Let's leave aside for a moment that this is just spin from the Clinton campaign and our own opinions of how valid any “Big State” analysis is. This one is plain wrong for several reasons.

If you look at the top 9 states that have voted so far, it doesn't take too long to see that both Illinois (#5) and Georgia (#9) went for Obama. If you leave out Florida and Michigan, which clearly won't count, and generously count Texas as a tie (even though Obama got more delegates), you have a record among the top 9 states of 4-2-1 in favor of Clinton. That's hardly a knockout. While Pennsylvania (#6) went for Clinton, it's worth noting that North Carolina (#10) is trending to Obama if you drop the obscure “Top Nine” routine.

Among the Top Ten states, the record looks to be 4-3-1 with 2 not counting.  This is supposed to be decisive?

Let’s leave aside for a moment that this is just spin from the Clinton campaign and our own opinions of how valid any “Big State” analysis is. This one is plain wrong for several reasons.

If you look at the top 9 states that have voted so far, it doesn’t take too long to see that both Illinois (#5) and Georgia (#9) went for Obama. If you leave out Florida and Michigan, which clearly won’t count, and generously count Texas as a tie (even though Obama got more delegates), you have a record among the top 9 states of 4-2-1 in favor of Clinton. That’s hardly a knockout. While Pennsylvania (#6) went for Clinton, it’s worth noting that North Carolina (#10) is trending to Obama if you drop the obscure “Top Nine” routine.

Among the Top Ten states, the record looks to be 4-3-1 with 2 not counting.  This is supposed to be decisive?