The other somewhat historic footnote

It has been exactly a century - 25 elections - since the last time neither major candidate was a state governor, sitting president or vice-president. In 1908 Secretary of War Taft defeated Democratic party luminary (not sure what else to call him, at that point in his career) William Jennings Bryan) by eight percent in the popular vote, or an electoral margin of 321-162. In those days, of course, the Democrats were still the party of the south and the Republicans (especially southerners) were still considered the party of Lincoln.

The Wikipedia article.

Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden endorses Sen. Obama

Otherwise unremarkable in a season of pronouncements of adulation and fealty, but I thought waiting until the final votes were cast was a classy move. To this day I don't understand the great rush to get Sen. Clinton out of the race; I never saw why she shouldn't go to the convention, had neither candidate secured the necessary delegates. If the DNC wants to build in some sort of 'when you're 200 behind we're calling the mercy rule,' that's fine, but until then that's the system - I've always felt playing hard until the final buzzer was a mark in somebody's favor (leaving aside, of course, the wretched campaign she has run).

Getting it done pre-convention is of course extremely advantageous to the Democrats, but if the party big-wigs don't want candidates exercising their right to go to the Convention, they ought to change the rules.

Sen. Obama still has five months to take on Sen. McCain, which is more than enough time for both of them. It's not as if McCain has built up any great lead because he finished his primaries early - the margins are still just about as razor-thin as they were when McCain was still slugging it out with Govs. Romney and Huckabee.

An idea whose time has probably come, but is almost certainly not original here

A history professor of mine recently shared with the class that he believes there ought to a national primary day, where this six-month process would take place in the space of a single day, roughly approximating the conditions of a general election. He thought this would reduce the relevance of Iowa and New Hampshire, which he described as 'America likes a winner.'

He also argued that delegate apportionment - whether proportional to percentage of the popular vote or winner-takes-all - ought to be consistent with the general election.

Another professor of mine made essentially the federalism argument in rebuttal when I brought the question up to him - that local state parties should and do have the wherewithal to decide when primaries are held, relative at least to the RNC and DNC.

I tend to agree with the former. I see more positives than negatives in a national day of primaries.