Barack Obama Won Pennsylvania, Not Hillary

Asserts Politik Ditto, a black conservative Democratic blogger, about Sen. Hillary Clinton's win last night over Sen. Barack Obama in the Democratic presdential race: "Forget the final votes tally, I'm seeing Barack's second-place finish last night as a victory. Why? Well, considering that Hillary was once leading PA by as many as 33 points in the polls, when all was said and done Barack proved his mettle by slashing two-thirds of her lead away. That alone should be noteworthy to superdelegates, esp. in a liberal-leaning state like PA that any Democrat would win versus a Republican. Consider too that its [sic] been a long six weeks since the last Democratic primary, that plus the fact that Hillary's vowed to stay in the race until the convention lets you know that the significance of the PA primary got way more play from the media than it should have--the only question here worth asking in the last six weeks not being if Hillary would win PA, but how much she would win by. So in the end a 10-point 'victory' really comes off as a loss in my book."

My response: I disagree. Sen. Obama spent more than twice as much money in Pennsylvania as did Sen. Clinton. He is the frontrunner, and the media is backing him more so than Sen. Clinton. With all of that behind him, Sen. Obama should have been able to close the deal in Pennsylvania - actually some time ago - but yet has been unable to do so.