Danny Finkelstein raises some good points about the odd caucus system employed in some states to selet their delegates to vote for the Democratic and Republican candidates for the US presidency. But then he goes and spoils it all by saying "There was so much fuss about what happened in Florida in 2000. But whatever your view of that, isn't this at least as bad?"
Actual Mr Finkelstein. No it isn't. Let me explain why.
In Florida in 2000 there was mass fraud. Firstly not everyone's votes were counted because the counting machines did not do their job properly. Then there was the issue of absentee ballots, which were accepting after polling day, at the discretion of eletion officials appoited by the Republicans. these overseas ballots, often from members of the armed forces, and overwhelmingly Republican voters should not have been counted. then there was the mass removal of htousands of names of known felons from the voting lists in Florida. There is a greater chance of poorer people voting Democrat, and likewise a greater chance of a poorer person being a known felon. this meant that thousands of Democrat voters had their vote taken away and they often did not know until they turned up to vote. They were not informed that they had to re-apply for the right to vote. And then, of course, there was the obstruction of polling stations in areas where the Democrats were expected to do well.
So in short Mr Finkelstein you make a good point about caucuses, but then spoilt it by comparing it to the situation in Florida in 2000.