After convincing wins in Ohio (54% to 44%) and Rhode Island (58% to 40%, and hey, it may be tiny but it counts!), and a close win in Texas (51% to 47%), Hillary Clinton might just have put a dent into Barack Obama's momentum. So was last night enough?
Before I answer, I think it's necessary to clarify: "enough" what, exactly?
First, Clinton managed to stop Obama's freight-train-like roll; I wasn't sure that was possible. Chalk one up for Hillary there.
Her "terrify people" commercial with the phone ringing at 3am--terror uses a phone?--must have had some impact on the voters in the states where Clinton won last night; further, she's got strong support among hispanics, women, the elderly, and what Carpetbagger's Report calls "whites without college educations." These groups must've come out big for Hillary.
But before we go calling her the Comeback Kid like we did her husband in 1992, we need to look at the delegates tally: 1,562-1,461. That's 101 delegates' worth of difference, despite the big wins and the potential momentum swing. The whole delegates issue is as sore a subject with me as the electoral college--both systems deny the power of the popular vote (don't they, Mr. Gore?). I don't like that at all.
So does Clinton have enough time--and enough remaining support--to catch up and knock Obama out? I am tempted to say yes, and to see this as a definite shift, a change that will give Clinton the momentum she needs to right her ship. A definite benefit for me is that she's more likely to still be on the ballot in April, when I finally get to vote.
But I'm also realistic. Obama's got a hundred more delegates that Clinton. That's not good. And she's still surrounded by idiots like Penn. Again, not good.
Still, I believe she knows how to fight; she's goal-oriented and driven.
I hope it's enough.