Caucus Confusion, Funding

I'm trying to figure out the difference between a closed primary and a caucus.
It looks like a closed primary would still have more turnout than a caucus though.

I looked at my outline and the next thing is campaign advertising so I think I will be discussing some ideas with Keilah (advertising is her thesis).

Looking into the basics of campaign funding today as well:
These three primary methods of raising money and regulating it are disclosure, contribution limits, public financing.
Disclosure: every state has different requirements about how often a candidate has to disclose funds. Independent expenditure disclosure involves television and radio ads and is not coordinated with candidates, so it is not regulated, which explains the surge in ads.
Contribution limits: four states do not have contribution limits (Missouri, Oregon, Utah and Virginia)
Here is a chart of limits for the states in the 2013/14 election cycle. It's really long because each state has different requirements, definitions, and time limits. However, the amounts are in the thousands, so how PACs are allowed to donate millions of dollars is beyond me. I'm guessing they send their money to the headquarters and then it gets distributed, or there are loopholes involved.
Twenty-four states currently operate programs that give grants of state funds to candidates and/or political parties for their campaigns. The amount of money that a candidate receives varies hugely by state (some states have grants that are limited in scope, while in others the state finances the entire campaign). There are requirements involved of course. The candidate must raise a certain amount of money beforehand or otherwise prove that he/she is popular enough to merit a grant.

Another type of public financing is commonly called "Clean Elections" public financing, and is the newest idea in state campaign finance reform. Once a candidate qualifies by collecting a specified number of small contributions (often as low as $5), he or she agrees to abide by strict spending limits and is prohibited from receiving any additional contributions from private sources. Instead, he/she receives a state grant to run a campaign. This looks like a good idea and has been around in a few states since 2000, but for it to work every state would have to use it to equalize the funding barrier.

I also found two studies (here and here) that showed that electronic voting increases the amount of residual votes (votes that are not counted because they were cast incorrectly).

Also an analysis of the different primary reform proposals. Definitely need to find another one that is more balanced.
Unfortunately, having all the primaries on the same day is logistically a problem. Maybe if it's later in the year the media coverage issue could be solved.