influence, intimidation and bullying that the caucus format affords.

Perfect venue for his Bros.

a rubber stamp for TPTB--a kangaroo kourt of public opinion.

It's a Lord of the Flies situation.

I don't think they could have anticipated a "tyranny of the minority".

Washington has a primary, but the Democratic Party sued the State to be allowed to caucus. The Nevada caucus is so new that Hillary has won both contested Democratic caucuses in Nevada, with similar rhetoric and accusations toward her rival's supporters by the way. Harry Reid had a heavy hand in pushing for that change to caucus.

So I do hear much yammering on DU about Bernie not being a 'real Democrat' but I also hear lots of complaints about the Party's choices coming out of Camp Clinton in regard to the caucuses. What I see is that supporters of both candidates have serious qualms about the process as it stands, and both camps have specific issues with the Democratic Party and various State Democratic Parties.

This OP is in essence a complaint about Democratic Party processes and choices. I agree, caucuses are not to my liking at all. But if you have criticisms of the Party, it's wrong to attack others for having criticisms of the Party as well. If you are not happy with Party choices, you really can't claim to be The Super Loyal, Democrat No Matter crowd anymore than those who are also not happy with all the Party's choices.

The thing is once those States set up a caucus that is their choice and that's how the delegates are chosen. In 2008, Obama did better in the caucuses than Hillary and after that race no one called for changes so here they are again, all those caucuses.

If the respective state rules allocated the delegates by the primaries in those states, the campaigns would have been different.