It kicked into high gear once voting began, though. Arizona's messy voting system -- a function of a state official drastically cutting the number of polling locations -- led to unwarranted concerns that the process had been disrupted to Clinton's advantage. Questions arose about a result in Chicago. Misunderstandings about how exit polls work led to assumptions in some quarters that operatives working for Clinton had orchestrated a widespread national effort to shift the results of primary contests. At one point, The Post was criticized after a glitch in AP data showed Sanders losing votes in a district in Delaware.

AD

AD

Since Democrats award their delegates proportionally, small shifts in the margin by which candidates won or lost states didn't make any difference. Clinton isn't going to be the nominee because she won New York by 16 points instead of 10. She's going to be the nominee because she won a number of states by a wide margin, racking up a huge delegate lead.

But the idea caught on. Our Wesley Lowery spoke with Sanders supporters outside of the convention hall in Philadelphia and says that "each and every person advanced some version of the theory that Clinton 'stole' the election."

That sense was no doubt reinforced by the leaked emails from the Democratic party that came out on Friday -- for which Sanders also had a response.

Sanders the candidate took a different tack in trying to tamp down dissent than Sanders the spokesperson, but it's clear that the goal of each was the same: Assure vocal Sanders backers -- a minority -- that they could accept the results. She offered a further note of hope to her followers.