Time to move the "math" from algebra to calculus, this is much more complex than Beaudrot points out.

From the NYTimes:

Given Democratic rules, it is entirely possible for one candidate to win a majority of Feb. 5 states, and enjoy the election night ratification that comes with a TV network map displaying the geographic sweep of that person’s accomplishment, while his (or her) opponent ends the night with the most delegates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/28/us/politics/28delegates.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

That is what I find most surprising about the Clintons' recent high risk strategy. Following New Hampshire, it seemed to me that Hillary Clinton was in an excellent position to win big on Super Tuesday and get the nomination.

A more sympathetic Clinton ("I found my voice") coupled with an emphasis on her readiness and command of the issues seemed to be an effective message going into Super Tuesday. Clinton could afford to emphasize and focus almost exclusively on the positives of her own candidacy.

Instead, the campaign put Bill front and center stepping on Hillary's own independence as a candidate and went negative against Obama alienating liberals, blacks and many Democratic politicians who were ill-disposed to Hillary's candidacy.

I don't understand it, and my only conclusion is that this was a strategy that was decided upon before the surprise victory in New Hampshire and was not reevaluated and changed after that victory.

Obama goes into Super Tuesday with greater momentum than he had after his Iowa victory and the reason for that is not so much his South Carolina victory as the Clinton campaign getting hopelessly off message and reminding many Democrats of their concerns about the Clintons.

Bone-headed and almost entirely self-inflicted.

OOPS. I meant to write above:

Instead, the campaign put Bill front and center stepping on Hillary's own independence as a candidate and went negative against Obama alienating liberals, blacks and many Democratic politicians who were not ill-disposed to Hillary's candidacy.

This is a phenomenon I have observed firsthand, and being a bit familiar with the standard campaign tactics regarding the media, it surprises me. I'm interested in hearing opinions on this approach to dealing with the media.

Team Obama Is Courting Everybody But the Press

[There was no high-level campaign spinner to argue that Obama had gotten the better of the exchanges or that the verbal fisticuffs were part of some precisely calculated strategy. On the press bus the next day, mid-level aides dealt with travel logistics but made no attempt to shape the coverage.]

[In an age of all-out political warfare, the Obama campaign is a bit of an odd duck: It is not obsessed with winning each news cycle. The Illinois senator remains a remote figure to those covering him, and his team, while competent and professional, makes only spotty attempts to drive its preferred story lines in the press.

"There is no charm offensive from the candidate toward the press corps," says Newsweek correspondent Richard Wolffe. "The contact is limited. . . . They see the national media more as a logistical problem than a channel for getting stuff out."]

[Some reporters say Obama seems disdainful toward journalists, having submitted to precisely one off-the-record chat over beer several months ago in Iowa. To them, the absence of a senior official traveling with the press is a sign of benign neglect.]

[In fact, some journalists say they have to guard against getting swept away by the excitement. NBC s Lee Cowan was candid about fighting such temptations, saying on the network's Web site: "I think from the reporter's point of view, it's almost hard to remain objective, because it's infectious energy." Politico Editor in Chief John Harris said on CNN that when he was a Washington Post editor a couple of years ago, "you would send a reporter out with Obama, and it was like they needed to go through detox when they came back -- 'Oh, he's so impressive, he's so charismatic,' and we're kind of like, 'Down, boy.' " ]

[But the man who touches so many Democratic hearts feels no need, for the moment, to reach out to journalists. For those reporters who spent seemingly endless hours last week riding across the state's flat, rural landscape, their quarry out of sight except when glimpsed on a stage from afar, this was a curious disconnect indeed. ]

Stupid math--always fucking things up.

Obama doesn't need to court the press as long as he's getting positive press. He's a likable guy, that's obvious from the coverage he gets without them apparently having much access. When the Press goes negative on him, that's when he'll need to open up, it's a waste to do it now I think while their eyes are still glazed.

And what the hell does this crap mean. Why do you bother posting this.

Obama was supposed to be up by single digits in SC. He won by close then 30.

On Friday I was thinking "Obama is gaining ground, but there's not enough time between now and Super Tuesday to catch Hillary."
Now it's Monday, and I wonder if Hillary can do damage control, rustle up some endorsements, and get back to a positive message in only 8 days.