It sounds like a bit of a mess. Our media here in the UK claimed that Hillary had already clenched the final vote even before the Californian caucus. If this is true then it presents a clear weakness in the democratic system as those Californians have essentially been cheated out of their democratic rights: their views have become redundant.

Now we have something similar in our country. We elect members of parliament every two years (occurred a month ago here) who represent our counties on a local level. We elect the leader of the country in a year without local elections (for us it was 2015) and they become the new Prime Minister (we don't get to vote on who runs for PM but a bad local election for a party can result in a candidate being removed from leadership by their party.) However the key thing is that all our elections and events happen on the same day. The whole country votes one day and that is it. There is no local election for Manchester one week and a local election for Cornwall the next. You can do postal voting of course but it encourages considerable criticism.

In terms of corruption I think our country may even be worse than yours. Most of the ruling classes in Parliament are known negatively as "Old Etonians" and the masses favour fringe parties instead (which is becoming a common occurrence in Europe) such as Nigel Farage and his UKIP party. In sixteen days our country will have a referendum on membership in the EU. To say it is an important vote is a major understatement. The government has resorted to scaremongering and even threatened to ignore the vote if the public votes against their wishes. They have shown themselves to be corrupt and fears that the referendum will be rigged are common place here. After the show our government have put on for us I will have a hard time finding fault with yours. I can't see it being much worse than ours.