>there was absolutely zippy corruption or bias in the 2016
>primary.

I never said that. Reeq already noted one particular SMH moment. I think it's pretty overblown, but yeah, Donna Brazile was chummy with the Clinton campaign, and she turned over some vague indications about what kinds of questions would come up at a town hall; totally unnecessary indications, because anyone who knows anything about politics knew those subjects would obviously come up anyway. Mainly she seems to have done this because she was politically savvy enough to know the Clinton campaign was gonna win anyway. Still, it was a dumb fucking move by Donna, and if the campaign paid any attention to it, it was a dumb fucking move by them.

Note, though, this was BEFORE Donna was became affiliated with the DNC. Donna Brazile was a private citizen, completely unaffiliated with the DNC, when she did that particular dumb thing.

I STILL haven't heard a credible claim of any action taken by the DNC that could conceivably put in doubt the results of any primary or caucus. I've been asking for YEARS, and thanks to Russia, you have plenty of material to comb through for evidence. And there's still no sign that the DNC played favorites in any primary or caucus.

Sure there was incompetence at the DNC. You seem to think the DNC has a lot of official power over primaries. You're wrong about this. All the DNC really is is a clearinghouse for sending campaign money where it's needed, mostly for congressional and local races. The DNC utterly failed at that, and yeah, I blame Debbie Wasserman Shultz in large measure for this (and, I hate to admit it, Barack Obama for sticking by her for too long). The Clinton campaign had to bail out the DNC to staunch the financial calamity that was about to hit the congressional races. Good for them; it showed how much they cared about fighting all the way up and down the ballot. Shame the Sanders campaign, with all their vaunted fundraising powers and talk of "revolution," was not as interested in helping Democrats up and down the ballot.

>That's the type of energy the Democratic party is dealing with
>- a lack of internal inquiry and self-improvement.

Oh I definitely think the DNC needs to do its job better. I also hope the Sanders campaign is more prepared to actually fight the WHOLE fight this time around.

>People always say: "let's not re-litigate 2016" - however -

I've certainly never said that. I think we should take every opportunity we can to shame Bernie Sanders into being a better Democrat.

>you have to first actually litigate 2016 before you can
>"re-litigate" it.
>
>There still remains a considerable gap with where the
>Democratic electorate is at and where the party
>leadership/infrastructure is at.

You don't know where the electorate is. You know where your personal bubble is.