The trouble isn't so much that John McCain's delegate lead is insurmountable, although it is significant. And Romney's problem isn't that John McCain will get an enormous bounce out of yesterday's wins. This is the year of no bouncing.

Romney's problem is that the fully mature version of his campaign has faced the fully mature versions of the Huckabee and McCain campaigns all over the country. Romney hasn't done well. Although past performances don't necessarily guarantee the results of future contests, it's tough to picture what Romney can do to shake up the race and begin getting those extra votes he'll need in each future state to turn losses into victories.

Fred Barnes marveled on Fox News about Huckabee possibly taking “five states! five states!” Barnes called it a “remarkable comeback.” Before anyone gets carried away with talk of a Huck resurgence, though, most of his victories are taking place in states that aren’t winner-take-all. Whatever delegates he picks up in Georgia, Alabama, etc., will be more than offset by his zero showings in NY and NJ and his weak showings in California, Illinois.

If this is, as many argue, a "long war", then in a two-party system, don't the Democrats at some point have to take joint ownership of it?Parties don't wage wars, nations do. One could make the case that the war, rather than being the sole overwhelming reason for electing McCain, is actually a compelling reason, given their convergence on domestic issues, why you might as well stick Hillary in there. I don't think Mrs. Clinton will be so eager to lose the thing once it's on her watch.

Anyway, just a glum thought. I'm now going to sleep in hopes that, when I wake up, it will all be a bad dream and Calvin Coolidge will be ahead in the primaries.

Anyone who saw the Democratic debate Thursday night can envision the new future on their horizon: identity politics and self-congratulation over race and gender; tax increases (back to estate tax hikes, income tax rates go up, payroll tax caps lifted, etc); internationalism for the sake of internationalism (defer to the U.N., E.U., apologies for past conduct, contextualizing terrorism), more government (teachers, the poor, the middle class, etc. all need new government programs to add to those we have), and legislating judges (more Ginsburgs and Breyers).

Interestingly, the Governor’s endorsement could have greater influence with voters outside of California whose opinions are unsullied by news coverage of his problems with other Republicans back home.

Yet the greatest value may have nothing to do with voters casting their ballot based on Governor Schwarzenegger’s recommendation. Instead it may stem from the Oscar-worthy coverage the endorsement has generated. And when you’re running against a well funded opponent like former Governor Mitt Romney, that of kind nationwide free publicity is worth millions.