The Canadian press has it right. Unlike the invested New York Times, they've written about the implications of the math - and not the emotion of narrow victories in states where big wins were anticipated. The Canadians have perceived last night for what it was - a colossal effort to gain ground which failed.

What do Rhode Island, Arkansas, American Samoa and New York have in common? Those are the only states (going back to January) where Ms. Clinton has claimed more than 57% of the popular vote. Contrast that with her opponent who continues to rack up clear pluralities - while retaining solid numbers in big states.

Ms. Clinton has suggested that the voters in Ohio should place her at the top of the ticket. Surely she jests. There are many ways to figure this thing out. Let's take an equally absurd proposition. Let's simply tally the votes for Ohio, Illinois and New York. Would that work for Ms. Clinton? Let's reduce the election to Home States and her precious Ohio.