The way Clinton and Obama have been pulling from their respective basis, a computer simulation could predict the Fall election, based on the demographics alone.

Right. The superdelegates will overrule the pledged delegates causing a deep rift in the party, all on the basis of a computer simulation that tries to extrapolate from Clinton-vs-Obama results to Obama-vs-McCain and Clinton-vs-McCain. Because obviously if a voter from Hillary's "base" has to choose between Obama and McCain, they'll go with McCain. Or something.

In other words, you hope the superdelegates are really, really stupid.

Good luck with that.

Thank you. That makes sense, though I still disagree with you. I think enough superdelegates will be more concerned about their local elections, and the negative effect that Clinton's appearance may have downticket. And I don't think that they will view an Obama loss in PA as evidence of unelectability on a general ticket. Maybe if the TX, OH and PA victories were by wider margins.

Gosh, I have said this before, but I still find this prediction severely implausible. For one thing, it proceeds from the assumption that electability in November is the only consideration in the minds of these uncommitted supers, which seems unlikely to my mind. Surely at least some of them will be making decisions based on their own feelings about the effects of one-candidate or another on the downticket races in their own localities, and those sorts of considerations will not be much affected by PA or NC.

For another thing, all of this talk about bases holding or bases cracking only makes sense if the supers begin from the assumption that these bases are mutually exclusive of each other. That is to say, the fact that she wins PA is only relevant to this analysis if one proceeds from the assumption that the folks that vote for her in the primary would never vote for him in the primary. This assumption, however, is as much as a concession of defeat before the convention even comes. Neither candidate can carry PA with only the votes s/he wins in the primary. Both will need the other's primary voters to win in Nov. There is, however, no real reason to take such a dim view of things; it is not unreasonable in the least to expect that the folks who vote in the democratic primary will, by and large, vote democratic in the GE, even if their first-choice candidate does not get the nomination. If one proceeds from that expectation, however, then all of this talk about bases holding or cracking is just beside the point.

Of course, I am not a superdelegate, so what do I know? Then again, neither are any of the rest of us here.

You, Bill, Chelsea & Carville all arrived at the same faulty conclusion. And what do you all have in common?

One thing that you fail to take into account is that primary voters are also thinking about electability in their decision, and that this will not be a factor in their decision in the general (for the most part).

You could parse the fact that a significant % of older white voters are voting for Clinton as evidence that they are uncomfortable with the thought of a black president/young president/whatever. Or you could interpret it as evidence that they believe, more than young people, that the country is too racist to elect a black man and they want the most electable Democrat to run against McCain. If their motivation is the latter, they would still vote for Obama in the general election over McCain (unless they just want to be on the winning side no matter what). I actually find that second premise more believable, given the high approval ratings Obama usually gets in exit polls even from Clinton voters. It also helps explain why the more he campaigns in a state the more he closes the gap--older voters see evidence of his electability when they see the crowds in their own town cheering him on.

In fact, if there is one predjudice that I have seen coming from older voters more than younger voters, it's agism. I have read more posters on blogs saying, "I'm in my seventies and I think McCain is too old to be president," than anything comparable linking age to race. My parents, both in their seventies, believe that about McCain. I suspect that much of the ahistoric hysteria about Rev Wright comes from young voters who did not live through the civil rights movement.

"John Edwards has to be kicking himself for folding so soon."

So friggin' true.

I wanted to raise the ante, SC, but allsburg pointed out, quite rightly, that I would be hedging my bet if I did. The rest of you can set the bar as high as you like. I'm stuck with win no matter how small. And I can't take it back. It's not right to lie to children.