The Obama bandwagon slowed down this week. It’s tough being out front and taking incoming fire. And the shelling will get worse as more people see the videos of Obama’s pastor.

The Clinton campaign still has hope. But, for all their kitchen sink strategy, there’s one argument they haven’t used: When you look only at states that held primaries – not caucuses – who won the most delegates?

Should her campaign say – as is probably the case – that Obama has a delegate lead only because his supposedly upscale, pointy-headed supporters with their flexible schedules were the ones who could go to the lengthy, complicated, obscure caucuses?

Given how close the delegate count is – and how overwhelmingly Obama won the caucus states – Clinton might, in fact, be the primary winner.

This, of course, begs the question of how the experienced politicians at Team Clinton got out-organized in the caucuses. Maybe they were too busy dumping on each other and eating the doughnut budget.

The “primary winner” case is more persuasive than either candidate’s argument that their various victories in various states portend anything for the November election.

Clinton says she won the big swing states. Obama says he won states all over the country.

Doesn’t mean squat. Those victories came in primaries and caucuses limited to Democrats, and sometimes Independents. Unfortunately, Republicans and conservatives get to vote in the fall.

This race is not over. Stay tuned.

Click Here to discuss and comment on this and other articles.