Bernie:

— Lost the United States Senate election in 1972 at 2.2% of the vote.
— Lost the Vermont gubernatorial election in 1972 at 1.1% of the vote.
— Lost the United States Senate election in 1974 at 4.13% of the vote.
— Lost the Vermont gubernatorial election in 1976 at 6.1% of the vote.
— Lost the Vermont gubernatorial election in 1986 at 14.4% of the vote.
— Lost the United States House election in 1988 at 37.5% of the vote.
— Lost the United States D Primary for the House election in 1990.
— Lost the United States D Primary for the House election in 2000.
— Lost the United States D Primary for the House election in 2004.
— Lost the United States D Primary for the U.S. Presidential Election to Hillary Clinton with a 3,700,000 votes deficit.


Hillary:

— Lost the D Primary for the U.S. Presidential Election to Barack Obama despite having a lead of a quarter million votes.
— Lost The United States Presidential Election despite having a lead of 3,000,000 votes

hillary got closer thus making it a bigger loss

Well, Bernie. But history will remember Clinton as even more of a loser for whatever reason.

.

Numerically, Bernie.

Narratively, Hillary.

But Bernie couldn't even get that close so how is that even comparable

Well Bernie laid the groundwork for the future of the democratic party/country whereas Clinton is old news.

He wasn't even close to beating Hillary in the primaries, she's more of a winner on every aspect of the debate.

because of this. Hillary was championed, everything was lined up for her, she "had it in the bag" and went up againt a joke and loss. that's a far more memorable loss than some seat of the house loss in the BC era

One will be looked back at fondly as a progressive, the other a misstep for Democrats.

Wow, the system really is rigged, especially in the second one since penalized primaries boosted Hillary in '08.

What does being ideologically progressive have anything to do with winning more?

The only misstep for Democrats was allowing a non-Democrat to run on their ticket, use their resources, debate on their stages, etc. only to lose miserably by 4M votes and refuse to drop out for like 4 months when he could have endorsed the obvious WINNER.

But but but, he's non-establishment progressive outsider who takes money from the gun lobby and yells "while people don't know what it's like to be poor" and "we need a revolution"!!!!!

They're both wealthy white people. It's a win for both at the end of the day by default just based on those two facts alone.

This. She'll be known as the lesser of two evils and someone who wasn't charismatic enough to appeal to every democratic due to her controversies and being the embodiment of a totally corrupt political system thus being the biggest loser.

Bernie exceeded expectations massively. Hillary was expected to easily win, and lost.

Contrary to common belief, Bernie is actually barely wealthy despite being in Congress for decades, and that's because he stacked up tens of thousands of dollars in credit card debt.

Can't manage his own finances but expected the country to trust him with the most vibrant economy in the world.

We all know why he couldn't get further than what he did...

Except she won 91% of Democrats and a good chunk of the remaining 9% weren't even solid D's.

Being in debt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not showing his taxes for twenty years.

Yes, because the voters REJECTED him despite him having an advantage in the rigged voter-suppressing Caucus system.

If you give Bernie's supporters the benefit of the doubt every single time they claimed "RIGGED" (which you shouldn't since most of it was false and baseless), he would be at a 3M deficit of votes, rather than 4M.

If you eliminate the rigged Caucus system, he would have been erased the first couple of weeks.