Dan said:That's easy to believe, but to my knowledge the cost of these primaries and caucuses usually falls to townships, counties and states, so this process should damned well be held up to legitimate standards, none of this free-for-all nonsense. It's not the party footing the bill, but your tax dollars. This would be utterly unacceptable in any burgeoning democracy's elections that the world watched over.
I don't think any caucuses are state run. States are forced to pay for primaries only if they require a primary election by law. Also, having a state-run primary doesn't mean the parties have to follow the results. See: Washington, Louisiana, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc. Its a private nomination process, and the party is always free to hold its own contests (the caucuses you are complaining about)
It would be unacceptable to use a caucus to elect somebody, but I really don't see the problem with parties setting their own rules for selecting their leader.