It seems strange to me that the leader of a certain party needs to be determined in the public gallery. This seems a sure way to undermine the party, in that the competing delegates point out each others faults in order to prove their own competency, thus highlighting more weaknesses within that party. In Australia the party leaders are determined from within the party, then the opposing delegates battle for the leadership in the public forum. Seems more practical the Australian way or am I just missing something with the American system. I'm not very political minded so the latter is highly probable.