ACRIMONY

And back then, a whopping 45% (!) of Hillary voters said they would either vote for John McCain or not vote at all in the general election if Barack Obama were to be the nominee (http://politics.nytimes.com/.../results/vote-polls/PA.html).

Sanders supporters are spewing vitriol all over the landscape

Everyone always wants whoever is not their choice to drop out as soon as possible and every candidate in such a situation wants to keep the campaign going as long as possible. This is just the usual tug of war between camps who want to call their win and those who don't want to cede defeat yet. Frankly there is a lot of acrimony in this part of the back and forth itself that will mostly just all evaporate by general elections like it always does.

Actually the base of the democratic party is voting for Hillary. It is independent leaning democrats and the youths who have never voted before who are voting for Sanders. Those are facts which have been proven over and over again through out the primaries and caucuses.

Sanders supporters are spewing vitriol all over the landscape--and you're trying to teach me about politics and the history of campaigns in the United States.

Mrs. Clinton is not my candidate. Mr. Sanders is not my candidate.

The Senate is the issue which i consider most important. Spare me your shallow analysis. Have a nice day.

I guess the full link is:
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/vote-polls/PA.html\

as long as Bernie shifts the types of criticism he makes of Clinton it is not a big deal for him to stay longer

Lauding the Independent from Vermont’s fundraising prowess, the MSNBC anchor asked Sanders when he might start applying his considerable abilities to benefit the Democratic Party. In his response, Sanders pointed out that the average $27 contribution to his presidential campaign is “a very different way of raising money than Secretary Clinton has pursued.” So, Maddow pressed him.

MADDOW: Well, obviously your priority is the nomination, but I mean you raised Secretary Clinton there. She has been fundraising both for the nomination and for the Democratic Party. At some point, do you think — do you foresee a time during this campaign when you’ll start doing that?

SANDERS: Well, we’ll see. And, I mean right now, again, our focus is on winning the nomination. Secretary Clinton has access, uh, to kinds of money, uh, that we don’t, that we’re not even interested in. So let’s take it one step at a time. And the step that we’re in right now is to win the Democratic nomination.

“We’ll see”? “Secretary Clinton has access, uh, to kinds of money, uh, that we don’t, that we’re not even interested in”? To appreciate how those two comments expose Sanders’s hustle, you need some background.

Sanders, the self-identified Democratic Socialist, is a registered Independent who caucuses with the Senate Democrats. Not only has he been helpful in raising money for them in the past, he also has availed himself of those same funds. But in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sanders has done nothing. In fact, he has disparaged Clinton at every opportunity for doing so.

Sanders makes it sound like Clinton is raising such obscene amounts of money for her campaign. In actuality, she’s raising money for herself, the Democratic Party and state Democratic parties around the country. Those funds would then be used to finance everything from “get out the vote” operations to phone banks and email blasts not only for the presidential nominee but also for House and Senate candidates down the ballot. In an election year in which the Republican presidential nominee could be Donald Trump, the prospects of Democrats holding the White House and possibly retaking the Senate AND the House are not remote. Having money to do this for the November elections will be essential.

So far, the Hillary Victory Fund has raised $26.9 million with more than $22 million of it going to the DNC and the state party committees.

Now, here’s where the Sanders hustle comes in.

While most people still assume that Clinton will win the Democratic nomination, all that money she is raising for the DNC and state parties will go to helping said nominee in the general election — even if that ends up being Sanders.

The master fundraiser who hasn’t lifted a finger to help his adopted party.

The fiery campaigner who has hammered his opponent for raising the money to fortify the DNC for the general election.

The person who stands to benefit enormously from Clinton’s big-money prowess without sullying his carefully crafted aura of campaign-finance purity.

One particular difference between the campaigns has been generating attention on this site: Clinton raised $18 million dollars for the Democratic National Committee, to be used in the general election to support Democratic candidates, while it appears Bernie Sanders has raised none.

Update II: I believe in party unity and in mending fences once the nominee is decided. And I will state again that I will work for and vote for the election of Sanders if he becomes the nominee. This is not the point. In diary over diary here on this site, Sanders supporters have demanded substance (i.e. policies) over biography. Yet the substance, when presented, seems to provoke outrage. I believe that it should be pointed out quite unequivocally that while Hillary Clinton has campaigned for and fundraised for downballot Democrats (consistently!! — as the 2007 numbers demonstrate as well), Sanders has not. These are the facts.

In many of the responses downthread, Sanders’ supporters are reacting with anything between happiness and glee that Sanders has not, in fact, contributed to the DNC. Like Jack Nicholson says to the little dog Verdell in As Good As It Gets, “Where’s the trust?” Granted, the DNC and the Sanders campaign had their spat. But I believe the ongoing lawsuit against the DNC by the Sanders campaign, as well as Sanders’ apparent reluctance to live up to the terms of the fundraising agreement with the DNC are much more damaging to party unity and to Sanders’ image, than any diary title I may choose. Still, it is encouraging to see that most Sanders’ supporters will be “OK” with Hillary Clinton in the General Election.

it kind of is a big deal since he doesn't seem to have any interest in supporting downticket candidates

Anyone voting for Sanders is likely voting for Democrats in other races as well.

I've seen you post this opinion a half dozen times