If the experts who have done the delegate math are right, then it's all about the super delegates in determining who will be the Democratic Presidential nominee. The New York Times has as it's lead story this piece about those delegates and how they are being wooed by the two campaigns. There is also this story about the very different delegate selection rules in the two parties. I especially like this bit...

The two parties’ nominating systems reflect the philosophical differences between them. Or, as a prominent Republican strategist, Mike Murphy, suggested, perhaps jocularly, in a recent appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Democrats are hung up on ideas of fairness and equity.

“Democrats, being the nice liberals they are, grade on a curve,” he said. “They give you delegates for coming in second.”

“Republicans,” he continued, “being mean social Darwinists, we tend to punish the second-place guy with a lot of winner-take-all primaries.”

In other words, the Republican who kills the buffalo gets all the meat; the Democrat has to crouch around the campfire and share it with his brethren and sistren.

Heh. Read the whole thing.

Meanwhile, in a disturbing sign of things to come, election officials in California are still struggling to count all the votes nearly two weeks after the Super Tuesday primary in the Golden State. If they are having this much of a problem for a primary, what will it be like in what should be a very high turnout election in November? If the election is as close as the last two, and California is close (not likely, I know, but possible), it could make for another 2000 scenario.

The Clinton campaign is working hard at their eleventh-hour strategy for pulling out the nomination. They need wins in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania. If they lose those states, even if they still get enough delegates to deny Obama the mathematical clincher prior to the convention, their case for electability goes out the window and with it, the nomination.