I've been reading a political discussion on a listserv between a number of California Democratic Party delegates--one of whom is also the chair of the state rules committee, and a member of the DNC rules committee. He and others rightly point out that nominating contests--though paid for by states and subject to state voting laws--are contests for nomination by a PRIVATE organization--a political party. As such, the rules of the parties determine how delegates are apportioned, the primary schedule, who can vote in party contests, etc. For example, in the late 1990s, California passed a law saying voters could choose at the door what primary they'd vote in. They do it in Iowa and Missouri. But the parties went to court to stop it in California, and won. So you have to register for the party you want to vote for two weeks before the election now. In a few states, the GOP awarded delegates proportionally, but not many. The Democratic party did it in all states, though not necessarily based just on popular vote as in Texas and Nevada. Because we are nominating candidates for private political organizations, who will then run for public office, in contests that are partly controlled by state law, and paid for with taxpayer money--the Clinton campaign has been able to confuse the issue by claiming voting laws should apply to delegate selection. As the California court case proves, this is not true. Just confusing.