After tonight even the "get the pledged delegate lead down to 100 and let the Superdelegates do the rest" scenario is implausible. Since March. Hillary hasn't been racing Obama, she's been racing the finish line ... and losing.

After tonight Obama has netted somewhere around 10 pledged delegates. This will put his pledged delegate lead in the area of 168.

This is the rest of the calendar:

West Virginia: 28 delegates

Kentucky: 51 delegates

Oregon: 52 delegates

Puerto Rico: 55 delegates

Montana: 16 delegates

South Dakota: 15 delegates

Looking at it I'm not sure Hillary would even whittle his lead to 150 pledged delegates.

I'd bet she wins West Virginia and Kentucky, Obama has done poorly in the Appalacia regions and those two states are the center of that region.

Obama will get Oregon. Look at the results of the surrounding states. As far as politics go, Oregon and Washington tend to hew together.

I don't know about Puerto Rico. Clinton like to play up her strengths with the Latino community, but lumping Puerto Ricans with Latinos from Texas is like lumping Ireland and Greece together because they are both European.

Montana and South Dakota will likely break for Obama. Maybe things have changed drastically since February, but Hillary has had a real Mountain states problem.

So I expect a 3/3 split in the remaining contests with Kentucky/W. Virginia being negated by Oregon, Montana, and S. Dakota. So if Hillary nets anything it will be whatever she nets from the 55 delegates from PR.

After the nearly 200,000 net votes he received tonight, Hillary won't beat Obama in the popular vote. Even counting Florida (and probably Michigan).

He has won far more states and contests.

So what metric does Hillary have to convince Supers to go against the voters and choose her? Electability? Never mind the nebulous nature of the term, there is no way to measure electability this far away from the general election. Don't forget John Kerry was supposed to be more electable than Howard Dean. The polls have been changing week to week, sometimes day to day. It doesn't make sense to choose a nominee based on a poll one week when the polls could say something entirely different the next week.

I'm not saying Hillary should drop out. I am saying from this point out she really needs to choose her campaign strategies carefully. She has to look in the mirror and ask herself if it is worth doing everything possible to destroy a rising star in the party just to mantain the barest of chances of getting the nomination. For the sake of the country I hope she decides that she will take her chances with just running on her ideas and if she doesn't get the nomination so be it. Make the last month a dialogue on ideas for running this country and not about latching onto any gaffe the Obama campaign makes.

This process has been great for organizing Democrats, running elections, and practicing GOTV efforts in every state. We've been able to strong networks in every state. It would be a shame to lose those gains due to one candidate adopting a "win at any cost" attitude. We aren't going to beat the Republicans by playing their game. Republicans are better at being Republicans than Democrats are. We need to play the game on our terms.

The point really needs to be driven home to super delegates that Obama is much better at fund raising. Let's just hope they don't learn about 527s and how much they are spending to get Hillary elected.

A 1.5% win isn't a game changer in Hillary's favor. It is just another example of voters not giving Hillary what she needed to gain ground on Obama. After Wisconsin, the onus was on Hillary to not just win, but win by big margins. She has failed to do that.