Mark Schmitt has some thoughts about last night's results:
The presidential primary process, over the years since Eugene McCarthy "won" New Hampshire by losing it in 1968, has evolved into such an elaborate analysis of expectations and sequence that, this year, it has finally imploded on itself. Every other Tuesday brings a new analysis of whether Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama has done better or worse than expected, is closing the gap or widening it. New measures are invented weekly -- this week, a version of the popular vote that excludes four states, but includes the invalid primaries in Michigan and Florida seems to have taken hold in the media, although it has no actual relevance to the nomination. At a certain point, the constants of the underlying political alignment reassert themselves over the micro-trends of the artificial narrative. Consider the things that do not change from primary to primary:
Read the rest and comment here. And subscribe to our RSS feed to receive our articles as soon as they're published.
--The Editors
