As of today, Clinton has 266 superdelegates to Obama's 244. Considering that the Democratic Party instituted superdelegates to keep the party from nominating another major vote-loser like McGovern, it seems the trend is towards Clinton. The next few weeks will be very interesting.

I completely agree about "He's not a Muslim as far as I know." I was completely appalled and disappointed to hear that come out of Hillary's mouth. (As well as really grossed out that we're so Islamophobic as a country that this is an effective slur.)

The specific comments I'm thinking of are:

"It's that experience, that understanding, not just of what world leaders I went and talked to in the ambassadors house I had tea with, but understanding the lives of the people like my grandmother who lives in a tiny hut in Africa."

the response to the tea party comment: "Those folks must really be on edge."

And ""I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she's feeling down, launches attacks."

A lot of Barack Obama's appeal is supposed to be what a deft speaker he is, and I agree, with his better speeches I don't think Clinton could touch him, but that means that it has to be acknowledged that he knows how to use words and therefore knows that these are very slightly coded sexist attacks, the first a jab at women's work, the second an accusation of hysteria, and the third a reminder that we don't really want women in the white house because they'll go crazy with their periods.

I think that kind of thing is unattractive and cynical in the "change candidate," and it bothers me that while Clinton's remark was (completely correctly) roundly chastised, these comments don't get nearly the same attention.

I think McCain has the better economic platform than either Clinton or Obama, but I probably will not be voting on economic platforms this year, as the next president will probably be more protectionist no matter what. (I am one of those deluded people who secretly hope that, after Obama wins the election, he holds an economic summit that's half community activists and half Chicago economists, concluding with a Paul Krugman-Gregory Mankiw cage match, and out of that comes an economic policy that coordinates affordable housing and tries to balance honoring trade commitments with helping out businesses in the worst-hit states.)

I don't like Senator Clinton, and if she enters the convention without the nomination and exits with it, I'll be on the first plane to Denver with Buffalo Springfield on the headphones and an ACLU "If You're Arrested" card in my pocket. (Or at least threatening to do so, the way some of my friends kept threatening to move to Canada and are now threatening to move to Australia.) But it's not as much that I don't like her as that I don't trust that voting for her isn't giving her husband another de facto four-year term. I'd vote for Hillary as the fair and square Democratic nominee, Grand Theft Auto scapegoating aside, if I thought once in office she'd take a page out of Nicolas Sarkozy's book, and dump Bill for Blair Underwood post haste.

I'm wondering which statements Obama's made you'd characterize as misogynist.

The "She's likable enough" statement? The Annie Oakley comparison? If those are some of the statements you mean, I confess I don't see the misogyny in them. The first statement might constitute damning with faint praise (although it made me laugh), but I don't see it as anti-woman, and I don't see how comparing someone to Annie Oakley is prima facie misogynism (if the tables were turned, I wouldn't be bothered by Clinton comparing Obama to, say, Jesse James). And neither statement, for me, remotely approaches Clinton's "He's not a Muslim, as far as I know" in terms of conscious or unconscious attempts to do twisted damage.

I do acknowledge that Clinton has faced a lot of despicable misogyny in her campaign; even as an fervent Obama supporter I can see that, and I've been appalled by it, but I don't see that it's been coming from his mouth or his campaign. But maybe there are other statements he's made that I'm not aware of…

Oh—an apology: I'm the one who posted the link to Slate's delegate calculator while describing it as including superdelegates and the popular vote. But it doesn't; it only counts pledged delegates. Lo, there's even this sentence right on the first page: "The calculator does not incorporate superdelegates into its calculations." I guess I must have been conflating that delegate calculator in my memory with other areas on Slate's site (eg, their "Trailhead" blog) that sometimes address the electoral math. Sorry! D'oh!

And in response to how an Obama supporter could vote for McCain over Clinton even if they consider the issues, it's pretty clear that Obama and Clinton are *so* similar on actual policies that that doesn't make any sense at all. Seriously, I can't even tell a difference between the policies of Obama and Clinton. I feel that their differences lie entirely in their personalities, and I just don't like this magical hope-land that Obama presents in his speeches.

The other spin on the same truth is that she knows how to play the game and he's naive. I see it as him rising above the game and concentrating on getting things done. We haven't seen that in American politics in a very long time – THAT is the change I believe in.