BY TAYLOR MARSH

Start by reading this post by Jay Cost.

Then read this MyDD diary by DaveOinSF. It came in through a flurry of emails. The data is impressive, so make sure you read the post. Here’s the conclusion, which is sobering.

Based on the caucus results in the above states, Barack Obama gained 295 pledged delegates to Hillary Clinton’s 158, a net advantage of 137 pledged delegates. Reallocating delegates based on the primary results or an interpolation based on the WA-TX-NE-ID data, Barack Obama would have won 233 to Hillary Clinton’s 219, a net advantage of 14. The use of low-turnout caucuses rather than higher-participation primaries is directly responsible for a net margin of 123 pledged delegates in Barack Obama’s favor.

Hello superdelegates! Any of you paying attention to all the evidence?

As I wrote yesterday, and you can see from the headlines on this site, top name Clinton supporters are getting the feeling we’re not going to field our strongest candidate. Bill Clinton chimed in on this as well:

Bill Clinton also said winning the popular vote “will prove she’s the popular choice of the Democrats,” despite ending with less delegates than Obama, the former president said in an impromptu press conference on the streets of Old San Juan. “And the party will have to decide whether they believe the caucuses — where you get about one delegate for 2000 votes — are more important than the primaries where you get one for 12,000,” he said. “And that this really astonishing race, where both have run amazing campaigns, they’re gonna have to decide how to resolve this.

Talk about it. Overnight thread for you night owls… and early risers.