There's only a handful of bitter people on this forum, so your message is a bit in vain if directed at us.
It's important to remember that a lot of people don't follow politics as closely as we do, and even among some of the most enthusiastic primary supporters in the country right now, the vast majority don't understand political geography like a lot of us do. When you combine that lack of awareness with the exponential increase in "opinion" (s[inks]tty blog posts) available on the web today, just about anyone can find plenty of material with which to delude themselves into thinking that this primary is still competitive.
With that being said, this primary isn't anywhere nearly as nasty as 2008. The primary difference is that social media is now about 100x more potent than it was then and it is amplifying everything. Twitter was just starting to gain traction in 2008. YouTube was seeing its first presidential cycle. And on and on and on...the only potential worry is how social media - already contributing almost exclusively to the rapid spread of disinformation and BS opinion - will prevent those primary wounds from healing like they have in all past election cycles.
Just wait until June and see what happens. At that point, the disinformation-fueled will have no more primaries on which to cling for hope; I suppose they could try to cling to the "superdelegates flipping" argument if Sanders' deficit < Clinton's # of superdelegates, but I'm really going to give (most of) them the benefit of the doubt that they're not that nutty.
Yeah, this post nails it pretty much. The actual campaigns are far more civil than in 08, but in the past 8 years people have sorted themselves into their online echo chambers far more comfortably. For example, Reddit deluded themselves to the extent that they KNEW Bernie would win Arizona, then when he didn't the logical conclusion was that it must have been stolen by Hillary and the DNC. You know, even though the Republicans control the entire Arizona election system, and the lines weren't enough to change the eventual outcome anyway. But if anyone actually pointed out this reality, they'd be called a "corporate shill" and banned or whatever.
