It's exhausting to contemplate the sheer numerology of this week's primaries. So I sat out Wednesday as all the smart people who get paid to parse stats figured out what happened on Tuesday. It all felt like a giant game of Monopoly, with talking heads trading Park Place for Marvin Gardens. Is New York worth a Georgia plus an Illinois? Ultimately this winning of states is unsatisfactory. Even beyond the red-blue divide, states are not as homogenous as these contests would suggest.

The New York Times came up with some nifty insights on this, at least on the razor-thin Democratic side. In Tuesday's popular vote (which broke previous turnout records, while still remaining pathetic), they figured that Hillary Clinton got 48.83 percent to Barack Obama's 48.45 percent. That's pretty close considering Obama took 13 states, several of them decidely purplely-red versus Clinton's big-blue dominance. Tim Egan makes this argument in his read of Obama's performance in red counties in Idaho and Colorado, calling it the "Geography of Hope."

Nicholas Kristof agrees that the strongest matchup in the general election would be Obama versus John McCain, as both are showing purple appeal. Meanwhile, Brett Arends of the Wall Sreet Journal calls Super Tuesday decidely for Obama, at least from the perspective of the betting public, who buy and sell candidate "stock" on Dublin-based InTrade's fun political markets toy.

But the numbers that really matter in the primary season are the delegate counts. As of this morning, that is still up for debate. CNN counts 823 for Clinton, to Obama's 741. The NYT gives Clinton 892 delegates to Obama's 716. Politico's math has Clinton at 1000 delegates and Obama at 902. These are somewhat back of napkin calculations that will have to be nailed down, obviously.

The numbers vary as well for McCain, Romney, and Huckabee, but McCain is so far ahead, with more than twice the delegates of No. 2 spot Romney, that the details matter less. In general, either Dem is about halfway to winning the 2025 delegates needed to win the party nomination, while McCain is a little more than halfway there.

Other numbers being touted today are in fundraising. Obama is kicking ass in that department. His campaign has claimed he raised $32 million in January and is on pace to collect another $30 million this month. Meanwhile Clinton was forced to loan her campaign $5 million, and she's now beginning to pitch her campaign as the underdog effort fighting the establishment money of her opponent.

It's all so surreal, I love it.