“Delegates, schmelegates,” said Clinton supporter Taylor Marsh. “There’s a new comeback kid and her name is Hillary Clinton. Again.”

But Hanna Rosin of the XX Factor all but groaned when confronted with an extension of the primary campaign.

“My only thought this morning is that I really want it to be over,” she said. “I’ll vow to raise $5 million for Hillary if she’ll drop out.”

Andrew Sullivan, meanwhile, thought the extended primary season was bad news for the Democrats. “Never, ever under-estimate the ability of the Democratic party to screw it up. They should have won this election easily. Now, the odds clearly favor McCain. And if it’s him versus the Clintons, after all they have revealed about themselves in this primary season, many, many Independents will not be particularly torn.”

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo crunched the numbers, and saw Clinton getting only a modest gain in delegates. “Current estimates suggest the Texas caucus results will trim her net gain to somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 delegates.”

Dave Weigel of Reason’s Hit and Run found an unlikely source of support for Clinton in Texas and Ohio:

Ohio didn’t wind up being very close, but Clinton won the Texas primary by about 98,000 votes out of 2.8 million cast. If the exits are right, about 252,000 of those voters were Republicans, and about 618,000 were conservatives. Clinton truly might have won the Texas primary on the backs of Rush Limbaugh listeners.

Reading conservative blogger Hugh Hewitt, one could believe it. “If Hillary ekes out close wins, stays alive, gains the nomination and the White House,” Hewitt asked, “will Rush hold the Bible at her Inauguration?”

Clinton has staked her presidential campaign on wins in the Texas and Ohio primaries, which will be held on March 4. By the time those states vote, Clinton could well be down about 150 pledged delegates in the race for the presidency. It will be all but impossible for her to make up that gap, even with a big victory in those two states and a big win six weeks later in Pennsylvania. Even if everything breaks Clinton’s way — she wins 60 percent of the delegates in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania, wins all the remaining states save North Carolina, where she pulls out a surprise tie, gets every possible bit of luck — Clinton would still trail Obama by a few pledged delegates.

Given that, it’s only natural for the Clinton campaign to see if there’s any possible way to win. And there is. The only problem is that it could tear the party apart.

If Clinton is close, she can appeal first to seat delegates from Michigan and Florida, states stripped of their voting rights for moving their primaries up too early. Clinton won both, but with an asterisk: Clinton was the only major candidate on the ballot in Michigan, and none of the major candidates actively campaigned in either state.  Both states could well be seated, but only if they won’t make a difference in the outcome. If Sen. Barack Obama has a 200-delegate lead, they’ll be seated. If Hillary Clinton somehow gets a delegate lead, they’ll be seated. Otherwise, they probably won’t.

That will force Clinton to rely on superdelegates, party elders and pooh-bahs who make up 795 of the 4,048 delegates at the Democratic National Convention. Clinton will have to ask them to do something drastic: ignore the winner of the pledged delegates, and anoint her instead.

Oh, the Clinton campaign rationalizes that it would be asking superdelegates to do no such thing. Some Clinton supporters have crunched exit poll numbers to suggest that maybe Clinton has received more votes than Obama from registered Democrats. Obama has received more votes overall, they say, but they’re not the right kind of votes.

The Clinton campaign has also argued that Obama has not won the right sorts of states — winning a bunch of small states, caucus states, red states, and states with too high a proportion of African-American voters. Clinton has shown her mettle, the story goes, by winning big states like her native New York and California.

The problem for Clinton is that eventually this becomes a more difficult line to maintain. Obama won Virginia last week, a big state that has been slowly trending Democratic over the past few cycles. And Obama won his native Illinois, which he probably should have — but it’s a win no less meaningful than Clinton’s victory in California.

This leaves the Clinton campaign with little cover if they are to try to outflank Obama for the nomination. They will have to essentially admit that they’re relying on superdelegates to do what they could not convince the voters to do — back Hillary Clinton for the presidency.

The Clinton campaign says that they are just playing by the rules, and they’re right — they are. The superdelegates were created as a check on the stupidity of voters, as a way to avoid another George McGovern candidacy. They were created precisely so that an establishment candidate could keep an insurgent from winning the nomination. Clinton is simply playing the game as it’s been set up.

But it will be difficult for Clinton to convince Obama supporters that she has earned the endorsement — and extremely difficult for her to unify the party behind her. And if she tries, and fails, to win on superdelegates — or worse, succeeds, and loses in the general election — Clinton will find her political future cut abruptly short.

So will Clinton roll the dice? Much will depend on the outcome of the March 4 primaries. If Clinton loses either Texas or Ohio — indeed, if she even wins both, but narrowly — she will be too far behind to be able to pull this off, no matter how willing she is to pull the trigger. But if she gets the big wins there she’s been hoping for, then she will have a hard decision to make: risk going for the presidency and losing her partisans at the same time.

The thought of Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau taking over for our current governor is enough to make people instantly suspicious of the thought of Vice President Tim Pawlenty. But Pawlenty’s aspiration for higher office is hardly crazy. For John McCain, Pawlenty could serve as a valuable second man on the Republican ticket. And for Minnesota, having another vice president — or at least another vice presidential candidate — could bring positive attention to the state.

First off, Pawlenty makes some sense as the type of candidate McCain would pick. Nobody can argue against Pawlenty’s fiscal conservatism. He at least technically hasn’t approved a tax increase during his time in office. One can argue whether that’s the best policy for the state — I would argue it isn’t. But Pawlenty’s willingness to stand up to any tax increase, no matter how sensible, puts him in good stead with economic conservatives, a constituency that is still cool to McCain.

But it’s not just reflexive opposition to taxes that makes Pawlenty a good match for McCain. Pawlenty has executive experience, something McCain lacks. Geographicallyhe’s the governor of a purplish blue state, and while he may not be able to personally swing Minnesota, he’s located next-door to Wisconsin and Iowa, two other purple states.

And, let’s face it, Pawlenty is one of the few up-and-coming Republicans around. 2006 was a debacle for the GOP, but somehow Pawlenty managed to eke out a victory here. That he owes his victory as much to former Attorney General Mike Hatch’s temper as anything else is beside the point, as is the fact that he won but a plurality of the vote. Winning at all in 2006 was a major accomplishment for a Republican, and Pawlenty did just that.

For Minnesota a Pawlenty candidacy would have some benefit, too. Pawlenty would be the third person to seek the vice presidency from Minnesota in the last 44 years. The first two — Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale — won. A Pawlenty candidacy would once again draw attention to the state’s political scene, for more reasons than just a collapsing bridge.

And needless to say, if Pawlenty were elected vice president, he’d represent a friend to the state at the highest levels of government. And not just in the person of the president of the Senate. John McCain would be the oldest person ever elected to the presidency. There is more than a little speculation that McCain may serve only one term. By 2012 we could well be talking about a Pawlenty administration. And while the president has a responsibility to all 50 states, it’s doubtful that Pawlenty would ignore the one he came from.

All in all, a Pawlenty vice presidential run could be a positive for the state. Even if it leads to an incompetent fool like Carol Molnau in the governor’s mansion.

The New York senator, who trails Illinois Sen. Barack Obama in the race for the Democratic party’s nomination, is cutting her time in Wisconsin short, leaving Monday afternoon instead of Tuesday as originally planned.

Polling in the Badger State shows Clinton trailing Obama by a narrow margin.

Clinton will head for Ohio, which holds its primary on March 4, along with Texas, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Clinton is counting on a big win in the March 4 primaries, especially in delegate-rich Texas and Ohio, to make up some of the ground she’s lost to Obama since Super Tuesday. Obama has won eight states in a row since last weekend, and appears poised to win in Hawaii and Wisconsin on Tuesday.

Obama won by a wide margin in the caucuses held in Washington and Nebraska. In both states, Obama more than doubled the total of votes received by Clinton, winning 68 percent of the vote in both. With 68 percent of the vote in, Obama was leading the Louisiana primary, 53 percent to 39 percent. Obama also won almost 90 percent of the vote in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

The wins were big for Obama, as they came right after a Super Tuesday that resulted in an effective tie for the Democratic presidential nomination. Obama hopes to win several states over the next few weeks, in order to secure front-runner status in the presidential election.

Maine will hold its caucuses on Sunday, and Tuesday will bring primaries in Washington D.C., Maryland, and Virginia.

Romney was a well-funded candidate, but failed to catch fire. He was assailed by social conservatives for changing his positions on abortion rights and civil rights for homosexuals, and struggled to earn support from evangelical voters suspicious of Romney’s Mormonism.

Romney’s withdrawal largely clears the way for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., to win the GOP endorsement. McCain’s remaining serious challenger, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, trails badly in delegates.

Romney won Minnesota on Tuesday, defeating McCain, who was supported by Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

Johansson, the star of Lost in Translation and The Prestige, went to Carleton College in Northfield to help drum up support for Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., a rally that had Carleton administrators both excited and a bit concerned about being overwhelmed.

“We’re worried that all of Northfield High School is going to show up,” joked Chris Rasinen, assistant director of campus activities.

All of the high school may not have shown up, but hundreds of high school and college students turned out to see the star, who urged them to caucus tonight.

“This is a really incredible time to be young, a really incredible time to be eligible to vote,” Johansson said. “I don’t want to be like a corny celebrity, but I will use every ounce of stardust I have to sell that to you.”

Johansson said she was in Minnesota because the state has had a traditionally high turnout of young voters, and that she’d come to Carleton for “the opportunity to talk to you as my peers.”

She said she’d become politically active after the start of the Iraq war, saying she felt like opposition to the war was “falling on deaf ears.”

“That’s not how democracy is supposed to work,” she said, praising Obama for his opposition to the war.

“This is a senator who opposed the war from the very beginning,” she said.

Asked by one student why she supported Obama instead of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who is the first major female candidate for the presidency, Johansson said, “I don’t want to say nasty things about Hillary Clinton. I think she has a lot of good intentions.” Johansson added, “We have an African-American man and a woman in this race, and it’s amazing that this is happening now.”

But Johansson said that Obama’s wife, Michelle, was a reason she supported the candidate.

“When we elect Barack Obama to the White House, we will have an amazing woman in the White House, Michelle Obama,” said Johansson.

Johansson also took aim at Clinton’s claims of being the more experienced candidate in the race.

“I like the fact that [Obama] has a clean slate,” Johansson said. “Just because you’ve had experience in the past, that doesn’t mean it was good.”

Johansson praised Obama, saying she’d been “star-struck” the first time she’d met him.

“I said, ‘Hi, senator, I love your wife, it’s so nice to meet you,’” she groaned, saying she’d felt “dorky” for the statement.

There were a few moments of levity at the rally. At one point, Johansson was distracted by a large banner that touted “Vagina Night” at The Cave, the campus bar. And one student asked Johansson what Bill Murray had whispered to her at the end of Lost in Translation.

“Vote for Obama,” Johansson stage-whispered.

While Johansson was at the event specifically to support Obama, she urged students to caucus regardless of their candidate preference.

“Please, please, the whole point of this is to go out and caucus,” Johansson said. “Go. Do it. Make a change.”

Romney and McCain have been within the margin of error in several polls over the past week, with Romney and McCain trading leads.  Romney has held support between 21 to 30 percent, while McCain has shown support ranging between 22 and 34 percent.  Romney leads in the latest Mitchell Interactive poll, 29 percent to 27 percent, while McCain leads in the latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll, 27 percent to 24 percent.Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee appears to be a distant third, while former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani vie for fourth.

On the Democratic side, Clinton holds a wide lead, but that lead is somewhat diminished by the fact that her main competitor, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, is not on the ballot there.  Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina also skipped Michigan, which was stripped of its national delegates by the Democratic National Committee for holding its primary before February 5.

Clinton polls around 50 percent in most polls.  About 30 percent of voters say they’ll support “uncommitted.”  Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich both poll in the low single digits.

And so it was that the candidates departed the cornfields of Iowa for the Granite State, where they would again go into small cafes and blueberry festivals.  They’ll go to the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee and the convenience stores of Nashua, and then they will stand for election in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation presidential primary, if one doesn’t count the Iowa or Wyoming caucuses.  And when the votes are tallied, one thing will be absolutely clear: this is no way to pick a president.

There is nothing wrong with New Hampshire, of course, nor with Iowa, nor Wyoming or South Carolina or any of the other states that hold primaries or caucuses before Super Duper Tuesday in February.  But the system that took us to Iowa last Thursday and to New Hampshire this Tuesday is, to put it nicely, insane.  On the Democratic side, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., appears poised to win in New Hampshire, and thus to have essentially wrapped up the Democratic nomination for the presidency.  Never mind that 48 states and the District of Columbia have yet to weigh in on the matter; any pundit will tell you that momentum is obviously on the side of Obama and clearly against Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who is obviously in second place nationally now.  Of course, Clinton looks ready to come in second after coming in third in Iowa, which will likely be the opposite of former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., who came in second in Iowa and will come in third in New Hampshire.  But everyone knows that Edwards is certainly out of the running, while Clinton can at least soldier on a bit more.And the Democratic field looks to be a bastion of sanity compared with what’s going on in the Republican Party.  At least Obama will have won two states; he’ll be the clear front-runner.  For the Republicans, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee won Iowa, but is definitely not the leader, or so we’re told.  Neither is former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who came in second in Iowa and won the Wyoming caucuses on Saturday — except we don’t count the Wyoming caucuses, because traditionally New Hampshire comes after Iowa, so they’re being studiously ignored.

No, the current leader among the Republicans is Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who came in fourth in Iowa behind former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., and tied for fourth in Wyoming with no delegates, behind Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. , who got one delegate. (Then again, nobody takes Hunter seriously, so best to ignore him.) Now McCain looks like he might win in New Hampshire, so he’ll be in the driver’s seat, at least until we hit the next set of caucuses.

If you’re getting the sense that our system of selecting presidential nominees doesn’t have much to do with actual election results, you’re right. One can make the case that Obama is rising in the Democratic field because he’s running a great campaign that connects with new voters, or one can make the case that he’s rising because Clinton came in third in Iowa and subsequently faced a barrage of negative press.  One can make the case that McCain’s fourth-place showing in Iowa doesn’t matter because he didn’t run hard there, and therefore a win in New Hampshire is a win in his first major test.  One can also make the case that a national winner should be competitive nationally.

And therein lies the problem: none of this has anything to do with who’s winning more votes or delegates, and everything to do with pundits and journalists reading tea leaves and telling the masses what it all means.  Should Obama win New Hampshire, as appears likely, the press will dutifully report that he’s now a prohibitive favorite for the nomination.  And that will draw voters to him.  Should McCain win New Hampshire, as appears probable, the press will report on the McCain resurgence.  And that will draw voters to him.

Indeed, the story the press tells becomes the story of the nomination.  Romney’s one first and two seconds will be viewed as a failure, while McCain’s one first and two fourths will be viewed as success, because that’s how the narrative goes.  And Romney will suffer because of it, while McCain rises.

This is no way to select a president.  Yes, the images of Huckabee or Edwards eating at a diner in Laconia are swell, but they’re not particularly useful.  No, it’s time for us to start running a presidential primary based on actual voter preference, rather than media narrative.

It wouldn’t have to be hard.  Divide the country up into five groups of states, starting with the 10 smallest, then next-10 smallest, and so forth.  Run 10-state primaries every other week from the first Tuesday of February through the first Tuesday of April.  If you want, put Iowa and New Hampshire in the first group for old-time’s sake.  Craft a federal law that sets basic criteria for the primary: the value of each state in delegates, the means of apportioning delegates.  Give the parties some input, but make this a federally operated election — meaning it’s time to eliminate caucuses, and replace them with primaries.

Some will cry foul.  Are we not tampering with the state-by-state process our Founding Fathers envisioned?  In a word, no.  The Founding Fathers figured that members of a party would pick a standard-bearer, and didn’t really worry about how that happened.  That meant that until the middle of the 20th century, those decisions were made in proverbial smoke-filled rooms, with citizens cut off from the process.  Our current system evolved out of the bad old days, a quasi-functional procedure that gave some of the power to the people, but not, frankly, very much.  Iowa is the first caucus in the nation because it’s the first caucus in the nation; ditto New Hampshire and its claim to being the first primary.  Neither state was selected because it was particularly representative or their populations particularly politically astute; they just got there first, and now hold on to their positions by vowing to penalize any presidential candidate who doesn’t pledge fealty to those states.  And the candidates gladly do so, because as Romney can tell you, Iowa and New Hampshire matter more than other states because that’s what everyone says.

It doesn’t matter how we divide up the states and structure a better system.  Divide them by region, draw lots, pick based on literacy rates or ratings for “According to Jim.”  Use instant runoff voting or allow a plurality to decide.  But divide up the states, and set up a true and fair primary system that recognizes and prioritizes votes instead of the narrative.  Because the presidency is too important a position to select in a sloppy, half-assed manner.  And we shouldn’t let another cycle go by without fixing the system.

“You believe that one?” said Ellison, talking to a crowd of about a hundred Barack Obama supporters gathered in St. Paul.  “Wait ’till he comes to Minnesota!”

Ellison had reason to be happy.  Obama won the Iowa caucuses on Thursday night, winning 38 percent of the delegates to the state convention and bragging rights in the first major test of the 2008 presidential campaign.  Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., finished second with 30 percent of delegates, while Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who is Obama’s chief rival for the nomination, finished third with 29 percent.

Ellison was not the only excited Obama supporter.  At one point, the room erupted into an ad-libbed “Obama Hop,” to the tune of the Bunny Hop.

Obama supporter Grace Kelly credited the campaign’s organization with the victory.

“We knew it was pretty much tied going in,” Kelly said.  “This [victory] is organization.”

Rep. Betty McCollum, DFL-Minn., said that Obama’s victory was not the end of the road.

“We’re going to be really busy,” said McCollum.  “It’s going to be all of us working together.”

But McCollum said Obama was a candidate worth backing.

“He speaks with people, not to people,” she said.  “It’s a two-way dialog.  He listens, he thinks, and then he finds a solution.”

The crowd was almost as happy about Clinton’s third-place finish as Obama’s victory.  Clinton has been viewed as the front-runner in this campaign, but with Obama’s victory and Clinton’s finish, it’s possible that has changed.