Larkin, you are right it is the margin of Obama's victories that have been impressive. And before Hillary can get to Texas and Ohio ( no push-overs either) on March 4th, there is the Hawaii caucus 29 delegates at stake and Wisconsin primary the same day, next Tuesday with another 92 delegates at stake. Here is a good clear site with a look at the upcoming contests.

It's get worse by the minute. See this Wisconsin poll

Obama 50, Clinton 39

Hawaii is a caucus state and a home state for Obama so he should be favored there.

If Obama sweeps everything from Super Tuesday to March 4, it means Ohio and Texas become absolute must wins for Clinton.

Ohio and Texas have been absolute wins for Clinton ever since super Tuesday. I think Pennsylvania falls into the same category, doesn't it?

Nothing's changed - nothing is new. This week's results are all very predictable and forecast following what happened on Super Tuesday. It wasn't nearly this predictable until Super Tuesday, so digging up 3 month old polls is just plain silly.

By "factoring" it in they are referring to the fact that they aren't wasting money on a lot of tv ads in those states where they know Obama will sweep, etc. The bulk of those decisions were made after Super Tuesday, and often with as little notice as a day or two.

I used to edit political campaign TV ads (exclusively for Democrats, of course). During the election season I would often get a call at 6am on a Saturday morning telling me we needed to get a new TV spot out in time to air at 6pm that night. They'd shoot it at 10, I'd edit it at noon, and it'd be on the air that same afternoon.

11 week old polls are not relevant to any campaign strategy underway this week, I assure you.

But keep trying, there's bound to be a pony in there somewhere... *wink.

By "factoring" it in they are referring to the fact that they aren't wasting money on a lot of tv ads in those states where they know Obama will sweep, etc.

If that's the case then why has Hillary been campaigning so hard in Virginia? Bill Clinton's been all over the state too. Why waste him on an election that can't be won?

The answer is that they "expected" to win Virgina all along (prior to Super Tuesday). And they haven't written it off because they desperately need a big win (and I mean 10% or more) to stop Obama's momentum.

If not Virginia, then where? Soon they'll be talking about how they "expected" Obama to win Wisconsin. On March 4, the string will finally run out because if they don't win big then they are through.

The game here is delegates, not expectations. You can't get the nomination if you don't get the delegates. Saying you didn't "expect" to win a contest doesn't change the fact that the delegates are all going to other guy.

If you intend to win the nomination people "expect" you to win contests. Just ask Rudy Giuliani about the importance of winning as opposed to managing expectations about your losses.

Clinton needs to start winning. Soon. She can't wait until March 4. We'll see very shortly if her efforts in Virginia paid off.

"If that's the case then why has Hillary been campaigning so hard in Virginia? Bill Clinton's been all over the state too. Why waste him on an election that can't be won?"

It's a proportional primary, Larkin. Of course they'll try to win 'some' delegates even though they know they won't win the primary.

Come on... that was a trick question, right? You knew that...

"The answer is that they "expected" to win Virgina all along (prior to Super Tuesday). And they haven't written it off because they desperately need a big win (and I mean 10% or more) to stop Obama's momentum."

There you go again, making up what Clinton's camp is thinking so you can shoot holes in them - lol...

Ohh, they're "desperate" - lol... If that makes you happy, you go ahead and believe that.

... but still no pony, and the pile is getting larger.

I used to edit political campaign TV ads

Well that explains why you're such a nasty character who's primary purpose is to constantly distort and demonize an opponent. You are all spin and dishonesty, Lee, and you are clearly very desperate now. I can't possibly see how you could support Obama after he wins the nomination.

Looking forward to hearing about how everyone expected Obama to win Wisconsin. And if he wins Ohio or Texas, we'll see how desperate you can get. Maybe you'll find another toothless prostitute video on youtube!

Maybe you'll find another toothless prostitute video on youtube!

Classic. I've always said you should be writing for Wizbang mantis.

Hillary speaking in El Paso last night:

"We're going to sweep across Texas in the next three weeks, bringing our message about what we need in America," she says, saying she's ready to be president on "day one" and can "turn the economy around," then gives the sound bite you'll see a lot tonight: "I'm tested, I'm ready, let's make it happen!"

If that is Hillary's new campaign message, it is going to have all the effect of a damp squip.

After her speech in El Paso, Hillary gives a local competent-sounding audio podcast interview..says she is "ahead in delegates" and is "a problem solver".

"I can't possibly see how you could support Obama after he wins the nomination.

There's obviously a lot you can't possible see, mantis, but that isn't my problem, it's yours.

I assume you'll take cues from your tactical, if not idealogical, brethren on the right who are now turning around and heralding McCain as a true conservative and a worthy nominee. That's pretty much what you'll have to do if Obama is the nominee and you support him as you say you will. Of course, the twelve people who read your posts will remember what you really think of him (or what you're willing to say about him, anyway).