Just some back of the envelope math. As we've seen in this campaign, both HRC and BHO have been raising insane amounts of money from the respective supporters. In addtion, both have been spending insane amounts in nearly every state.
My question is- will HRC really be in a position to say to BHO, after March 4, "You have to spend another fifty million against me, and not against McCain"?
Hillary raised 35m this last month, most of which is probably spent, or being spent, as we speak. By some back of the envelope math, each candidate is spending about $1m per day on all expenses, from travel, to wages, to signage, etc.
We've all seen the delegate math. According to RCP, Obama is slightly up in TX (and with the caucases, he'd likely prevail in delegates there), and even if HRC takes OH by 7-8 points, she'd only cut into BHO's pleadged delgate lead by 10-15 delegates, leaving her still 100 pledged delegates behind.
Let's look past 3/4, assuming HRC cuts into BHO's pledged delegate lead by 15, he'll easiely make this up in Wyoming and particularly Mississippi, where he'd most likely win by 20+ points. And then there's nothing for 6 weeks until PA.
So I think the question after 3/4 is, can HRC really look at BHO and say to him, "You and nearly everyone else thinks this is over. I don't. Get ready to raise and shell out another fifty million."
Leaving aside the pain of stepping down, leaving aside any hurt feelings, etc. I think it's really irresponsible to spend 50m more on a fight where the goal posts continually change size, or more often, are moved back.
That 50m (or 100m, if you count HRC's spending during the same period) could be spent making sure we don't get another 100 years in Iraq. Financially, I think it will be irresponsible for her to continue after 3/4/08. Flame away.