Barack Obama sometimes utters the cryptic line, “We are the ones we have been waiting for.”

People faint. And the pied piper moves on to the next state, piping his new age political con to the swooning throngs who believe in…what, exactly? All we see is liberalism wrapped in rhetoric that tries to hide that liberalism, disguise or deny it. Oh, and change. We mustn’t forget the ultimate raison d’etre of Obama’s campaign.

Big cons, even those masquerading as political campaigns, are complex endeavors, with many intricate moving parts, most of which are unseen or ignored, as intended. But if you don’t win, it’s all just a show. Rock stars pack stadiums, not voting booths.

Let’s play a little game, shall we? Let’s call it “How Does Obama beat John McCain.” Let’s use some exit poll data from the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary. Let’s acknowledge that the methodology is beyond flawed, but so, too, have been the results of many polls and prognostications, with far greater pretenses to legitimacy. At least we acknowledge that we are engaging in political card counting coupled with voodoo political analysis.

In Pennsylvania, among white voters, Obama lost in every age category, by four points from ages 18 to 29, by 16 points from 30 to 44, by 26 points from 45 to 59, and by a staggering 36 points from 60 and older voters. (White voters from ages 18 to 29 comprised only 8 percent of the total vote. Whites over 45 comprised 58%.)

Only among black voters between the ages of 45-59 was there enough of a sample to derive numbers, and Obama took 85% of those, winning 90% of all blacks. Blacks between the ages of 18 to 44 comprised 7% of the total vote.

Not enough Latinos voted to obtain a sample.

By religion, Obama lost among Protestants by 10 points, among Jews by 24 points and among Catholics by a staggering 40 points. He won among those of “other religion” by 16 points and by those of “no religion” by 24 points.

He lost in all education categories by significant percentages, except for college graduates whom he won by 2 points. Remarkably, however, he lost voters with postgraduate educations by 6 points.

Obama lost among voters in every income category except those who make less than $15,000 (which he won by 6 points), those who make between $150,000 and $200,000 (which he tied) and those making more than $200,000 (which he won by 14 points).

Those are the absolute bedrock categories of voters – race, age, education, income, religion, and the percentages of each will vary by state and by general election voters as opposed to primary voters. There are obviously errors in the data, but those errors do not advantage Obama, given the Obama Effect, wherein some voters tell exit pollsters they voted for him when they clearly did not.

Pennsylvania was a Democratic Party Primary, but it was hard fought over a protracted period of time, with Obama outspending Clinton by at least two to one, probably more. The demographic results were similar to those of Ohio and other states, indicating that in large industrial states (excepting his home state of Illinois) Obama is now locked in a narrow base of support which he seems unable to meaningfully expand.

Democratic Party Primary voters are the best that Obama will face, regardless of state. Why, for example, would General Election Catholics favor Obama more than Democratic Primary Catholics? Even among blacks, Obama’s staggering and understandable support is at its apex and will be offset, to some extent, in states with high Latino populations.

But the numbers from Pennsylvania reflect only Obama versus Clinton, not Obama versus McCain, many will say. Yeah, well weigh the comparative negative baggage. Use any scale you want, and you cannot come up with McCain’s being heavier than Clinton’s, for the general election. In the Pennsylvania vote by ideology, Obama lost in every category except “very liberal.”

Remind yourself that the General Election is not a national election, but a combination of state elections, with relatively few true “battleground” states, of which Pennsylvania and Ohio are among the necessities. When Must Win states become Can’t Win states, well, even congenital liars like Hillary Clinton can sometimes find the truth.

Also remind yourself that Obama’s negative baggage is only now beginning to be understood. Pastor Wright and “Professor” William Ayers (not to mention Ayers’ wife, Bernadine Dohrn) aren’t going away. Neither is Minister Farrakhan. How many voters know that Obama marched in Minister Farrakhan’s Million Man March? Right, we didn’t think so.

Only this week did ads start running that begin to explore Obama’s voting record in the Illinois legislature (ExposeObama.com). His record as a Member of the Board of Directors of two far left foundations is only now coming under scrutiny, with Politico.com investigating grants to anti-gun groups. There will be more, much more. Visualize the ad that says atheists love Obama. The General Election is not played in the Powder Puff League.

So how does Obama beat John McCain? You do your own voodoo analysis. Ours says he can’t.