Primary voters in Texas and Ohio are sending the same message that voters in New Hampshire sent: Not so fast; let's let this race continue.

Tuesday's primaries, particularly those in Texas and Ohio, were being portrayed as a do-or-die situation for Hillary Clinton's campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. By winning both states, plus Rhode Island, Clinton's campaign is revitalized, despite the fact that Barack Obama's substantial delegate lead was barely dented by these three Clinton wins.

Following Clinton's victories on Super Tuesday in early February, she had endured 11 primary defeats as Obama built a powerful wave of momentum. Now that she has scored high-profile wins in Ohio and Texas, Clinton has at least slowed Obama's momentum.

Part of Tuesday's results could be explained by voters wanting the process to continue and not wanting to let Obama's February momentum short-circuit the process.

Another factor in Clinton's wins might have been the sharper attacks she made against Obama, suggesting he was not experienced enough to handle a foreign policy crisis, and that he has ties to shady political contributors.

A television ad run by the Clinton campaign featuring a 3 a.m. call to the White House suggested she, and not Obama, has the experience to handle such a crisis call. While Clinton's supporters note that Obama lacks such experience, many other people will argue that Clinton lacks the experience also.

That attack ad, which raised doubts about Obama, likely will have repercussions. Analysts predict that Obama will now return the favor, by sharpening his attacks on Clinton.

Another consideration is that Clinton's attempt to play on national security fears could come back to haunt her, or Obama. It would not be surprising to see Sen. John McCain, who clinched the Republican nomination on Tuesday, turn Clinton's lack-of-experience line of attack against her, based on his deep knowledge of national security issues. He could make the pitch that his extensive experience in the Senate makes him the most qualified candidate to handle the crisis phone call.

Clinton also raised doubts about Obama's ethics by directing attention to the impending trial of Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a Syrian-born, Chicago-based developer accused of influence-peddling in the Illinois governor's administration. Rezko was one of Obama's early campaign supporters, and they had a connection in a real estate deal when Obama bought his Chicago home.

But by using Rezko to raise doubts about Obama's ethics and his ties to people with legal troubles, Clinton opens herself up to scrutiny over the questionable backgrounds of some of her own campaign contributors and the fact that the public does not yet know the names of the wealthy people and organizations that have contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Arkansas or the William J. Clinton Foundation.

It is expected that people also will be looking at the lucrative financial deals that have earned former President Bill Clinton tens of millions of dollars in recent years. The Wall Street Journal reported recently on Clinton's plan to extricate himself from a can't-lose business partnership with Yucaipa Cos., an investment company owned by billionaire Ron Burkle, a Clinton supporter. Yucaipa has business relationships with the ruler of Dubai and others in the Mideast.

And there also might be more attention paid to a story reported by the New York Times about the former president traveling to Ka-zakhstan in 2005 and helping win a lucrative uranium deal for Canadian mining investor Frank Giustra. Soon after Clinton's influence helped Giustra win the uranium contract, Giustra made an unreported $31.3 million contribution to Clinton's foundation.

The potential for conflicts of interest posed by these affairs and these wealthy, anonymous donors to the Clintons is something voters will have to consider.

Already this week, Obama has reminded people that he released his tax returns and comprehensive reports on his income months ago. He notes, however, that Clinton has not done the same, although her campaign now promises to do so around April 15, the federal income tax deadline.

And, the fact that most of the former first lady's papers still are sealed in secrecy by the Clinton Library also is troubling to some who want a closer examination of her role in her husband's administration.

Clinton's wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island this week mean the campaign will continue, and the American public will get to learn more about each of these candidates. The current scenario of a drawn-out, potentially more negative, primary contest is not what Democratic Party insiders had in mind as they set up the front-loaded primary election schedule when Clinton's nomination was seen as inevitable by Super Tuesday.

That hasn't happened, and that's a good thing for voters, particularly voters in Pennsylvania, who on April 22 will enjoy their first taste of relevance in a presidential primary in decades.