Unconstrained by any detailed knowledge of these occasions, the point that has occurred to me as the roadshow has proceeded, is that the early definition has begged the possibility of the precipitation of some late transformation which would considerably change individual prospects; making it worth delaying any assessment until closer to the big moment.

Henry Percy, London, UK

The argument that the super-delegates should "follow" the "popular" vote is completely flawed. Firstly this is effectively like saying there shouldn't be any super-delegates at all. Has Obama consistently opposed thier vote? Or only now it suits him?

Secondly, as this article points out, the "popular" vote is anything but, as it excludes two states on a technicality, and sometimes has a wide franchise, sometimes not, sometimes only democrats vote, sometimes anyone can. Furthermore the staging of the contest is clearly influencial - states voting in different orders might produce a different result.

The primary process has a lot of strengths, not least in testing a candidate to the full, and part of that process is that the super-delegates can take a considered view on the candidates merits in a close contest, based on what has gone before.

They have every right to vote for who they think is the best candidate to win and represent thier views.

Nick, France,

Obama has a better chance of beating McCain in November. Never underestimate this so-called inexperienced "neophyte". Hillary did and look where she is, behind in almost any number that matters. People seems to overlook the fact that it is hard to defeat an established candidate with such a huge name recognition as Clinton. Except for PA, Obama can definitely beat Hillary in Oregon, Indiana, Montana (which like Utah where Obama beat Hillary), even North Carolina. McCain is ver rated. He is intellectualy similar to Bush; incurious, he was almost at the bottom of is class in Annapolis and he has his shares of scandals waiting to be re-revealed.

M. Stratas, St. Louis, Mo, USA

Hillary Clinton will never give up. She would prefer John McCain to win the general election than Barack Obama. She would prefer to see her party reeling from deep divisions of her own making than see Obama winning the Democratic nomination. She is a ruthless, scheming, self-serving woman and she has skeletons in her closet that the Republicans will not hesitate to air when the time is right. If she somehow manages to win the nomination, by fair means or foul, she will definitely lose the Presidency. That's why Republicans are being encouraged to vote for her in the Primaries. So far the only major Primaries she has managed to win are because Republicans turned out in large numbers to vote for her.

Caroline Kennedy, San Jose, Costa Rica

this article is a joke, Obama also has overwhelming support in Oregon which votes very similarly to neighboring Washington which went hands down to obama.

Kumar, Chicago, IL

I'm guessing that Clinton, after Pa. and North Carolina, is still behind in the total votes cast or delegates will quietly work out some deal with Obama so as to not further damage the parties chances in November.
As it stands now, Obama is actually the far weaker candidate in the November election and without a fully engaged Clinton on his side will most likely lose to Senator McCain.

I would predict Clinton will do just what she did for Kerry in 2004, very little. She did some public campaigning, but behind the scenes she undercut him when possible. The last thing she wanted was a President Kerry for 8 years. Now, if Obama is beaten, she will feel she has the inside track(again) for 2012.

Problem is, once the country has 4 years of no Bush and no Clinton, and a good man for President, they won't be the least bit interested in a candidate that was already shown the door once and is too well known and understood by the electorate to win.

Joshua, Buckeye, Az/USA

Easy enough to keep them all sorted out. Just think of them being in an episode of "The Simpsons", as the Simpsons.

Tucano Fulano, Big Beag, USA

The Republican Convention will be in St. Paul, not Minneapolis, only ten miles apart but a world of difference to the people who live there.

James Lachowsky, Swindon, Wiltshire

John McCain is the man for the big job forget the others they just like to look pretty.

VJB, London,

Oh, my gracious sakes, alike! You say that Obama can do better in North Carolina because "a large proportion of the electorate are African-Americans." Are you saying that black Americans in North Carolina are RACISTS?

Bob Evans, Anaheim, California

The author's Euro-cultural myopia is on full display in this article. There is no way that Montana and South Dakota, two of the last states to vote in the caucus/primary season, will choose Senator Clinton over Senator Obama. The author's suggestion, which is entirely off target, seems to be that because they are heavily white in ethnic make-up, they will vote for Senator Clinton.

Yet their neighboring, often equally white states, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, etc., etc., voted heavily for Senator Obama, as did the more ethnically diverse Minnesota.

What is true for one region (or even one state) is not necessarily true of another region (or state) in this geographically diverse country. For instance, while ethnicity was a huge factor in South Carolina and Louisiana, it was hardly a factor at all in Iowa or New Hampshire.

Recent Montana polls suggest that Senator Clinton is reviled there; Senator Obama (and Bill Richardson, a Hispanic) score far better there

C. Hassel, Saint Paul, USA / Minnesota

This 'race' is only 'very close' because the people have been fooled into thinking it is by the media. To fuel endless ratings, discussions and 'webhits'.
There is no race when one leads in delegates, votes and states won (Obama) and the other lags and cannot catch up.
She is waiting for a miracle for god. That is the truth.

Kathy Millet, Toledo, OH,USA

The Democrats are a freak show, a diverting and grotesque entertainment. Which makes it all the more plain that a serious and responsible figure needs to be elected president, not least to continue the necessary task of bringing stability to Iraq and security to the wider Middle East. That figure of course is John McCain.

Sandra Dean, Newport, RI

There is little to no statistical chance that Clinton will emerge as a delegate front-runner at any stage in this race. While the superdelegates can (and I suppose, might) overrule the pledged delegates, I doubt this will be the case. Obama is the clear winner on the maths of the thing, and the only reason for supers not to declare in his favour (as quite a few have been) is that there is still a chance (and therefore a political cost in doing so) that Clinton could somehow pull it out of the bag. With Florida and Michigan increasingly unlikely to factor into it, it's only by the grace of God that Clinton still has a whisper of a hope.

Obama can't really lose this, save for a political (or literal) meteor hitting the man. It just seems that given where we were six months ago, with Clinton being "inevitable" I don't think either side has really had that idea sink in yet, especially with the interminable news cycle playing its part.

Alan Black, London,