... alls you'll see is "Hillary Wins California!", yet hardly any speculation of whats actually happening in the Congressional districts that decide the delegates. Barack won the states and very well may have won the delegates.

Not just that, but he's got more cash to push this thing through. Also, as evidenced by some of the states he's won, the more time he spends in a state, the better the chance he has to win it.

The county including California results and New Mexico Results- I just haven't seen anything about it (which claims to be anywhere near complete) anywhere else.

Two weeks ago, Obama was supposed to be DOA on the morning of February 6.  Here we are, and the campaign is alive and well.

Next week, the elections are here in DC, MD and the Old Dominion.

Virginia Matters!

This will stretch out possibly until April, but understand that it's all just expanded exposure to Obama, and the more people see him, the more they understand what his candidacy and Presidency will mean to this nation.  

It's been a surging trend for Obama since South Carolina, who came up against the strongest name in Democratic politics tonight and won more states, more votes, and more delegates, with the promise of greater things to come.

That's a Victory!  

13-9 may be the wrong count...Obama will most likely win New Mexico to add another state.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/20...

P.S. If Hillary loses N.M. she will have won only 8 states tonight.

Washington Post reports
Clinton 582
Obama 562

I think both candidates got what they wanted out of this night. Obama won a larger number of smaller, relatively unimportant, and mostly caucus states from several geographic areas, demonstrating the potential for a new coalition.

Hillary, on the other hand, held the states she really needed to hold, like New Jersey, and won convincingly in California, showing that her base of support, particularly the Latino vote -- withstood the Obama surge of the past week.

The Massachusetts vote was significant as well. I understand that she was way ahead in the state and Obama caught up considerably, but the perception of her victory was that the Kennedys are not all-powerful leaders of the Democratic party, and I think arguably it blunts the impact of those high-profile endorsements (not that I thought they would live up to their billing anyway). In fact, Ted Kennedy was probably the biggest loser out of all this, at least in terms of perceptions.

Based on the excitement of many Obama supporters expressed over the last 10 days, I have to think at some level you are disappointed that he did not deliver a more decisive blow to Clinton. After all, everything seemed to align for him in the wake of S.C.

I'm guessing they are breathing a heavy sigh of relief over at Clinton headquarters this morning.

The path to the nomination for Obama is now clear.  See here for Chris Bowers' excellent analysis:

...Obama now has a clear path to the nomination. The Clinton campaign is going to talk a lot of super delegates and a lot of Florida and Michigan, but right now Obama has the edge of pledged delegates, resources, and momentum generating activists. If he can sweep Beltway Tuesday, avoid a surprise in Wisconsin on February 19th, and then win both Ohio and Texas, he will be the nominee. Of course, that is a lot of ifs, and every time someone has had a chance to take a stranglehold on the nomination this season, the other candidate has stepped up.

My guess: Obama wins Virginia, Maryland and DC, plus the other states leading up to Ohio and Texas on March 4.  That should determine it right there, and my money -- emphasis on the word money, which Obama has more of than Clinton -- is on Obama.  Also, the longer this goes on, the more Obama's movement will build.  In other words, Obama has "upside potential," as his campaign is arguing.  In contrast, I believe that Clinton has pretty much hit her ceiling.  We'll see in coming weeks, including next Tuesday right here in Virginia.

but I think you and Bowers are jumping the gun a bit in defining a clear path to the nomination for Obama.

If you look at the popular vote totals from the primary states last night, they are pretty much split 50-50. I think if you spend a lot of times on Progressive blogs like I and many people who post here do (not just on RF and DK, BTW) you can easily get a skewed view of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidates out among the Democratic electorate.

in which sort of make a similar point.

Wish I had read it first.

among older women, Latinos, and working class whites.  Having said that, I stand by my analysis...Obama has an excellent shot at the nomination moving forward.  Tell me which one of the following Obama will lose:

February 9, 2008
Louisiana (56 pledged delegates)
Nebraska caucuses (24)
Washington caucuses (78)
U.S. Virgin Islands (3)

February 10, 2008
Maine caucuses (24)

February 12, 2008
DC (15)
Maryland (70)
Virginia (83)

February 19, 2008
Hawaii caucuses (20)
Wisconsin (74)

As far as I can tell, Obama's in strong shape in all of these states, which have a total of 447 pledged delegates at stake.  

The NY Times website this morning (Thursday) is still missing a substantial number of pledged delegates, most of them Obama's. In Georgia, for instance, which Chuck Todd estimated as 60-27 for Obama, they are only reporting 34 delegates decided, with Obama only up 10. In Alabama, where Obama won decisively, 23 of the 52 pledged delegates are missing and Clinton is shown as up 9. Several caucus states with Obama wins are missing entirely. What gives here?

This comes courtesy of Real Clear Politics. It lists total delegates rather than Super Tuesday delegates, but there is a state-by-state breakdown.

http://www.realclearpolitics.c...

Just noticed that delegate totals are still not yet complete, so we may have to wait a while. As of this count, Clinton leads by 79 total delegates (1060-981).