Obama's campaign has 40 million while Clinton's campaign is broke, leaving a trail of debts that far exceeds her available cash. Clinton has made numerous blunders leaving her credibility in tatters. Newspapers are overwhelmingly endorsing Obama and even the New York Times --which endorsed Clinton in January-- wrote a scathing editorial placing much of the blame for the negative tone of the campaign squarely on the shoulders of Clinton. Her national polling numbers are sinking as former supporters, disgusted with her Tonya Harding strategy, Rovian tactics and shameless pandering turn their backs on Clinton in increasing numbers. So, why can't Obama close?
Obama knows the victory that matters will not come in Indiana, North Carolina or any of the other remaining primaries. For the general election Obama will need to unite the party around him and that is a responsibility he, and indeed anyone fit to serve as president, must take seriously. Like an experienced general, Obama has surveyed the battle field and is going to spend his resources wisely and take advantage of places where the political terrain favors him since Obama knows that the really important battles are yet to come this fall.
For someone like Clinton, who started the campaign with universal name recognition, a fat war chest full of cash and a long list of influential democratic insiders supporting her, going from inevitability to struggling for viability must be a bitter pill to swallow. However, humiliating Clinton is not in Obama's or the Democrats best interest. Obama's strategy of minimizing the damage Clinton's negative campaigning does while limiting Clinton to trivial gains, far below what she needs to maintain viability, will provide Obama with the democrats strongest chance for victory in November.