Senator Clinton has lived to fight another day. She did not halt Senator Obama’s momentum entirely, but the voting last night showed that the rush to install him as the party’s candidate in November has slowed.

In the two weeks since Wisconsin voted for her rival, Mrs. Clinton has sharpened her attacks against him and prompted the press to scrutinize him more closely. Her campaign did not collapse when she was shunted into second place; in February she raised an enormous $35 million.

Mr. Obama raised even more in the same period, $50 million, but his cash advantage paid few dividends last night. He is estimated to have outspent Mrs. Clinton in television advertising in the four primary states by a factor of four to one — in Vermont it was as much as five to one — yet he failed to overwhelm Mrs. Clinton in Ohio and Texas. So last night, billed as Mrs. Clinton’s Alamo, proved not to be the do-or-die fight it was at first billed.

The Clintons’ game plan is now becoming clear. Few who have studied the couple’s methods imagined that Mrs. Clinton would abandon her life’s ambition until the evidence against her was inarguable. And argue they will. It is evident they will advance simultaneously on a number of fronts.

So far Mr. Obama’s surrogates have argued that only elected delegates should count. Yet the Democratic system allows for superdelegates, made up of ex officio party members and elected officials, which the Obama camp suggests should echo the popular will. If only it were as simple as that.

Superdelegates were invented and given considerable power in order to calm the runaway enthusiasm of temporary, extreme, callow primary voters who might elevate an unelectable general election candidate. Mrs. Clinton’s supporters can argue that the Democratic party constitution should not be tampered with. If the party had wanted a one person one vote system of picking a candidate, that is what would have been chosen.

This is important when assessing who exactly has been voting for Mr. Obama. While Mrs. Clinton has relied almost entirely upon long-standing Democratic party members, Mr. Obama has enjoyed enormous support from independent and even Republican voters. As many as 10% of those who voted in Democratic primaries formerly billed themselves as Republicans, and exit polling suggested that they mostly voted for Mr. Obama.

When debating which candidate has democratic legitimacy, the vast numbers taking part in the Democratic race in open primaries who are not necessarily Democratic supporters — and may not vote Democratic in November — might become a liability for Mr. Obama.

Mrs. Clinton has been carefully keeping in reserve, too, her wins in Michigan and Florida, two primaries the Democratic leadership deemed void. No Democratic candidate campaigned in either state, and in Michigan only Mrs. Clinton and Senator Dodd were on the ballot, but Mrs. Clinton won both. In Florida, 1.7 million voted in the Democratic primary, which is a large number of voters for the Democratic leadership to ignore.

Although Florida’s Republican Governor Charles Crist has joined Mrs. Clinton in demanding that his state’s votes be counted in the Democratic contest, and has even hinted he would fund a rerun, it is not clear how practical it would be to mount late primary races. If the contest were to reach Denver in August, as seems increasingly likely, the lost voters of Florida and Michigan are sure to play their part.

To put last night in perspective, it has been just two months since Mr. Obama trounced Mrs. Clinton in Iowa, but there are six full months before the Denver convention. Wyoming votes on Saturday, and Pennsylvania, a state much like Ohio, boasting 188 delegates, looms large on the horizon on April 22. Each day the race continues will give Mrs. Clinton time to continue to alter the notion that Mr. Obama’s victory is inevitable. Last night she showed Mr. Obama is vulnerable; she must now show she is a sure winner.

As a little known quantity, Mr. Obama’s claim to be untainted by politics as usual went unquestioned. But since he became the Democratic favorite a number of ugly issues have arisen which puts that assertion in doubt.

He has been endorsed by Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, an embarrassment he has shrugged off. But combine that with the beliefs of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, his church pastor who sails close to advocating a separate America for African Americans, and the embarrassment is compounded.

The fraud trial in Chicago of Tony Rezko, a friend, supporter, and generous donor of Mr. Obama’s, is getting under way. The Illinois senator’s judgment has been put in doubt by a property deal made with Mrs. Rezko from which he profited, even while Mr. Rezko was being scrutinized by federal agents. At best, Mr. Obama’s dealings with Mr. Rezko shows profound naivety.

And Mrs. Clinton enjoys another benefit over time. Exit polling last night showed that voters are far more anxious about the economy than other issues, including the war in Iraq. The flagging economy shows no sign of turning to boom before the end of the year. For once, Mrs. Clinton has a clear policy advantage in suggesting she would be more likely to turn the economy around. Her husband’s repeated call, “It’s the economy, stupid,” may still prove to be the winning campaign mantra.

nwapshott@nysun.com