Barack Obama and his supporters frequently boast that he's won more delegates from the primaries and caucuses as well as more of the popular vote. You can argue (as I have) that one or the other measure is more meaningful, but both obviously have at least some significance.
But I just heard Obama surrogate John Kerry repeating another argument I've heard from the campaign: That Obama has won more total contests than Hillary Clinton, 31 to her 15.
I actually thought the figure was 27 to 18, but maybe there's some disagreement about the count. Whatever. What bugs me is that the number of contests won seems entirely irrelevant to me. Surely winning a large state like New York or Ohio means more than winning a small state like Delaware or Nebraska.
Lord knows the Clinton campaign has invoked its own creative logic on plenty of occasions. But just as I didn't like when they did it, I don't like when Obama does it, either.