Originally Posted by Badgered Mushroom

Isn't this due to the caucus states which he swept through? I believe at caucuses each person's vote was worth much more than during a primary due to lower turnouts on both sides.

Obama's ground campaign was much more organized (and by much more organized I mean that Clinton essentially ignored caucus states) thus he got more DPV (delegates per vote, aren't I clever?) in caucuses. He didn't cheat or do anything wrong, he just played the game better.

I don't see what your point is. It's nothing that we didn't already know. As for the popular vote argument, it's not useable because we don't know how many people would have voted for him or any other candidates in Michigan, and caucus states don't record their turnouts.