But can he win?

See here ("Can He Win The Red States?"). So Obama's team had a winning strategy in the Dem primaries. Can he rescue the country from another disastrous Republican regime, which is, of course, the whole point?

The Washington Post runs a good analysis of how Team Obama used a delegate-centered strategy to beat Team Clinton. In short, Clinton and her woeful team focused on big battleground states and locking this up early without ever taking caucus states seriously. Conversely, Team Obama planned for the long haul and aimed to hold down her delegate counts, focusing on all 50 states and especially caucus states to keep a continual stream of delegates coming his way. . . .

A strategy based on piling up delegates across all fifty states significantly through caucuses is effective in getting the Democratic nomination, as the party rules are currently written. But as pointed out before, winning the nomination largely in caucus and red states while holding your opponent’s battleground state gains down has its limits in winning a general election. If Obama cannot capture Hillary’s battleground states himself, and if he cannot convert his primary season success in red states into actually winning some of these states in November, this self-described campaign of personality over policy will all be for naught.

I realize that the assumption by Team Obama is that their 1,500,000 . . . donors constitute an army across all 435 districts that give him a credible chance to capture red states and their electoral votes. We're about to see if the army and the crowds at the rallies can get him to 270 and hold her base in those battleground states, all while McCain appeals to her voters as well. . . .

(Emphasis added.)

It's never been about whether the Democrats could nominate a black man (and not a woman?) for president, though it appears some Democrats thought that was what this whole thing was about. (I always thought Hillary should be the nominee this time around, and Obama next.)