Whether MS. Walsh described the mix of the crowd in Oakland correctly or not, there is one missing element in her analysis: the potential importance of the last minute endorsement of Obama by the principal Spanish language newspaper in California. Then there is , Obama's sudden "surge" in endorsements from Latino and Latina public. Add to the mix, Obama's emerging superiority in financial resources.

The real downside for Obama is the pre-primary date mail in votes which may reflect the status of the campaign in the first week of January rather than the first week of February. Although touted to be as much as half the vote, my guess is that with all the enthusiasm generated by the campaign, it may be substantially less.

Except for Hillary's votes on Iraq AND Iran, there really is a George Wallace's "not a dimes bit of difference" between them on the issues. Health care will be determined by the Congress and the White house.

So what’s the difference: the future and the past. IN 2004, MoveOn and similar web based resources played a key role in some states such as PA but couldn't carry the day in either Florida and Ohio. In 2006, the Web defeated Lieberman in the Democratic primary in Connecticut but failed in the General Election.

Obama's edge in financing is web-based. MoveOn has endorsed him and is banging the drums with its members.

I don't think these factors received a sufficient analysis in your analysis for a simple reason: We really won't know until tomorrow AM whether Hillary's regular Democratic roots can finally dent the Obama momentum.

In the end, that may be the only issue that counts: the power of the past politics versus the power of the new politics.

If Obama wins CA, the rules will be changed for good, and the parties old guard will not be able to stop it.

--------

PS: I can't believe that any one "cool" enough to read Salon could actually refer to thye editor as "Mrs. Walsh" Not that its an insult or anything, but hey, its 2008. Whether there is a Mr. Walsh or no, Ms. is correct. IN fact, I have even gotten to the point of dropping Mr. & Mrs. & Ms. from my correspondence whenever possible. For writing androgynous corporations, I have adopted a French affectation: “Dear Sirs and Mesdames.” May not be PC, but it’s kind of fun.

http;//Johnklotz.blogspot.com

Dear Anonymous:

Okay, so now we have an anonymous hint about "Keith." Since I don't watch network news anymore, why be so coy about it? Spit it out. Did Obama shoot-up with Keith? (Obama has denied heroin I recall. He has admitted to pot and I believe some "blow" which I translate to cocaine)Did he deal Keith? What year(s) are we talking about it?

Hillary claims to be vetted. Okay, vet Obama, vet him now. Tomorrow may be too late. Had he been "vetted" earlier and its as bad as you say, my candidate (Edwards) might still be in the race.

My late oldest brother (by 15 years) was an Air Force officer. From about 1950 to 1960, he tried to convince his kid brother that we had to attack the USSR before the USSR attacked us. He knew things he couldn't tell me. In 1960, I got a "Secret" security clearance and it's about that time the preventive war stuff stopped. During the Cuban Missile crisis in 1962, Curt LeMay tried to instigate World War III by flying SAC planes straight for USSR and then pulling back at the last minute.

If you have an atom bomb on Obama, drop it. If you don't have an atom bomb, drop it. Either way, drop it. You owe it to Salon readers not to be coy.

Otherwise, you can get crossed-off as just another Hillary flunkie trying to dirty Obama by innuendo. Is your last name Penn, anonymous? Why do you prefer to dish dirt anonymously?

You can check out who I am: http://johnklotz.blogspot.com

Prior to the California Primary, we were told that up to 3 million mail-in ballots had already been cast, the ballots having been sent out one month before the primary. Yet, it all the analysis of the vote, NO ONE has broken down the percentages between mail-in ballots and primary day votes.

Obviously if a substantial number of ballots were cast before the Obama surge, then without such a break-out, it would be impossible to measure whether there was an Obama surge that was swallowed up by the mail ballots - or not. HRC's early margins were far in excess of the one on election night.

I know that in Florida, the reports were that Obama actually tied or won among those who voted on election day and lost heavily with the mail-ins.

Has anyone see a break-put of the mail-in votes as compared to the walk-in votes on primary day? It might explain the gross disparity between the results and the polls also.

You can E-mail me at johnklotz@johnklotz.com