with 29% of the vote outstanding the guy with less than 27% thinks he won.
Well, the 30% "winner" is a big problem with the switch from control by party leaders to the "democracy" of primaries.
It is seen as fair, and it kind of is fair, for 50.1% to beat 49.9% in a two-candidate final race to gain a seat that can only be held by one person.
In a multi-candidate race, a plurality winner is OK as long as all the candidates are on the same page.
But if 30% want, let's say, Mitt Romney and 70% do not, making the hypothetical Mitt Romney the "winner" doesn't advance democracy, it frustrates it.
If we are going to use idiots voting to select candidates for the Presidency, at least separate the delegate selection form the horse race. Get 30% of the votes, get 30% of the delegates, the guys wh "lost" get the other 70%.