If I understand your question correctly, it’s because inevitability has two effects: bandwagoning and depressed turnout.
So inevitability gives that candidate a bigger portion of a smaller pie.

Given that Clinton won by 4 million regular votes, I don’t see how anyone honestly can claim superdelegates had any real impact on the election.

“As a so-called superdelegate myself, I feel this is the best path forward…It is exactly the kind of change we have to make, not just to strengthen our candidates, but to strengthen the view of the Democratic Party among its core group of voters, which is young Americans.”

Harris has been a major disappointment.

Progressives aren’t tearing the party apart. Democrats do nothing to appeal to them as voters. Sorry, you’re not going to get big voter turnout from a group of people whose political beliefs you refuse to represent. I don’t know how much more simple I can make that statement.

Yep. Obama governed as a “centrist” but ran as a populist and crushed both McCain and Romney. And McCain was one of the most popular politicians of the past 50 years or so.

Oh that’s cool, I’m interested! I’m in a swing state; there’s a lot of progressive energy, but it’s also very much on the leftier end, so I feel like it’s a case where the moderare/cautious approach is actually counterproductive. I guess in some ways it depends on the midterms; if those go well infighting will…

Personally, I’m expecting centrists to weaponize Russia discourse and try to write off anything to the left of Republican-lite as a Putin plot. Already seeing it on Twitter (which, admittedly, is not 100% representative of actual discourse).

And yet, Bernie won primaries in and polled ahead of Trump in Wisconsin, and Michigan and polled ahead of Trump in those two states and Pennsylvania, which would’ve won the election.

Ok, yes Hillary technically got more votes, but the point is that if a better candidate had run, they would’ve gotten more votes in the right states and won.

I’m starting to think it’s just a performance troll account, but they could just be really kinda sad.

I forgot how unhinged your comments are, so I just didn’t read like any of that. It started off well with “My argument is silly” but then went downhill from there. So forget I spoke to you, I now recall that it is a waste of time, and shall go back to leaving you to your own fantasy world where you stand sweatily on…

But...

There is a whole progressive caucus in the House and it has more than a few members. 

Setting aside the fact you’re glossing over losing the easiest electoral layup in history, are you really going to suggest that Obama beat Clinton in the primaries by being even more moderate?

Careful, you start making too much sense and they’ll dismiss your comment and reply to a screenshot. Can’t have too many people agree with you.

I don’t love Sanders, but I also don’t see any of the major contenders for 2020 picking up that torch in convincing ways, so...that new driver better pipe up sometime soon.

Been there, done that, Einstein already wrote the tee-shirt:

Not that anyone should punish themselves like I did and read the piece, but did anyone notice what their grand ideas were? Privatizing social security and getting senior citizens to volunteer for stuff.

Alternative to progressive?