Slashdot

So Obama basically crushed Hillary in North Carolina and turned Indiana into a nail-biter that Clinton managed to win by 1% (or roughly 14,000 votes out of 1.2 Million). This is the exact opposite of what Clinton wanted: A decisive win in Indiana and a nail-biter in North Carolina. I'm not going to gloat too much -- I've been on the losing end of a few campaigns myself and it always sucks. The emotional investment that you make is hard to explain to anyone who hasn't been there -- losing feels like being punched in the gut. I know it did for us in Ohio after we worked our hearts out.

The big question now would seem to be who will tell Hillary that it's over? Obama leads in the number of states won, the number of pledged delegates and the popular vote. He leads in all of those categories even if you include Florida and Michigan, where he wasn't even on the ballot in one of them and didn't compete in either.

Granted, the Clinton team will doubtless say that both candidates still need some superdelegates to put them over the top. This is true. Are those superdelegates really going to take the nomination away from the person leading in every category (including the only one that really counts -- the delegate count) to give it to the person losing every category? The person whose campaign is broke and whom apparently loaned another 6.4 million of her own money to remain competitive?

It's just not going to happen. It's time for the olive branch and reconciliation. It's time to beat John McCain.