Obama's consistent organization and message coupled with his ability face seemingly unsurmountable "distractions" introduced and sustained by the media has been enough to prove to me that his ability to lead far exceeds Hillary Clinton's. I would vote for either, but the Hillary campaign's (mis)management of money and strategy has put her where she is today. It is undeniable that Americans have only one point of reference that demonstrates either candidate's ability to lead anything and that's their campaigns. If your decision that Obama is a weaker candidate based on HIllary's underestimation of caucuses, for one, then you may need to reconsider why you would vote for her. Obama's team, which he assembled and led, was stronger than hers. He's simply a better manager.

ps. It's been well documented now that Obama would've won every caucus state even if they were primarys, except for Maine, which would've been a toss up .