The point of the article is not that the popular vote is meaningless, but that by going out and constantly giving a misleading popular vote and claiming victory based on it, comparing it to Gore and the Civil Rights and Sufferege Movements, Hillary is making it more and more difficult to unify the party afterward.

To paraphrase "Animal Farm," all voters are equal, but some voters are more equal than others.

Which I knew but had forgotten.

They also went into the 1000's of mostly AA's disenfranchised by FL's cute little voter elimination program: Gather names of felons from all the country and then eliminate voters with any names remotely simlar to those names. In 2000, there were no provisional ballots -- that at least seems to have been fixed. Counting the provisional ballots? Not so clear!

Charlie kept trying to say the HBO film favored Dems and would be used (Hillary is mentioning it now) to encourage Dem voting. Jeffrey Toobin and David Boies kept saying everything had possible had been done to get at least one person from each situation on record and got their input as to veracity.  

Again, I will point out that individuals are moving from their candidate choice (Hillary or Obama) and then trying to rationaize why the votes should be counted this way or that -- or in fact, which votes should be counted.

That's a record worthy of contempt.

What the anti-count lobby is engaged in, however, is the contempt of the concept of universal suffrage and democracy itself.  While I may not like the voters who've given us such lousy leadership I fully recognize their right to do so (excepting, of course, the 2000 results).

This is about fairness and having votes count; the media needs to be exposed and slapped with a
legal suit for violating FCC fair reprorting standards..

Unfortuneatly if there are any such standards, they don't go so far as to actually protect the public from this overt monopolization and distortion of information...

I'm getting my news by comparing blogs and then
verifying the information with media. It's astounding how much of the news is not being covered..

Given the above factors, is there are question as to why Clinton is pursuing the strategy of trying to argue she won the popular vote?  That is literally the only argument left to make to convince the uncommitted superdelegates.

Now, the fact that she will need Puerto Rico's popular voters (who do not vote for President) is a tiny fly in the ointment, but it is much more powerful and frankly, appropriate, argument than "he can't win because reasons XYZ (insert flavor of the month- Ayers, Wright, white voters, etc.)" stuff.

But the point is that right now we're down to the very end of the game and Team Clinton is behind.  They ARE entitled to a hail mary pass into the inzone for the win.  It most likely isn't going to work, but they sure as heck are entitled to try.  They've earned the right.

To my Obama supporter friends - you've almost won the race.  Clinton will most likely not have the delegates to win the nomination.  Be nice to Clinton supporters.  Especially now.  No one likes a sore winner.

To Clinton supporter friends - losing sucks, and your competitive spirit is commendable.  No one likes losing, but if you do, you need to think very hard about whether a President McCain or President Obama would be more likely to do things like: end the war in Iraq; appoint more judges in the mold of Ginsberg instead of Scalia; fight for better access to health care; etc.