I didn't really get a sense from this why the caucus process is "corrupt".

It's flawed, certainly. The problem with democracy is that the people who get involved in democratic politics tend to be a bit weird. This is true both of the grassroots and of those who get elected.

But while the rest of us are too lazy or embarrassed to get involved, we owe the politically motivated a debt of gratitude. Maybe they deserve a bit of free babysitting.

I think he's suggesting that ability to buy votes with cheap political bribery is a form of corruption.

GreenwichJ:

I didn't really get a sense from this why the caucus process is "corrupt".

It's flawed, certainly. The problem with democracy is that the people who get involved in democratic politics tend to be a bit weird. This is true both of the grassroots and of those who get elected.

But while the rest of us are too lazy or embarrassed to get involved, we owe the politically motivated a debt of gratitude. Maybe they deserve a bit of free babysitting.

He's suggesting a few things. As noted, the caucus system is open to what is tantamount to bribery in some cases. (There is an earlier straw poll in Iowa, which Romney won this year, which is essentially a test of how much money you're willing to spend).

Hitch is also making a more substantial claim regarding the caucuses relation to our democracy: that,

1. due to the small unrepresentative sample involved,
2. in addition to the way in which it operates, and 3. the media's groupthink over how winning in Iowa and New Hampshire means ever so much,4
4. that, four, the caucus system leads to poor decisions (see the Pat Robertson example), which, due to three, mean that the nation's politics are worse off for it.

That is the crux of the argument and I think a rather good one.

The Republican Party conducts a straw poll for President by secret ballot in years when the nomination is contested. (No vote was held in 2004, when President Bush was unopposed for renomination.)

The whole caucus then elects delegates and alternates to the county convention.

(almost 2 seconds to find using the google)

The Dems are of course different in procedure. As an Indy, I usually go to the D caucus (yes they are open here, unlike many other states) and have never felt it any problem to address my concern or support in public; in fact I may have changed some minds. There are a lot of folk critical of a process they themselves have never participated in and as CH subtly notes, the real problem is the media coverage and the money - problems that afflict the process in every state, and in many to a far greater extent.

I suggest that everyone go and read all the authors recent in depth articles on the electoral process problems in CO, CA, OH, FLA, etc to get a firmer grip on his passion to fix and balance the election game.

Now, if he could only make his points without gratuitous name-calling, it might actually be a good article.

Yes, Iowa is white. Yes, Iowa is rural. But the caucus process brings party faithful together and then they debate and argue and they stand up before their fellow Democrats and declare a preference. I think there is nothing quite as democratic as that. And if the author believes that caucuses are undemocratic, how does he feel about national conventions? Elected delegates stand up and vote, in public, in support of a candidate. And if you think a free sandwich is a bribe, what about the stuff traded at conventions?

Hey Anthony, either you're fanastically uninformed or you're deliberately deceiving. Delegates at conventions are pledged, just as Presidential Electors are. Please tell me you knew that and were just confused.

Actually, not all delegates are pledged. I refer you to the following from demconvention.com:

What are the types of delegates? How are they selected?

Pledged delegates differ from unpledged delegates in that they must openly commit to a candidate before the vote and are subject to review by that candidate. Unpledged delegates are sometimes referred to as "superdelegates."

District-level delegates - These make up roughly half of delegates, and must file a statement of candidacy designating the presidential or uncommitted preference and a signed pledge of support for the presidential candidate the person favors, if any, with the state party by a date the state party specifies. They must run for election in the district they are registered to vote, and are subject to review by the candidate they support.

At-large delegates - Must also file a statement of candidacy designating the presidential or uncommitted preference and a signed pledge of support for the presidential candidate the person favors, if any, with the state party by a date the state party specifies. The state party determines how these delegates are selected, but they are often selected by the district-level delegates.

Party Leaders and Elected Official (PLEO) delegates - DNC Members, Democratic House and Senate members, Democratic governors, and former Democratic Party leaders are automatically confirmed to the state parties. In addition, these positions are considered according to the following priority: big city mayors and state-wide elected officials, state legislative leaders, state legislators, and other state, county and local elected officials and party leaders. These delegates can be chosen by a state convention, the State Party Committee, or by a committee consisting of a quorum of district-level delegates. There are both pledged and unpledged PLEO delegates.

Add-on delegates - May be selected by either the same selecting body that selects the state's PLEO delegates or by the same selecting body which will select the state's "at-large" delegates. They can be selected whether or not they previously filed a statement of candidacy for a delegate position or submitted a pledge of support for a presidential candidate. There are both pledged and unpledged add-on delegates.