Oh, this is an ugly day for Senate Democratic appeasement of law violators! Will it have any impact in the primaries?

Now look: Obama’s leading in Wisconsin polling 50-39%. Even without the addition of Republicans and Independents in the open primary state, he’s leading 46%-44% among Democrats, in a poll conducted February 11th.

In its poll taken February 6-7, American Research Group had it as HC 50%, BO 41%, Others 1% and Unsure 8%. If both polls were accurate, that means - in a four day period - Clinton lost 4% while Obama gained 3%, a switch of 7% total among Wisconsin Democrats. (The Unsure went up a point, too, so the change didn’t come from them.)

The poll indicates that the Iraq War remains the top issue there, and Wisconsin Democrats credit Obama for opposing the war from the outset.

Taken altogether, this means the Obama sweep is now likely to continue till March 4th, with Maine and Wisconsin counting as upsets in his post Super-Tuesday onslaught. It will look even worse if Clinton doesn’t regain the lead among Wisconsin Democrats when exit polling is done next Tuesday.

Referring back to this morning’s chart, the numbers from Rhode Island’s poll don’t look at all reassuring for Clinton, despite her current lead. 36% doesn’t pick up many delegates against Obama’s 28% when she’ll need to play catch up on March 4th.

Old polls, taken in January before Obama gained momentum (and one before other Dems exited the race) gave Clinton 10% leads in the critical states of TX and OH. As has occurred in every state since Edwards departed and Super Tuesday states voted, it’s likely her lead has grown smaller still. And she needs big wins of at least 10% to claim enough delegates to come back from the lead Obama will have going into the March 4th primaries.

With all the momentum going Obama’s way, it’s not likely superdelegates will go the opposite. Clinton really has nowhere to turn beyond TX, OH and PA to reverse that momentum. And if she doesn’t win convincingly in at least two of those three, her only fallback argument is to pursue the delegates from FL and MI, to pursue the endorsement of Edwards (hoping to prevent another big loss in NC and possibly picking up Edwards’ 26 delegates), and to lean on Puerto Rico’s governor to grant her that entire bloc of delegates.

But the reality is Obama’s on a juggernaut now, and even though she may gain the endorsements of people (like Ohio’s John Glenn), endorsements and negotiated outcomes aren’t going to quell the popular reality if states keep going for Obama.

Texas and Ohio have to come through big for Clinton or this race is over. And the only good news for her is SurveyUSA has just released a fresh poll that gives her a whopping 17% lead in Ohio, 56%-39%. Can she sustain that? Can she take Texas by at least 10%?

Those are Obama’s remaining hurdles.

It certainly can’t help Clinton to see this result on immunity for telecoms who chose to illegally wiretap Americans. Obama voted to eliminate immunity. Clinton chose to avoid the vote entirely. McCain voted with numerous (mostly conservative) Democrats to keep immunity.

And Christopher Dodd is going to keep fighting it, which will bring the issue to the attention of more Americans before that fight is over. With Clinton waffling on such an important issue, how will Americans react to that? Clearly, Clinton’s given up on pursuing the votes of progressives, apparently believing Ohio and Texas conservatives will deliver her.

And maybe she’s right, but as a progressive, surrendering an important issue like this for political gain doesn’t offer me any reason to shift from my non-endorsement position to her side.

I despise the misogyny and unsupported MSM anti-Clinton bias, but some positions she takes deserve the rebuke of voters. This clearly ranks among them. But what will Texans and Ohioans say?