A simple explaination why Sanders did not do better in the primary (it ain't because of fraud)
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/us/politics/bernie-sanders-doesnt-kiss-babies-that-a-problem.html?_r=0For a candidate who has inspired the most impassioned followers since Barack Obama in 2008, Mr. Sanders is surprisingly impersonal, even uninterested, in one-on-one exchanges — the sort of momentary encounters in which a candidate can show warmth and humility by gripping every open palm.
He rarely drops by diners or coffee shops with news cameras in tow, unlike most politicians. He hardly ever kisses babies, aides say, and does not mingle much at fund-raisers. To Mr. Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont, political schmoozing is a phony business, and anathema to his total focus on weighty issues.
Clinton was mocked for her smaller events, but those sort of events are critical to winning the game.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/hillary-clinton-gambles-choosing-small-events-over-huge-rallies-n575311
Take the New York primary, for example. In the week leading up to the vote, Sanders held three huge events in Manhattan, Brooklyn and the Bronx.
Clinton instead focused on retail stops and smaller rallies. On the night of Sanders' Washington Square Park mega-event, Clinton spoke to about 1,000 people at a public housing community center in the Bronx.
Ironically enough, Sanders did not win any of the boroughs in which he held his largest gatherings.
Both these articles are worth reading, because they demonstrate a difference that I think as been a major factor. Clinton's retail style politics have done her a lot of good.
= new reply since forum marked as read
I completely agree. How many posts have I seen on DU deriding Hillary for not being able to draw those massive crowds? And I always thought to myself, "You genuinely think Hillary Clinton, one of the most famous women in the world, can't draw crowds?" It's by design, as is everything Hillary has done in this primary. Hillary makes the human connection. The pictures of her praying with church leaders in a black church in the south were met with the puke icon by Bernie supporters on here, but that stuff matters to a lot of people.
She learned from every mistake she made in 2008 and she put together a comprehensive plan of how to win, and she achieved it. The cries of fraud are mostly due to how incredibly prepared she was. Yeah, she got her donors in a row. Yeah, she had good relationships with her colleagues in government and with the media. Yeah, her ground game was unbelievably good. Yeah, she made sure she had the support before she started. That's what she's SUPPOSED to do, and no doubt it's the only way a woman would EVER have got as far as she has. It's not RIGGED, she just built her machine better.
Great post. 
You guys have broadened the definition of 'fraud' to include any election Sanders does not win.
It's clever as a short-term gimmick, but it won't stick in the long run; and additionally, it hurts the actual of cases of election fraud actually happening.
So, guess all you want Part Two, The Guesses Strike Back.
and his campaign slogan should have been "Who wants a damp hug?" 
The bad man is gone now. There, there.
