One bit of conventional wisdom in this election (which both the Obama and Clinton campaigns have bought into) is that the number of states holding caucuses (a less democratic procedure, for many reasons) have given Obama a real advantage. Today, liberal activist and Obama supporter Glenn Hurowitz and Wharton professor Gregory P. Nini–whose research on the Florida and Michigan primaries we have talked about here before–have come out with a study that suggests just the opposite: Had those states held primaries, Obama would have done even better:
The study also estimates that, in a true popular vote system where all states held primaries, Obama’s popular vote lead would have increased from 2.5 percent to 3.5 percent, because voters in caucus states would have slightly favored Obama based on demographic projections.