It's the delegates, stupid

A funny thing happens if you really look at the results of the primaries and caucuses so far: this race is far, far closer than most coverage makes it seem. True, last night had an exponential higher number of "horserace" analogies, but I think it also took some actual mathematics to hammer home the point. Check out this helpful table at Real Clear Politics - http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html - (hat tip to The Roundup at www.capitolbasement.com)
 
Even Iowa - the state that turned the tide and heralded an Obama filled future - has a single delegate difference between Clinton and Obama. No really. That's how the table reads to me. Am I wrong?
 
In non-winner-take-all states, who "wins" the popular vote is nifty, but it doesn't necessarily indicate a clincher for the candidate at the convention (which is still, by the way, where the nominee is technically selected).  Cali apparently was giving pundits a fit last night since we do stuff on a county-by-county basis that was just throwing them for a loop.
 
And on the Reep side - somehow even though Romney has more delegates right now, there's far more talk about him bowing out before Huckabee who just won't go away. Fine with me since he's the most fun Reep to watch.
 
So California both matters and yet remains non-determinative. That's a good place to be. We counted, but we couldn't really screw anything up too badly. Good for us.