The final results from Indiana weren’t even in before bloggers, pundits and others were writing the obituary for Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign.

At the Huffington Post, Miles Mogulescu declared that “the task now is for the Democratic party to unite around its presumptive nominee — Barack Obama — and get ready to take on McSame in the fall.”

Also at the Huffington Post, Sam Stein concluded that the exit polls show that Rush Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” may have been effective in Indiana.

“Thirty-six percent of primary voters said that Clinton does not share their values. And yet, among that total, one out of every five (20 percent) nevertheless voted for her in the Indiana election. Moreover, of the 10 percent of Hoosiers who said “neither candidate” shared their values, 75 percent cast their ballots for Clinton.”

Allahpundit at Hot Air said that whatever the outcome in Indiana, it doesn’t matter now:

“As I write this, she’s been nuked in Carolina and is, er, clinging to a bitter four-point lead in Indiana with 82% in. I said this morning that if she got blown out down south then she’d have to pull off a blowout of her own in the midwest to keep the superdelegates jittery about Obama’s Wright baggage. Hasn’t happened.”

Scott VW at Weblog Worth Writing in Las Vegas saw two very different candidates:

“I watched both candidates’ speeches tonight in the wake of a split decision in Indiana and North Carolina. Hillary seemed tired and resigned. In fact, she seemed to be on the verge of conceding. Obama was energized and spoke about the American Dream, an important theme of his. My wife was skeptical, though, reminding me that Obama might just be telling people what they want to hear. She’s right, of course. I think his campaign has been an honest, principled one so far, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t playing for votes. I hope he can maintain his principles in the face of what will be an onslaught in coming weeks.”

The view from Oklahoma in The McCarville Report was that this was the beginning of the end for Clinton:

“What is clear in the results is that Clinton’s momentum is ended; she needed a solid Indiana win and a close race in North Carolina and she got neither. Obama’s North Carolina win erased Clinton’s early Pennsylvania win and his better-than-expected finish in Indiana makes any argument Clinton makes about electability just so much talk.”

Here’s how the politicos could really spice up their traditional light-hearted, low-stakes bets on the outcome of the Minnesota Wild vs. Colorado Avalanche playoff series.

This hockey contest coincidentally mirrors the big events on the presidential political calendar later this year. The Wild play at the Xcel, where the Republican National Convention will be held. The Avalanche play at the Pepsi Center, where Democrats will nominate their presidential candidate.

So, the GOP and Democratic coordinators of those two conventions have engaged in some good-natured banter and a wager. If the Avalanche win, the GOP folks will ship walleye to the Democratic staff in Denver. If the Wild win, the Republican staffers in St. Paul will receive Colorado-raised beef steaks.

Yawn.

Here’s an alternative that would really make the bet interesting:

If the Wild win, the Democrats meeting in Denver would have to nominate Rep. Dennis Kucinich for president. If the Avalanche win, the Republicans would have to nominate Rep. Ron Paul. Now that would put a new twist on the predictable sports/politics wager.

It looks like the Senate will vote Thursday on an amendement that would ban earmarks for a year.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Sen. John McCain has changed his campaign schedule so he could be in Washington for votes, including this one.

McCain has been a leading opponent of earmarks, as Kevin Diaz points out in his story about Rep. Betty McCollum’s effort to put Gov. Tim Pawlenty in an awkward position over the pork barrel spending.

In fact, the Republican senator has never asked for one, according to the National Taxpayers Union (NTU).

Not so for the two Democratic presidential candidates.

In this year’s spending bills, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton received $342 million, putting her in 10th place in the Senate, according to figures compiled by the Taxpayers for Common Sense. Sen. Barack Obama received $97 million, ranking him 74th.

You can find a wealth of information about earmarks — including who got what — at the Taxpayers for Common Sense website.

With Geraldine Ferraro’s remarks about Barack Obama, all three leading presidential candidates have recently faced situations where their surrogates made controversial remarks. How do you rate the candidates’ handling of these cases?

In chronological order:

John McCain
On Feb. 26, McCain made a campaign stop in Cincinnati. Before McCain appeared on stage, a local talk radio host, Bill Cunningham, was among the speakers who warmed up the crowd. In his remarks, Cunningham used Obama’s middle name — Hussein — several times, and said: “Now we have a hack, Chicago-style Daley politician who is picturing himself as change.”

At least one other speaker took the stage after Cunningham and before McCain. After his speech, McCain raised the issue with reporters before they questioned him about it.

McCain said he wasn’t in the building when Cunningham spoke, but he was made aware of them at some point.

McCain said:

“I did not know about these remarks, but I take responsibility for them. I repudiate them. My entire campaign I have treated Senator Obama and Senator (Hillary Rodham) Clinton with respect. I will continue to do that throughout this campaign.”

“I want to dissociate myself with any disparaging remarks that may have been said about them.”

When reporters asked McCain about Cunningham’s use of Obama’s middle name, he said: “No, it is not [proper]. Any comment that is disparaging of either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama is totally inappropriate.”

Later, on his radio show, Cunningham complained that McCain “threw me under the bus to the national media.”

Here’s the full AP story. And here’s a Los Angeles Times story.

Barack Obama
An unpaid but high-level foreign policy adviser to Obama resigned after she called Clinton a “monster” who “is stooping to anything” to win the nomination. “You just look at her and think: Ergh.”

The adviser, Harvard Prof. Samantha Power, made the comments during an interview with a Scottish newspaper while on a publicity tour in London for her latest book.

When she resigned, Power apologized to Clinton and Obama for her “inexcusable remarks.”

Obama’s campaign announced Power’s resignation, but Obama himself has said nothing. Instead, the campaign issued a statement from spokesman Bill Burton that said, “Sen. Obama decries such characterizations, which have no place in this campaign.”

Here’s a New York Daily News story.

Hillary Rodham Clinton
On Friday, the Daily Breeze of Torrance, Calif. reported that Geraldine Ferraro, the former congresswoman, vice presidential candidate and current Clinton supporter and fundraiser, said:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

AP reported that in an interview today, Clinton was asked about the comments and replied: “I do not agree with that…It’s regrettable that any of our supporters — on both sides, because we both have this experience — say things that kind of veer off into the personal.”

News reports say that Obama’s campaign called on Clinton to cut Ferraro’s ties to her campaign. David Axelrod said in a conference call with reporters: “The bottom line is this, when you wink and nod at offensive statements, you’re really sending a signal to your supporters that anything goes.”

Here’s the AP story. And here’s an ABC News report, including a video of a TV interview with Clinton.

There you have it: Three examples of remarks that crossed the line. Three repudiations, but each done in a different way.

How do you think each candidate handled the situation?

No predictions here about the Democratic presidential race — just facts and calculations (with a few necessary assumptions) about what lies ahead now that it’s clear the contest isn’t about to end anytime soon.

Current delegate totals
Here’s the AP count, which includes superdelegates who have made public endorsements. These numbers include the results from yesterday.
Barack Obama: 1,564
Hillary Rodham Clinton: 1,463

Delegates needed for nomination
2,025

Delegates still up for grabs
There are 4,049 delegates to the national convention in Denver — 3,253 pledged and 796 superdelegates who are free to vote any way they choose. So far, 3,027 delegates have been awarded (including superdelegates who have announced an endorsement.)

Here’s how the remaining 1,022 delegates that are left break down:

– Pledged delegates in the remaining states and territories: 611
– Superdelegates who remain uncommitted: 349
– New Mexico’s Feb. 5 primary is being recounted, so no delegates have been awarded yet: 26
– Some Texas caucus votes are yet to be awarded: 10
– John Edwards won delegates before dropping out: 26

The math
You may have heard some commentators say that the math is working in Obama’s favor and that it will be hard for Clinton to catch up. Here’s what they base that on.

Let’s assume that the 36 delegates outstanding from New Mexico and Texas are divided evenly between Clinton and Obama. (That will almost certainly be the case in New Mexico, where Clinton leads 49-48 percent; in Texas it’s possible that Obama may win more than half of the 10, because he’s done well in caucuses so far.)

With that evenly-divided assumption, then…
–Clinton needs to win 55 percent of remaining delegates to win the nomination.
–Obama needs to win only 45 percent

If current trends continue…Obama wins
If Obama and Clinton each corral pledged and superdelegates at the same rate they’ve done so far, Obama wins the nomination. His lead in pledged delegates would trump Clinton’s edge with superdelegates.

Here’s the calculation:
There are 1,022 delegates not yet allocated — 673 pledged and 349 superdelegates.
–Obama has won 52.7 percent of pledged and 45.6 percent of superdelegates to date. If that continues, he would end up with a grand total of 2,078 delegates, or 53 more delegates than needed to win the nomination.
– Clinton has won 47.3 percent of pledged and 54.4 percent of superdelegates. If that continues, she would end up with a grand total of 1,971 delegates.

Who votes next?
There are 10 states left. Wyoming is next, with caucuses on Saturday, March 8. A paltry 12 delegates are at stake.

After that it’s Mississippi on Tuesday, March 11, with 33 pledged delegates.

Then it’s a 6-week hiatus until the big showdown in Pennsylvania on April 22. There are 158 delegates at stake that day.

Indiana (72), North Carolina (115), West Virginia (28), Kentucky (51) and Oregon (52) vote over the following four weeks, and then the last states — Montana (16) and South Dakota (15) — vote on June 3.

Along the way, two terroritories also vote — Guam (4 delegates) on May 3 and Puerto Rico (55 delegates) on June 1.

Wild cards
Michigan and Florida were stripped of all delegates by the Democratic Party for holding their primaries too early. Clinton was the only one on the ballot in Michigan, and the candidates agreed not to campaign in either state. Clinton won both states.

If those delegates were to be seated at full strength: Michigan would have 128 pledged delegates and Florida would have 210.

Also, John Edwards won 26 pledged delegates (AP count) before dropping out. But 14 of those were from the Iowa caucuses, and he’ll lose those as Iowa’s convention and final delegate selection process unfolds.

The fine print
2008 Democratic Convention Watch reports that the superdelegate total has dropped by two to 794.

California U.S. Rep. Tom Lantos died on Feb. 11. Lantos, a superdelegate, had endorsed Clinton. His replacement will be chosen on April 8.

Also, former former Gov. Kenneth Curtis had been listed as a superdelegate from the state, but he’s no longer a legal resident of Maine.

Guess where Curtis has moved: Florida.

He claims that no matter where he lives, he’s a superdelegate by virtue of being a former chair of the DNC. But because he’s now a Florida resident, his vote has been stripped, according to Convention Watch.

Curtis has endorsed Clinton.

You be the pundit
Some websites have provided delegate calculators where you can construct your own scenarios for the remaining states and superdelegates.

Here’s the Forbes site.

Here’s Slate’s.

Watching the returns from Ohio and Texas and looking back at the arc of this campaign brings to mind one of my favorite sports moments — the epic battle between golfers Jack Nicklaus and Tom Watson at the 1977 British Open at Turnberry. (Bear with me.)

The major championship had come down to a duel between Nicklaus and Watson in the final round. Watson, trailing earlier, had scratched his way back into a tie with Nicklaus by the time they reached the 16th tee.

As recounted in the book “And Then Jack Said to Arnie…”, as they stood on the tee box, Watson turned to Nicklaus and said, “This is what it’s all about, isn’t it?”

And then Nicklaus, smiling, said, “You bet it is.”

In the end, Watson won with a birdie on the 18th hole, and afterward, Nicklaus offered this praise: “I threw my best at him. I gave him everything I had. I just couldn’t shake him.”

The Democratic nominating contest has that same air about it — two candidates engaged in a monumental struggle for supremacy, each throwing their best at the other.

Tuesday’s result isn’t about the delegates. When the final delegate tally is reported from the Texas caucuses, Obama’s overall delegate lead may still hold up.

But at least for now it’s all about Ohio and the economy, stupid.

By prevailing on this dominant issue in a must-win state (must-win now and in November), Clinton has made her strongest case yet for being the Democratic nominee. And, it gives her an advantage heading into the Pennsylvania primary — another Rust Belt state with a Democratic governor who is supporting her, just like in Ohio.

Clinton tried to look every bit the nominee — with confetti accenting her victory speech appearance — but this contest still has a long way to go. Maybe all the way to Denver.

The intriguing things about that possibility are:

– The superdelegates. Early on the old-guard type superdelegates were breaking for Clinton, and Obama supporters expressed outrage at the possibility that those delegates could tip the balance to Clinton, over the expressed wishes of the primary and caucus voters.

But more recently, Obama has been winning the fight for superdelegates. It happened in Minnesota on Friday, when the DFL Party chair and associate chair abandoned their neutral stance and backed Obama.

Now, with Clinton reborn, will she again prevail among the remaining undecided superdelegates?

– Florida and Michigan. The Democratic Party stripped both states of all their convention delegates for jumping ahead in the primary calendar. Clinton won both states, but there was no campaigning and they weren’t fair contests.

At a brokered convention, Clinton no doubt would insist on seating those delegations. But surely the party would have to remain firm. By seating those delegations, the party would go from saying the states would have absolutely no role in picking a nominee to giving them the decisive roles.

And now, a final observation.

In their speeches last night, Clinton and Obama each related a tale about a touching letter or donation they had received.

– Clinton’s story: Young mom, with girls ages 2 and 4 sends Clinton $10 and a note saying she and the girls and cheering and rooting for her, and “I want them to know anything is possibile.”

– Obama’s story: Elderly woman sends him a money order for $3.01 — one cent! — with a “simple verse of Scripture tucked inside” the envelope.

He may have lost three states Tuesday, but Obama won the competition for best tale of poor-donor-searching-for-loose-change-among-the-couch-cushions-to-scrape-together-enough-for-a-contribution.

Of the two big states holding primaries Tuesday, Ohio had seemed to be Hillary Rodham Clinton’s best chance of ending Barack Obama’s winning streak. But in recent days her lead in the polls has been shrinking.

What was an 8-point lead in a poll taken early in the week is now within the margin of error in three polls taken in recent days.

Meanwhile, Texas – the other big state voting Tuesday — remains a dead heat, with some polls showing Obama ahead by up to 4 points and some showing Clinton ahead by up to 4 points — all within the margin of error.

And if Clinton’s odds of turning this race around don’t seem daunting enough, consider this: Even if she wins the popular vote in Texas, Obama may walk away with more delegates.

Texas has an odd blend of primary and caucus voting to award its 193 pledged delegates. This AP story describes the Texas Two-Step:

Until two decades ago, the primary was advisory only, and all delegates were picked in caucuses. But in 1988, “a group of reformers wanted to put a primary into the process to enhance participation,” according to Ed Martin, a former executive director of the party.

“But they also wanted to maintain elements of the caucus … system to the process. The theory was that’s a way to bring all the new people in and get them involved” in building the party, he said.

Bottom line, 126 delegates at stake in the primary on Tuesday, 67 more in caucuses that convene 15 minutes after the polls close, and more than enough complexity to go around.

Obama was sure making his presence known on the websites of the Dallas Morning News and the Houston Chronicle late Sunday afternoon, with huge banner ads atop the papers’ home pages featuring a large photo of him and a video.

In Ohio, both campaigns are bringing in plenty of political and entertainment celebrities to help out, and it looks like voter turnout will be huge.

Here’s an excerpt from a Cleveland Plain Dealer story about the action in Ohio this weekend:

In Ohio, former President Bill Clinton made stops in Kirtland and Lakewood on Saturday. Actress Melanie Griffin, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend also talked up Clinton across the state.

Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius; Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick; Andy Stern, who heads the powerful Service Employees International Union; actor Kal Penn; and the indie band Arcade Fire planned to lead events in Ohio for Obama this weekend….

The Cuyahoga County elections board was flooded Saturday morning with voters who wanted to cast ballots early under Ohio s new law….

The board also reported that 34 percent of the more than 900,000 people who have requested absentee ballots this year are voters who did not vote in the primary four years ago.

With two big states voting a week from Tuesday, it’s looking like the same old story: Hillary Rodham Clinton’s massive lead in the polls has all but disappeared.

That’s the situation in Texas and Ohio, two of the four states voting on March 4.

If Clinton can’t pull off wins in at least one of those states, it’s hard to see how she could continue running.

In Ohio last year, Clinton’s lead over Obama typically stood in the low- to mid-20 point range. Now, the last four polls have shown nearly identical results — Clinton leading by between 7 and 9 points.

In Texas, it’s even closer. The last four polls show Clinton with leads as high as 5 points, and as low as 1 point.

Certainly in Texas, and perhaps in Ohio, too, Clinton’s lead doesn’t seem large enough to hold off the waves of Obama supporters who surge to the polls on Election Day.

Texas has 193 pledged delegates at stake and Ohio has 141. Rhode Island (21 delegates) and Vermont (15), also are voting that day.

Currently, Obama holds about a 100-delegate lead over Clinton: 1,361 to 1,267, when Superdelegate endorsements are included.

Although narrow wins in Texas and Ohio by Obama may only widen the delegate gap over Clinton slightly, his repeated wins and his growing base of support probably would be enough to force Clinton to concede.

Today’s story by Washington Correspondent Kevin Diaz examines the status of Minnesota’s Democratic superdelegates — the members of Congress and other party officials who get to cast votes at the nominating convention as they see fit.

The role of superdelegates is not new, but the attention being paid to them is — because this year they may ultimately decide who get’s the Democratic nomination.

The debate surrounding superdelegates has raised lots of questions. Among them:
– Should superdelegates exist?
– Are they merely a device by party officials to retain control over the nominating process in a tight battle like this year’s, or do they serve a useful and defensible purpose?
– Should superdelegates be bound by the outcome of the primary or caucus in their state?
– If so, should Minnesota’s superdelegates be apportioned in line with the caucus vote, or should it be winner-take-all?

Sen. Barack Obama won 67 percent of the Minnesota caucus vote and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton won 32 percent. If the state’s superdelegate vote is apportioned — as the party does for pledged delegates awarded on the basis of primary and caucus results — that would give Obama 11 of the state’s 16 superdelegates and Clinton the remaining five.

Nancy Larson is a Minnesota Democratic Superdelegate — and she’s undecided between Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. That means she’s been getting lots of calls from people who want to help her make up her mind — including a number of people named Clinton.

To hear what it’s like to be a Superdelegate who hasn’t chosen sides yet, check out today’s Pig’s Eye Podcast.