MediaHerd predicted on Sunday that Sen. Hillary Clinton would almost certainly win Pennsylvania. Of course, anyone who followed the polls could safely predict that outcome. That’s why the media herd’s storyline is fascinatingly predictable: Did Sen. Clinton win by enough? Why can’t Sen. Obama “close the deal?” The media herd LOVES this storyline. Sen. Obama can’t close the deal because the media herd in part doesn’t want this exciting storyline to end. He still leads Sen. Clinton in pledged delegates and popular vote and number of states won. Sen. Obama has also been closing the gap on superdelegates and has more money. But you can sense the glee that this story isn’t over

ABC News suggests the new storyline:

Clinton’s Pennsylvania victory fuels questions about why Obama hasn’t been able to sew up the nomination, despite having more money, having won more states and having a lead in the popular vote and pledged delegates, according to ABC News’ delegate scorecard.

The media herd loves “fueling questions.”

Maureen Dowd, a confident and snarky member of the “Pundit Media” has probably been working on this line all week:

Now that Hillary has won Pennsylvania, it will take a village to help Obama escape from the suffocating embrace of his rival.

Fred Barnes, an ostensibly “conservative” member of the “Pundit Media,” rises to Sen. Clinton’s defense in the Weekly Standard this morning stating that she is building her case and even “boils down” her argument (or suggests the Sen. Clinton storyline):

Her argument boils down to this: I can hold the traditionally Democratic voters critical to winning the general election and he can’t, and thus I can defeat McCain and he can’t. Sure, he’s ahead in delegates, but he won many of them months ago, before the halo over his campaign was knocked off.

I love how easily the “Pundit Media” suggests that the supporters of the other candidate will either vote for Sen. McCain or just stay home in November. For some reason I doubt that. BUT, it makes for dramatic prognostications and following that storyline would require the media herd to exercise a calmer and more reasoned approach to its reporting which is never as exciting.

Walter Shapiro writes in Salon this morning:

Despite Obama’s unquestioned lead in delegates, fundraising and the fervor of his followers, the Democratic race increasingly resembles an academic conference on the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. There are no verities, just various forms of spin-dried argumentation. Does Pennsylvania prove that — like the March 4 Ohio and Texas primaries — Obama cannot close the deal when he is one big-state victory away from being bathed in triumphal confetti at the Denver Convention? Or does Pennsylvania underscore for Democrats the dangers of scorched-earth politics (68 percent of voters in the exit polls thought that Clinton “attacked unfairly” and 41 percent say she is not “honest and trustworthy”) at a time when Republicans and independent swing voters are moving in John McCain’s direction? (Emphasis added.)

But no matter how you frame it, Obama is the candidate who has not won a major primary since he swept Wisconsin on Feb. 22 by uncharacteristically carrying high-school-educated and lower-income voters.

Whoa! The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle! That’s probably the first time the Democratic primary has been compared to quantum mechanics.

John B. Judis floats the question of whether Sen. Obama will be the next McGovern in The New Republic. Intoning dramatically:

The struggle continues. Clinton still has virtually no chance of overtaking Obama’s delegate lead or his edge in the popular vote. And the superdelegates will be loath to ignore this advantage. Meanwhile, Obama’s weaknesses as a general election candidate grow more apparent with each successive primary. (Emphasis added.)

Gosh, sounds like a “no-win” for the Democrats!

Bottom line: Sen. Clinton’s victory in Pennsylvania wasn’t all that dramatic and wasn’t unexpected. Yet we are in a “Flock Alert” and the clamor of the “Pundit Media” indicates a likely “Herd Alert” over Sen. Obama’s inability to “close the deal.”