Dems are out of sync with the nation:

If the Democrats ran their nominating process the way we run our general elections, Sen. Hillary Clinton would have a commanding lead in the delegate count, one that will only grow more commanding after the next round of primaries, and all questions about which of the two Democratic contenders is more electable would be moot.

It’s their “convoluted system of proportional distribution of delegates that varies from state to state and that obtains in neither congressional nor presidential elections,” says Princeton prof Sean Wilentz at Salon.

It is this eccentric system that has given Obama his lead in the delegate count.

Hillary C. would be “comfortably in front” were it otherwise, “1,743 pledged delegates to Obama’s 1,257.”

Instead, she has about 1,242 pledged delegates to Obama’s 1,413, per CNN estimates.

Howard Dean et al. goofed mightily in handling Florida and Michigan, yes, but Obama has resisting repairing the goof, thwarting small-d democratic procedures, argues Wilentz.

For instance, O. arbitrarily wants half the Michigan and Florida votes, a ploy that Wilentz calls “a bold power grab, worthy of the Chicago machine organizations that claimed the votes of the recently deceased, their names gleaned from the voting rolls.

(This is truly a belt below the belt, involving as it does sharp criticism of how Chicago Dems do things, not to mention O’s connection at the hip with them.  How dare he?)

Wilentz has more, in near-numbing detail, and concludes that the new, fresh-faced kid on the electoral block is using “one of the oldest ploys in the playbook of American politics.”

You mean he’s just another?  Perish the thought.