Some random thoughts from the 'Dawg.

Advantage Clinton: She "won" the biggies, kept her leaky boat afloat, did some damage to Obama by splitting MO, and taking AR, TN and OK by relatively big margins, and she spanked Uncle Ted and crew in MA.

Advantage Obama: He did some serious damage in NY (Clinton only won about 40 more delegates), polled extremely well in CA - again doing some serious damage to the Clinton "victory", and took most of the interior of the country by storm. Latest count I saw on MSNBC is that Obama has 838 delegates to Clintons 836. He will get a new surge of money, and possibly some more endorsements (btw, endorsements are not about getting additional votes, they are primarily about fundraising, as Uncle Ted, et.al., can raise a ton of greenbacks)

Re voicing a question already asked: If Clinton really wants to be president, she is going to need the votes from Michigan and Florida. If Obama really wants to be president, he cannot let those delegates go to Clinton. If it comes down to those delegate totals, how will they settle the debate without (figurative) bloodshed?

From reading the comments on a MSNBC link: it appears that the election in Nov. will come down to a "mean little troll" vs. a "whiny little bitch." (NOTE: NOT the 'Dawg's words!) Is this really the best that the US can offer?

My own take: Obama cleaned Clinton's clock. She needed Super Tuesday to give Obama a knock-out punch, and all she did was rope-a-dope. Now he has momentum, can claim electability, and he has really put the screws to her in terms of fund raising. It appears she is banking on Ohio and Texas - a huge gamble given Texas' independent streak. On the other hand, she trounced Obama in OK, so I guess anything is possible.

It's all over on the Repub. side. Dead Man Walking better start writing some checks to Clinton, or his fairy tale will crash and burn in Nov.

Freightdawg