there were loads of sketchy numbers, were Sanders suspiciously lost like every single precinct or region that was closely contested (and we're talking like only a few thousand (or less) votes in some cases over and over and over again).
But it was fairly obvious since the convention happened that the Democratic Party screwed him with tampering. He's too extreme for them and frankly they didn't have faith in him to win the general election. the hilarious thing is I think he would have had a great chance, better than Hilary, because he was for NEW things and frankly the only reason Trump won is because people wanted the suggestion of some change
don't trust the election process in general when things are tight. No one is going to rig something when the state or regional race is not close at all, but when you have loads and loads of practical ties like Hilary and Bernie had.... that's a huge opportunity for some numbers to go 'missing'
someone could argue that Trump winning sort of proves things aren't rigged, but like I say, there have to be loads of territories where the numbers are tight for anyone to consider rigging something or adjusting numbers. With Trump and Clinton (regardless of the popular total vote being close) most states were clear one way or another by a decent enough margin
I feel for Bernie. he's a bit extreme for my taste but at this point with the hugely widening gap between the rich and poor, and the mega corporations, maybe some taste of a Bernie Sanders would help balance things out in the middle
