he did overtake her in Missouri, Connecticut, and Georgia since the first of the year. That's pretty impressive campaigning in anyone's book when combined with his other victories this evening. It's simply impossible to ignore what a feat Obama has accomplished up to this point. Remember, it ws not that long ago that "everyone" knew Hillary's nomination was "inevitable". Remember? Doesn't look quite so clear now, though she's still the favorite, but not by much.

Please don't anyone accuse me of shilling for either one of them. I voted for Edwards---proudly because I am a progressive/liberal/left Democrat and IMO he was the best candidate in the race (hands down in my opinion). So I don't have any more of an ax to grind against one of them as I do the other. These two are just two more centrist, corporate Democrats advocating much the same platform (which BTW I think is an error of massive proportions for us as a party and a people).

Be that as it may, Obama's campaign is far more reminiscent of Gary Hart's effort as opposed to Bill Bradley's which may well have succeeded were it not for the Monkey Business scandal. Regardless, the energy and spirit the Hart people had back then is apparent, but even more present in Obama's team now. All that really means is that while Hillary's camp can breath easy tonight, they cannot afford to do so for long because while they may win, they will be unable to do so without fighting Obama's camp hard for the privelege.

So, tonight's results clearly demonstrate that Hillary was able to defend her early, but eroding lead in the Super Tuesday states. She more than avoided embarassment. Obama was able to put a couple of chinks in her armor, keep the delegate count essentially even and will likely continue gaining steam and momentum as a result of his strong challenge. He clearly is expanding his appeal over time and that means there's plenty for Hillary's camp to worry about as they look toward the coming contests this spring. Getting agressive against Obama is probably as dangerous for Hillary as anything else. I doubt you'll see any real strong frontal assualt from Hillary's camp on him. To choose to accentuate the divisions in the Democratic Party would make either nominee's job more difficult in the end and the current "niceness" posture of both camps worked pretty well for her. Obama can attack her with much less fear of blowback for lots of reasons not the least of which is that if you can't attack the frontrunner then who can you attack?

Will there be enough time between now and most of the rest of the primaries for Obama to overtake Hillary's lead? It is impossible to know the answer to this question at this time. What we do know today though, is that if Obama continues to do as well as he has, there will be no apparent winner of the nomination until we get to Denver.

I'm confused as to how this is a big night for her. So far half of her wins are traditionally democratic states that any democrat is going to carry anyway. Obama has won 13 states so far and may win NM (it is currently too close to call, they are within 200 votes of each other.) and he didn't win states that any old democrat is going to take in November. He won swing states and red states.

The numbers from California ARE going to tighten overnight. Hillary is going to take it, but it WON'T be a 16% lead, in my opinion.

What this is going to leave her with is losing 9-13, possibly 8-14. Obama possibly winning 14 states to her 8 is a HUGE victory considering how far he was down in almost ALL these states.

Keep in mind that Clinton has almost no money left compared to Obama. She raised 13 million in January. Obama raised 32 million. They both spent around 10 million between S.C. and Super Tuesday. Do the math.

Comeback? No, I think that's about as much of an overstatement as the hype leading into Super Tuesday of an Obama avalanche. But I do know that I for one am a lttle worried.

I find it a bitter pill indeed that my state, which touts it's 'progressiveness' gave the nod to Clinton. Clinton is not progressive, Clinton is familiarity. That saddens me & fills me with a slight pang of nausea. 20 years of Bushs & Clintons is just about all I can stomach. Say what you like about Hillary being her own person, she's a Clinton. Enough already. California didn't go progressive. California didn't go for change at all. It went stagnant. And I can almost empathize with what most Republians must be feeling if it is indeed the name Clinton I see on my ballot this fall - "Dammit, this is what I'm supposed to vote for?"

I too was leaning towards Edwards initially but when he withdrew I went for Obama. And say what you like about both Clinton & Obama being equally empty on real substance, Obama has one clear edge for me...he's not a Clinton or a Bush. So I am still hoping he can pull out the nomination for several different reasons. Not the least of which is that I don't like this bile-like taste I get in my mouth when I'm forced to say the names President Bush & President Clinton. Ack...there it is again...

Ditto Douglas watts. So Hillary is the one that we should rally behind because she can appeal to the 'silent majority'. This makes me sick to even think about it. Have you no historical memory? The silent majority was that large number of white people that Nixon and Reagan encouraged to vote their prejudice and to reject the efforts of the New Democratic Party to include minorities in our system. If this is a new Hillary meme then God help us all.

Comeback?

This meme is silly. Clinton had been the prohibitive favorite until the polls, in general, began to close somewhat in the last week; and is, arguably, the democratic establishment candidate.

Clinton and Obama both did very well last evening. Let's all rejoice that we have a competitive primary, between two great candidates, for the first time in a long time.

Let's not begin eating our young, let's stay real; and, please, hold the nonsense.

Ken - I don't understand why you think yesterday was in anyway favorable to Clinton. In addition to a virtual tie in delegates won, I counted the popular vote this morning in just the non caucus states and that was a virtual tie also - Clinton (7,161,000) to Obama's (6.969,000).

In the 6 caucus states, Obama won overwhelmingly with a delegate count of 116 to 53, better than 2 to 1. I realize that many of these states are fairly small but Minnesota, Kansas, and Colorado have sizeable populations. If those states voting patterns reflected caucus percentages, then Obama probably would have won the popular vote totals.

As you correctly point out the remaining states don't really favor Clinton and it appears it will come down to a brokered convention with Obama ahead on pledged delegates. If you want to talk about comebacks, lets not talk about days but look where Obama has come in the last 3 months.

Independent Ben wrote:
"The troubling demographic is where white males went: in a big way for Obama. Makes you wonder if a bit of gender politics has entered the equation. If Hillary is the nominee, can she hold onto white males in November? Perhaps there are men out there who would rather stay home or even vote for "endless war," before they would vote for a woman."

I'm afraid that is true.

But while many white men are unwilling to vote for a smart woman, women who don't like the gender politics are stepping forward and backing Hilllary in larger numbers. (Hillary has always polled well among Hispanic and African-American men. For whatever reason, these groups don't seem as opposed to strong/smart women.

In a race against McCain, I believe white men will vote for McCain--whether he runs against HRC or Obama.

IF McCain is running against Clinton, she will take women (who will vote in large numbers against McCain because he is so hawkish), low-income Democrats, traditional ethnic Democrats, Hispanics, African-Americans and many of the under-30 voters who supported Obama. (Though some might stay home.)
In that scenario, I don't see how McCain could win.

If McCain is running against Obama, Obama will take the African-American vote, the under 30 vote and, I think, most women.

That leaves McCain with men and more conservative Independent and even Democratic voters over 40 from the midwest and the South who will see him as a war hero, more mature more "tested" than Obama. They'll see him as a true patriot. And as an "outsider" insider--someone who is independent enough to stand up to his own party. It's conceivable that McCain could win.

That's what scares me--Barry Goldwater in the White House.

(I don't know how Hispanics would vote--they might not turn out in large numbers for either McCain or Obama.)

This information is very useful! Thanks!
Best regards, Katya, CEO of ms hyper v, rhel iscsi target