Bill Clinton says wife is victim of a ‘cover up

[Alcon]

Your math is faulty, CARL.

Dave's site reports delegates, not raw votes, for caucus states.  Washington's caucus turnout was not 32,000.  Even if it were, "other candidates" would have received more than 50 votes (0.16%).  Clearly those were state delegates for "other candidates" which are an entirely different beast than raw votes.

In order to get a truly representative sample for the caucus states, you have to take state-provided turnout statistics (or estimates) and extrapolate the delegate results.  This is imperfect, as it negatively impacts candidates who failed to reach viability across many precincts, but is a more honest way than just counting state delegates, which correspond to voters at ratios around 20:1.

The DNC is not going to give Clinton a natural +328,309 margin out of Michigan, either, simply because other candidates withdrew their names because all parties (including Clinton's campaign) were on the record as saying Michigan would not count.

[Alcon]

I feel so much better having you on the other side.

Please tell me how Gallup and Rasmussen (not to mention Princeton) are also all wrong.

I do think Clinton is a marginally stronger candidate.  I'm not "on the other side."  I was just pointing out that you have no idea what you're talking about re: the caucuses.