Although today was the day that Kentucky and Oregon took their places among the parade of states that have voted for president in this long, long, LONG campaign for the White House, the only surprises came in a show that involved voting of a different sort.

Hillary Clinton pounded Barack Obama, as expected, in the Bluegrass State, running up a 35-point victory in her latest drumming of him in (for lack of a better term) late, predominately white states. She delivered a lengthy address in which she made clear her intention to—get ready—continue on in the campaign! I will say, though, that this speech was one of her better ones; it wasn’t the content that struck me as much as the pace of it. Usually, Hillary drones on a lot. Tonight, she seemed to have an energy about her. Maybe she had one too many Red Bulls: That would explain her fuzzy, fuzzy math. Clinton now says she has won more popular votes than Obama. Only a few problems with that argument:

But however strange the logic was behind it, the Clinton cheer was short-lived. Shortly after she spoke, Obama took the stage in Des Moines, Iowa, to soak in the excitement that comes from having won the majority of your party’s pledged presidential delegates. However weak his showing in Kentucky—and it was weak—it put him over that mark. Obama delivered a polished-up version of his general election speech, which he debuted a couple of days ago. It was notable for the conciliatory, even admirable tone toward Clinton (Obama noted that because of what Clinton has done in this election, because of the barriers she has broken and the support she has drawn, the world will be a different place for his two daughters), and then for the way Obama just as quickly changed gears and referred to John McCain as “my opponent.“ Translation: Clinton is no longer his opponent.

The speech sought to shore up Obama’s weaknesses among rural white voters in the wake of the “only-bitter-people-carry-guns-and-go-to-church” flap that dogged Obama last month. But if it was all but repentant in tone where that was concerned, it was downright in-your-face when it came to McCain and his foreign policy.

You know by now that McCain and Obama have been exchanging body blows since the president rang the bell with his comments about appeasement before the Israeli Knesset last week. Pundits can argue all day whether Obama’s strategy—which is to go after McCain with both barrels, so to speak—is wise or reckless. Few people can match up with the personal experiences of a solider who was held as a prisoner of war for more than five years. But Obama is not trying to match it: He’s simply saying he has different ideas, and he’s not backing away from it or trying to minimize it as a campaign issue. What’s good about that is that it shows Obama’s confidence in his position and that he is willing to stand on his belief that his is the right position. What’s potentially bad about it is that if he’s not careful, Obama risks wading into an area where McCain has experience that is just a few years shorter than the entire time Barack Obama has been alive. Obama cannot afford to be seen as a condescending university-type lecturing a wayward military recruit. If he can successfully walk that line, it will be considered a good strategy, one that allowed Obama to stand toe-to-toe with a man who was a POW for five and a half years. It he fails, it will go down as one of the biggest blunders of all time, because Obama will have chosen to engage McCain on what McCain believes are his strongest issues: National security and foreign policy.

Obama needs to remember that there’s a reason home games are desireable. He needs to play on his own field, where he has the upper hand on domestic issues like the economy, rather than volunteering to go out on the road all the time to McCain’s national security and foreign policy yard. Even the best teams get weary of the road.

All in all, I thought it was a solid speech, a good jumping-off point for Obama as he trains his sights on McCain and begins to tweak his general-election message as the race for the Democratic nomination (we hope) dies down.

As for the other voting venue, I cast my vote for David Archuleta after the season finale of “American Idol.“ It was the first time where I genuinely felt that either contestant would make a great champion, but Archuleta brought his A game to the finale, while Cook seemed to struggle with uncharacteristic nervousness.

But fans love David Cook as much as they love Archuleta—and possibly even more. We’ll find out tomorrow at 7 p.m. Central time.

If only the fight for the Democratic nomination could be settled as soon!