Warning: A catastrophic implosion is likely to occur to the Democratic Party in the event that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton steps out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The prognosis seems inevitable as Sen. Clinton’s campaign seems to be coming to an end.

The super-delegates count is no longer in her favor, numerous cable network pundits such as Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann have already counted her out. However, as we all know, especially 2000 Democratic nominee Al Gore, winning the popular doesn’t always make you the commander in chief.

On Thursday, Clinton sent a brief memo to the Obama headquarters imploring him to help her reinstate the delegate counts in Florida and Michigan. It’s truly the best thing for the Democratic Party. As Clinton put it in her memo, “the Republicans won an election by successfully opposing a fair counting of votes in Florida. As Democrats, we must reject any proposals to do the same.”

Disenfranchising the people of Florida and Michigan of their votes in the democratic process will not only hinder the Democrats in the fall but is doing so now in this all-important primary election. Clinton has proved herself victorious in many other ‘swing’ states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and of course the one that cost the Democrats the 2000 election: Florida.

Obama has indeed secured the popular vote, as well as the delegate amount, but has obtained his lead in red states that have traditionally voted Republican during presidential elections.

In 2004, President Bush won states such as Arkansas (10 percent), Mississippi (19 percent), Nebraska (33 percent), North Carolina (13 percent), South Carolina (17 percent), Tennessee (14 percent), Virginia (8 percent) and Wyoming (40 percent), according to infoplease.com.

These states have been Obama’s largest margins of victories (exception Illinois) and have accounted for nearly 80 percent of his delegate lead on Sen. Clinton, as calculated by CNN Election Center 2008.

The states most vital to the Democratic cause have spoken in favor of Clinton, yet the Democratic base and so-called pundits throughout the states are asking for her to step down?

Clinton is the candidate who will head into office with an agenda in hand that will benefit the United States. Even though she failed in her 1994 quest for affordable health care, her acumen was on point, before its time and she has adamantly stated that it will be a focal point in her presidential administration.

Our current economical burdens will be addressed by Hillary Clinton and her husband, who during his administration in the 1990s strengthened our economy and left our current president with a national surplus.

She has also made it her point to withdraw troops from Iraq and boldly confront nations hostile to the United States, such as Iran and other terrorist groups in the Middle East, with strong actions, unlike her Democratic contender, who feels that negotiations with countries such as Cuba and Venezuela would be the better approach.

When dealing with a nation capable of inflicting mass harm, would you rather act first or try sitting in a circle singling kumbaya and hope everything works out?

Yes, you run the risk of alienating the black vote but the same goes the other way for the gender vote, and just as important to the presidential elections are the Florida and Michigan votes.

Before anyone serves up the nomination to Senator Obama on a silver platter, the Democratic National Committee must reinstate the voices of those two suppressed states. With a much closer delegate amount between the two candidates, the super-delegates will be much more at ease to do their jobs.

That is, see the bigger picture and vote for the candidate who best allows the presidential election to ‘swing’ in his or her favor.

So in short, press on Senator Clinton. Press on. Victor Nieto can be reached at [email protected]