I must admit to being a little stunned by the Philadelphia Inquirer's analysis of the campaign math:

QUOTE:

Real Clear Politics keeps track of six versions of the popular-vote total. They are, in ascending order of inclusivity: (1) the popular vote of sanctioned contests; (2) the total of sanctioned contests, plus estimated votes from the Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington caucuses; (3) the popular vote plus Florida; (4) popular vote plus Florida and the caucuses; (5) the popular vote plus Florida and Michigan; (6) popular vote plus Florida, Michigan, and the caucus estimates. After Tuesday, Clinton now leads in two of these six counts.

If you believe that the most important precept in democratic politics is to "count every vote," then the sixth category is the most inclusive, and here Clinton leads Obama by 71,301 votes. Of course, this includes the Michigan result, where Sen. Obama had removed his name from the ballot. So while it may be the most inclusive, it may not be the most fair.

The third and fourth counts - the ones which include Florida - seem more fair. Here, Obama is clinging to a slight lead of 146,786 votes (257,008, with the caucus estimates). However, with Puerto Rico, Montana, and South Dakota remaining, he will almost certainly finish behind her in these counts, likely by a few hundred thousand votes.

But could Clinton take over the lead in all of the popular-vote tabulations? Quite possibly. In Puerto Rico's last major election, two million people voted. Let's assume that turnout for this historic vote - Puerto Rico has never had a presidential primary before - will be equal to or greater than that turnout.

If Clinton were to win Puerto Rico by 20 points she would pick up at least a 400,000-vote margin. This would allow her to swamp Obama in the popular-vote counts, which include Florida, making her the leader in four of the six permutations of the popular vote. At that point, Obama would be left clinging to the least-inclusive count, which he now leads by 441,558 votes (551,780, including caucuses).

To understand how razor-thin this majority is, consider that if the Puerto Rico turnout is slightly larger than we have imagined - or Clinton's margin is slightly greater - then Clinton would finish the primary process leading in every conceivable vote count. With two million voters, a 28 percent victory would put Clinton over the top even in the count, which excludes Florida and Michigan and includes estimates for Obama's caucus victories.

END QUOTE

If Hillary Clinton wins five or six measurse of the popular vote count, leaving Obama with only the most restrictive measure, she has won the right to demand the vice presidency or some other major prize. If Hillary Clinton wins the popular vote count by all six measures, how could Obama refuse her? The uncommitted superdelegates would likely insist on fighting it out until the convention unless Obama offers her the No. 2 job.

It all comes down to counting all the votes. And ... who would have guessed? Puerto Rico.

No wonder Obama is now saying that he wants to assemble a "Team of Rivals".

QUOTE

"I can tell you this. My goal is to have the best possible government. And that means me winning. So, I'm very practical in my thinking. I'm a practical guy. One of my heroes is Abraham Lincoln. Awhile back, there was a wonderful book written by Doris Kearns Goodwin called 'Team of Rivals,' in which she talked about how Lincoln basically pulled all the people he'd been running against into his Cabinet. Because whatever personal feelings there were, the issue was, 'How can we get the country through this time of crisis?' I think that has to be the approach one takes to the vice president and the Cabinet," - Barack Obama, in Boca Raton today, according to Andrew Romano.

END QUOTE

Why on earth would he want to do that? Because that may be the only way to truly end the nomination process without Hillary appealing all the way to the floor of the convention. If he gives in to her demands, it shuts her up and leaves her without a chair to stand on.

Rachel Maddow makes this point on Huffington Post:
<blockquote>if the Democrats are to avoid a divided convention, the Florida and Michigan dispute will have to be taken off the table -- settled in a way that avoids the risk of a rules dispute that stretches the nominating contest out through the convention. I can think of only one way to do that, but there may be others.

Here's my way: based on my read of NBC's delegate math, I think if the Clinton campaign won 100% of what they wanted on the Florida and Michigan dispute, Obama could still clinch the nomination -- even according to the most pro-Clinton math -- if 90 of the remaining 210-or-so undeclared superdelegates declared for Obama.

If they so declared before May 31st, the Rules and Bylaws committee would have no reason to take up the Florida and Michigan dispute because it would be a moot point -- Obama's camp could concede every Clinton demand on the subject and still win the nomination.

Otherwise? I'll be the twitchy one on radio row at the divided Democratic convention in Denver... spooked by the ghosts of 1968, 1972, 1980...</blockquote>If Maddow's math is right, then Obama could give in to 100% of Hillary's demands if he thinks he can earn the support of at least 42% of the undeclared superdelegates. Hillary would need 58% of these superdelegates to pull off a come-from-behind victory. Those are odds he could definitely pull off, considering that he will have won more delegates, more states, and probably the popular vote as well.

I'm not sure Obama would even need to give in to 100% of Hillary's demands. He could just give in to her demands for seating Florida's delegation, and then go with the Michigan Democratic party's suggestion that 69 of the state's delegates go to Hillary and 59 would go to Barack Obama. It would be extremely difficult for Hillary to attempt to go all the way to the convention if there wasn't a good cause. Her superdelegates would never sanction that.

By conceding defeat, Obama could hasten the march to victory and get Hillary out of the picture fast.

Poor me. Poor, poor me. I often work on a TPM post in the evening before bed (Pacific time). By the time I awake in the morning, the post is virtually impossible to find, usually not even visible on the Recently Posted list. While it's a good thing that many people are using the Reader Blogs feature, it's hard for quality posts that don't kiss Obama's butt or smack Hillary around to get discovered. In fact, I haven't had a post get recommended since February 20. 

So here are my greatest sleeper hits, as I give them one last chance at a semi-charmed life.

Obamanites: Chill out! Hillary won't go all the way to the convention ... unless
I wish Obama supporters would just chill out in their feverish attacks on Hillary Clinton. Doesn't anyone get what she's doing? It's really very obvious. She's going to keep campaigning until June 3, the last Democratic primary. She's going to...

Posted on May 22, 2008 5:57 PM

Good Bayh!
Forget the speculation that Jim Webb will be Obama's vice presidential pick. It won't happen. He adds little to Obama's perceived "experience deficit". He's not particularly charismatic. If he left his Senate seat, it would be a Republican gain. He's...

Posted on May 22, 2008 3:24 AM

The Case for Obama-Dodd '08
Christopher Dodd, the senior Senator from Connecticut and former presidential candidate, would make a great, safe, reassuring choice for Obama's running mate. Nobody would get all that excited about an older white guy who's been in Washington a long time, it's...

Posted on May 16, 2008 6:47 PM

Guess the Date Hillary Will Suspend Her Campaign -- a TPM Contest
Some Democrats think Hillary could withdraw her campaign any day now. Others think she will wait until June 4 -- the day after the last primary. Still others think she will wait until after enough superdelegates have announced their support...

Posted on May 16, 2008 5:15 PM

Anti-McCain Ad: Suffering Torture Doesn't Make You a Hero
An attack ad you're not likely to see the Democrats run against John McCain.  But perhaps they should...[over still photos of Abu Grahib, prisoners of war being waterboarded]Voice #1: I'm an American veteran who was ordered by my commanders to torture...

Posted on March 31, 2008 7:43 PM

We Must Not Overreact to the Wright Controversy, But Renew Our Goal of Party Unity
Here we stand, Democrats facing two crucial recent developments. With the news that revotes in Florida and Michigan are extremely unlikely, it has become virtually impossible for Hillary Clinton to win the deleate race or the popular vote. At the same...

Posted on March 19, 2008 5:37 PM

Will Obama Criticize Andrew Sullivan in His Own Sister Soljah Moment?
It’s now clear that Barack Obama has a secret weapon in his war for the Democratic nomination for president. He intends to remain calmly and cooly above the fray of his opponent’s daily attacks on his past, his resume, his...

I wish Obama supporters would just chill out in their feverish attacks on Hillary Clinton. Doesn't anyone get what she's doing? It's really very obvious. She's going to keep campaigning until June 3, the last Democratic primary. She's going to make her best case for the seating of Florida and Michigan delegations, and she will probaby end up with a compromise that will certainly not change the outcome of the election.

She's doing so, in good measure, with the blessing and support of many of her supporters who do, in fact, account for nearly half of the Democratic voters. She is doing so because hers is a historic campaign, and her supporters are grieving a painful loss. She is waging a campaign worthy of a fighter concerned to ratchet up the most powerful position she can possibly have, in order to have some semblance of control over the future of the Democratic party.

Yes, it's true that she's making a strong case for seating Florida and Michigan, and dismissing the Obama supporters who care more about selectively enforcing party rules than about winning two swing states in the fall. But she has also effected a "cease fire" on truly damaging attacks on Obama.

So let her campaign. Let her make the case to voters.

By early June, Obama will have the delegates he needs to claim a victory. She will suspend her campaign some time probably in mid-June, no matter what she says now about taking her campaign all the way to the convention. Don't take her literally. She needs to make the threat because she needs to get the media to pay attention to her campaign. And in just a few weeks the whole primary race will be over.

Let it happen. Don't get so wound up and angry. Take a deep breath. Your raving anti-Clinton antics are hurting the Democrats as much as, or more than, the very understandable tactics of Clinton herself.

I think there's only two scenarios where the Democratic race goes all the way to the convention.

One: If Obama can't persuade enough superdelegates to declare their support for him in June, then he will not hit the "magic number" he needs to win the race. Uncommitted superdelegates are the only ones responsible if the race goes to the convention. Instead of attacking a candidate who is barely relevant, why don't you focus your energy on persuading these superdelegates to declare their support in June?

Two: If Obama hits the "magic number", but fails to negotiate in good faith with Hillary for her to suspend her campaign. If she makes some reasonable requests from the nominee -- e.g., a prime time speaking spot at the convention; a promise to work for change to the Democratic primary rules, especially caucuses, for the future; etc. -- and Obama blunders the diplomacy, then Hillary might just take the race to the convention out of spite. Reportedly, Obama wasn't able to convince John Edwards to support him before the Texas contest because he didn't work for it and Edwards balked. If Obama's diplomacy skills aren't adequate to persuade Hillary to endorse him, then that will be a worrisome failure indeed.

So if you have confidence in Obama's diplomacy skills, and confidence that superdelegates will do what's in the party's best interest, then relax. The race will soon be over.

Forget the speculation that Jim Webb will be Obama's vice presidential pick. It won't happen. He adds little to Obama's perceived "experience deficit". He's not particularly charismatic. If he left his Senate seat, it would be a Republican gain. He's got a few vetting issues relating to controversial stuff in his novels. Plus, I think he's going to regret having written "Women Can't Fight" (or at least, writing that title).

So who will Obama pick? I would put my money on a name I haven't seen tossed out very often. I would bet on the Indiana Senator Evan Bayh. He has over 20 years of government experience, including terms as Secretary of State and Governor of Indiana. He's a good looking Midwestern white male with executive experience and strong foreign policy credentials. He gave the Democratic Convention's keynote address in 1996. He came very close to running for the presidency in 2007, but he endorsed Hillary Clinton instead. Pundits have placed Bayh at or near the top of Clinton's list of top prospective running mates.

Jim Webb says he doesn't want the vice president's job, so I think Obama should take him at his word. Bayh would probably accept the veep invitation in a heartbeat. And -- most critically -- his selection could be positioned as something like a concession to aid in securing the enthusiastic support of Hillary Clinton. Obama probably needs to select a strong Clinton supporter as a gesture of party unity, and Obama-Bayh could be the ticket.