That's true, and the problem for them is that Sanders was expected to have a low ceiling, and he'd hit it early. So by now his campaign would look anemic, and the Clinton campaign would look assured, and wise.
Woops, did not work out that way. 
It's like in warfare, there are advantages, and disadvantages, to staying in the castle while the barbarians are outside. You stay safe and healthy, while they freeze and starve. Or alternatively, they grow in numbers and flourish, while you wonder why everybody inside is starting to look feverish and/or looking to bolt.
"The Clinton Castle" is of course a metaphor for a state of mind. But the Sanders campaign does actually physically resemble a rebellion that grows in strength as it exploits its free reign to roam the hinterlands and countryside. This battle isn't all on the TV, where you can send out surrogates to do battle for you. The Sanders campaign is physically moving around and directly winning over voters.
Ironically, it's an old style of campaigning that started the ball rolling for Senator Sanders, and which keeps the Sanders campaign rolling along. The Clinton campaign has been banking on its, uh, bankroll, and its ability to dominate the media.
The final bit of irony is that the Sanders campaign has the edge in cutting edge electronic communication, where money matter less. Social media is lending itself beautifully to the Sanders campaign. It's this fusion of the oldest, and newest, means of uniting a candidate and supporters together that will win the day for the Sanders campaign, and our party's platform.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read