In last night’s long-anticipated Pennsylvania Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton bested Barack Obama by about 10% of the vote, with 82 delegates going to Clinton versus 69 to Barack Obama. Obama’s delegate lead has decreased from 139 to 126.

The prevailing wisdom, reports the New York Times, is that the fundamental dynamics of the race remain the same, but that the contest may continue for weeks or months to come, and that Hillary’s third big-state win, despite the Obama campaign’s significant efforts, “served to underline the concerns about Mr. Obama’s strengths as a general election candidate. Exit polls again highlighted the racial, economic, sex and values divisions within the party.”

Even though Clinton’s surrogates offend him, The Daily Kos blogger Hunter argues against the growing concern that the extended campaign is hurting the Democratic party. Obama, he adds, would have to be “eaten by bears” for Clinton to win without relying on superdelegates to perform a deus ex machina.

In his concession remarks last night, Obama quickly moved the focus from Clinton to John McCain, mentioning the former only once and the latter seven times. Top advisors wore shirts that said “Stop the drama, vote Obama.”

Politico.com, taking a lead from NBC, reports that the North Carolina Republican National Party plans to unveil a 30-second ad attacking two Democratic gubernatorial candidates for their support of Obama, with supposed references to the controversial Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

Wonkette conjectures that, in Pennsylvania, Obama’s ballyhooed youth vote was no match for that state’s enormous elderly population, which, rivaled only by Florida’s, turned out in droves to support Clinton.

In a post on the Daily Dish, Obama supporter Andrew Sullivan says, “If Obama thinks he has a right to actually be nominated by the Clinton Democrats because he has won more votes, more states and more delegates, he is sadly mistaken. They will never let such a person win without a death struggle. And that is where the Democrats are now headed.”

Slate’s John Dickerson notes that Hillary won significantly among last-minute deciders, small-town voters, and gun-owners, suggesting that the most recent debate and “Bittergate,” may have harmed Obama.

The New Republic’s John B. Judis worries that Obama’s disappointing night could undermine his general election chances and asks, Is he the next George McGovern?

Eager to show Clinton the door, Maureen Dowd quotes Dr. Seuss and discusses Obama’s plea to eat his waffles in peace at a Pennsylvania diner.

An Obama Camp Memo calls it “a fundamentally unchanged race”

Time.com says the number to watch is 43—that’s the percentage of Clinton supporters said they’d abstain or vote for McCain if their candidate doesn’t win the Democratic nomination.