Thank you for posting those links. They both rebut the myth Hillary has presented that she is leading the popular vote. And good point in one of them that there really is no popular vote. It's all estimates and they don't matter anyway, it's delegates that matter.

>You may be right. I was listening on the radio and heard the popular argument bandied back and forth. On the radio Michigan and Florida were not even mentioned. I saw the same on CNN. These articles contradict both the radio discussion and CNN:
>
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7371367.stm
>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/clinton_cant_win_popular_vote.html
>
>
>
>>>I agree with you that in many voters' eyes Obama is winning because he won more delegates, but Obama has more delegates because he won those smaller caucus states. Hillary actually received more votes overall.
>>
>>Not sure that's true. I know the numbers depend on whether you count Florida and Michigan. I think you can make some argument for counting Florida, where everyone was on the ballot, but none for counting Michigan, where everyone except Hillary played by the rules and withdrew.
>>
>>Tamar