Letter: Primary elections look rigged by rules

It is unfortunate that Democrats and Republicans, who want to have a say in the future of their party, are being stripped of a role in the most interesting and surprising nominating struggles in decades. Many people are wondering whether the voting booth has become obsolete.

Some states — South Carolina among them — have decided to alter the number of delegates a winning candidate will receive for the national conventions. When Donald Trump wins 50 delegates after beating Marco Rubio in the S.C. primary — that should be it. The same can be said for Bernie Sanders who has beaten Hillary Clinton in a number of primaries but has wound up with fewer delegates even though she lost.

Both national party officials say the state organizations are guided by the rules. Well these so-called rules have the appearance of rigging the primary elections.

Some people are calling this voter disenfranchisement. Is there a difference between not allowing someone to vote and replacing their vote with an opposing delegate? If the voting results don’t matter, why hold an election?

This story was originally published April 11, 2016 at 10:48 PM with the headline "Letter: Primary elections look rigged by rules."