Hillary Rodham Clinton pressed on with her presidential campaign Wednesday, the day after squeaking out a win in the Indiana primary and losing badly to Barack Obama in North Carolina.

As Mrs. Clinton addressed a crowd in Shepardstown, W.Va., voices on TV and around the Internet debated whether it’s in the Democratic party’s best interest for Mrs. Clinton to stay in the race when her chances of grabbing enough delegates to clinch the nomination are shrinking by the day.

The top pundit calling for Senator Clinton to wave the white flag was NBC’s Tim Russert, who said of Mr. Obama, “We now know who the Democratic nominee’s going to be, and no one’s going to dispute it.” His remarks on primary night have been flying around the Internet as a YouTube moment.

Blogger Taylor Marsh, an outspoken Clinton supporter, published a vehemently angry post, calling Mr. Russert, among other things, a “loud-mouthed, self-important elitist.”

“Whose place is it to announce we have a nominee when neither candidate has enough delegates?” Ms. Marsh asked. “I’ll tell you who: no one.”

But for the most part, bloggers from the left and right, with varying degrees of sensitivity, also called on Senator Clinton to withdraw.

Said Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic:

Barack Obama is, by almost every measure and by almost every unmeasurable impression, on the precipice of being able to declare victory and have his declaration be accepted by the media and his party. Hillary Clinton needed to find a way to give superdelegates their “Holy Moly” moment, and she failed.

Steve Kornacki of The New York Observer:

Clinton’s strategy since February 5 never stood much chance of working and allowed room for absolutely no slip-ups. Now it’s over.

John Aravosis of AmericaBlog:

There is no longer any reason for Hillary to continue in this race other than a desire to destroy Obama and make him lost in the fall so she can run again in 4 years. This farce needs to be ended now.

And Shaun Mullen of The Moderate Voice:

Yet with 90 percent of the pledged delegates now chosen, Clinton is once again picking up those goal posts, slinging them onto her itty-bitty shoulders… and is slogging on. This is not for the good of party or the nation, as she would have us believe, but because she cannot face up to the reality that she squandered pretty much a sure thing by engaging in the kind of divisive and fear mongering politics of which change-thirsty Americans are so fricking sick and tired.

Allahpundit at Hot Air noted, that even if she gets the Florida and Michigan delegations seated at the convention, as is her intention, she wouldn’t gain a popular vote advantage. Especially not if the previously unreported caucus totals from Iowa, Washington, Maine and Nevada (granted, the last of which Mrs. Clinton won) are added in.

She has nothing left to commend her to the supers except an electabilty argument unsupported by a single key metric or even circumstantial evidence that Pastorgate has done Obama grievous damage at the polls. Are they going to take the nomination from the first serious black candidate for president without any compelling data to hang their decision on? Not a chance. It’s over. Let’s move on.

That idea of “let’s move on” seems to be the train of thought of most bloggers — but Mitt Romney, the former G.O.P. contender, (unsurprisingly) disagreed.

“I applaud the ongoing battle among the Democrats and hope it continues,” he told the conservative National Review. No doubt because it gave the Democrats less time to campaign for the general election.

Fox News reporter Major Garrett brought up a rare point helping Mrs. Clinton’s rationale to stay in the race — how much of an advantage did Mr. Obama gain from early voters?

One of the key questions is whether Obama won the “day of” primary, meaning that he carried the votes cast on Election Day. It’s clear Obama crushed Clinton in early votes cast in both states. A good portion of these votes where cast before the controversy over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright took hold a second time in the campaign and before Clinton engaged Obama in a debate over her proposal for a federal gasoline tax holiday. This was a key difference in the Clinton and Obama strategies heading into these primaries. Obama’s camp worked overtime to solicit support in early voting. Clinton made virtually no effort on this front as her campaign, by necessity, focused resources solely on Pennsylvania to ensure the biggest victory possible.

There’s also a lot of outcry in the blogosphere over a story in the New York Daily News about how the Clinton campaign may want to stay in the race because many white voters are uncomfortable with the idea of a black president. “The implication being,” wrote Dan Collins of Protein Wisdom, “that Hillary backers are misinformed racist [jerks] specifically and haters generally. The pursuit of anecdotes in the service of the narrative: it’s amazing what these [jerks] will cling to.”

Despite what Mrs. Clinton says publicly, Markos Moulitsas Zúniga of the liberal site Daily Kos wonders whether she’s hanging around this race for another reason other than getting the party’s presidential nomination.

So Clinton vows to stay in through the end, and surrogates like James Carville are talking tough. But the feeling is that it’s all posturing as the Clinton Camp negotiates for 1.) having Obama pay off her campaign debt, and/or 2.) a spot on the ticket as V.P.

Finally, Jim Geraghty of The National Review brought up a bit of history in making a case for Mrs. Clinton to stay in the contest: