The media should report the "primary-within-a-primary" that will likely decide the candidate.

[gulliver]

The winner is not going to be the one with a plurality of delegates once the voting is over. The winner is (very justly and democratically) going to be the one with a majority of delegates, most likely a majority of pledged (earned from voters) delegates. There is, in effect, a center/left primary-within-a-primary going on. The real battle for the nomination is very likely in that primary.

Imo, this media "dumbing down" of the actual rules and process of the primary is very disappointing and destructive. They need to get their act together and start routinely reporting the race in terms that recognize how the rules actually work. While doing that, they can explain that all the candidates signed up for the rules and that the rules are basically very fair. It's the truth, so it should be reported.

On the bright side, many pundits are picking up on it and starting to go into "explain mode," so there's at least some improvement lately. Harry Reid also talked about it today, and the candidates basically all acknowledged it on stage in the last debate. But I'm still hearing way too many satellite commentators drawing "narratives, storylines, and questions" from the horserace paradigm. That does a disservice to media consumers in my opinion. Talk both "horserace" and "reality under the rules" if necessary, but make sure the latter isn't left out.