I'm going to have to disagree with most of this analysis:

"But will Obama's sweeping victory in South Carolina propel him to victories in the rest of the 40 or so states? I don't think so. The high population of Americans of African ancestry in South Carolina greatly contributed to Obama's victory."

Only if you completely ignore Iowa. 95 per cent white. In fact, if you look through the statistics themselves you find that while Obama is riding a strong wave of black support, Clinton also is well respected amongst African Americans.

Yet, their numbers are neck in neck. Just because Clinton is a woman, it doesn't mean she's getting all the women - Obama beat her on that score in South Carolina.

Australia's black population is quite small, but if you read the other OLO article today, Obama is the favourite.
Plus, I think the author vastly underestimates the unpopularity of the Bush presidency, which even among neo-conservatives, is regarded as a failure. A second republican tilt is unlikely.

There is much talk of the Americans 'not being ready' which quite frankly, I don't believe. There's nothing there backing it up and the voting figures show otherwise.

As the author makes a number of claims about the US intentions without backing, I guess I'll make one of my own - I tend to think that many of the people who would be averse to voting for a black man come from the southern states, and are likely to be core republican voters - a group which in the wake of the failures of the Bush presidency, has dwindled significantly in power and influence.

I think Obama's in with a damn fine chance if he gets the nomination, and I sincerely hope he makes it.

Yeah, the article's author clearly favours Hilary, which means we can discount anything you say about the nomination process.

I still believe that Hillary Clinton will win. But I could be wrong.
It's going to be an interesting race. Either way - both candidates are a far better alternative to the Bush Administration.

Perhaps Australia should also place a time limit on its leaders?

I think the author is dead wrong about the reasons why this race will be so tight and it has nothing to do with Hillary's gender or Obama's colour. The race will be close but I think Hillary will loose because she is old establishment which the voters are rejecting in numbers as shown in Iowa recently.

Since both candidates have stepped up their efforts to encourage Americans to register to vote, which is drawing bigger crowds of predominatly white/Hispanic people for Obama. My guess is that Obama will ask Bill Richardson to run with him as his vice President and seal the fate of the nomination for President from the party.

When you have Kerry, the Kennedy clan and Oprah behind you I thing it will be very tough for Hillary to claw back a victory but we will find out tommorow when registered voters make their decision.

Both are pretty good. Obama tends to be a visionary, "the pie in the sky" type. Hillary, in terms of experience and policies, is miles ahead of Obama. Obama gets the endorsement from democrat heavyweights because they don't like Hillary rather than they think Obama is better.

Surely I'm not the only one who thinks a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton team for President/Vice-President would be simply beautiful?

Not only would it send the heads of misogynistic racists into a complete spin, they could nominate Mike Gravel for Secretary of State and induce coronaries across the country among the hard right...