I just heard Chuck Todd mention Washington was not counted in the popular vote because they had a caucus which did not report popular vote results.
Please remember Washington state had a primary AND a caucus, similar to Texas. Barack Obama won the primary (for which few if any delegates were assigned) 51-46%, or 354,111 to 315,740 in popular vote according to msnbc's own election results site.
Strangely, navigating to the 2008 primary results from Washington's Sec of State website directs you to the wrong election's results. (Click on 2008 Primary results and you end up getting 2007 General results).
Obama won the caucus by a more substantial 2-to-1 margin...the results are right there on msnbc's website as well.
There is no reason why at least Washington's primary should not be counted for the popular vote tally...especially if it is counted for Texas.
Why, again, does this even matter anyway? Why don't we just throw the whole Primary process out the window to figure out something more favorable for Hillary?