Jonathan Alter of Newsweek wrote an interesting piece today called:
Hillary's Math Problem. In it he states that even if Hillary ran the table and won each and every state left, she still would be short of the pledged delegates needed for the lead over Obama.
Hillary Clinton may be poised for a big night tonight, with wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. Clinton aides say this will be the beginning of her comeback against Barack Obama. There's only one problem with this analysis: they can't count.
I'm no good at math either, but with the help of Slate’s Delegate Calculator I've scoped out the rest of the primaries, and even if you assume huge Hillary wins from here on out, the numbers don't look good for Clinton. In order to show how deep a hole she's in, I've given her the benefit of the doubt every week for the rest of the primaries.
...
So at the end of regulation, Hillary's the nominee, right? Actually, this much-too-generous scenario (which doesn't even account for Texas's weird "pri-caucus" system, which favors Obama in delegate selection) still leaves the pledged-delegate score at 1,634 for Obama to 1,576 for Clinton. That's a 58-delegate lead.
This is really interesting. Yet everywhere this morning, all you hear is how Clinton won the night last night. She won the popular vote in three states, but her margins weren't big enough to net many delegates. In fact, Obama may win more delegates because he wins the populated cities, whereas she has been winning the less populated rural areas. The cities have more delegates, so the edge is to Obama there.
Hillary is claiming that she is winning the big states and that those are the states that Dems will have to win in November against John McCain. But, is that really true? Wouldn't Obama win California, New York, New Jersey easily anyway? And isn't Obama's 60-40 dominance in the cities much more important? Isn't it the urban areas that are really the Democrats strong zones? Obama is actually winning where the voters are. Those rural areas that voted for Hillary in Texas will vote for McCain in the general election - no doubt.
This thing is really complex. But, I like what MSNBC's Chuck Todd said when he broke it down: "Either Obama is going to have to win in one of Hillary's strong states, or Hillary will have to win in one of his." So, looking at the map and what is left, here are their states:
Obama - Wyoming, Mississippi, Oregon, Montana, South Dakota, North Carolina, Guam, and Puerto Rico
Clinton - Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Virginia, Kentucky
It sure looks good for Obama. At the end of this process he should be able to make these claims: 1) Won more of the popular vote. 2) Won more pledged delegates. 3) Won more states. How can the Democratic party give it to Hillary if the people have voted in stronger numbers for Obama? No way.