‘Rigged’ implies some kind of nefarious scheme, tilting the playing field to ensure a predetermined outcome. In this sense, there’s nothing ‘rigged’ about the race for the Democratic nomination: both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton were aware of the lay of the land in advance; both understood what it would take to succeed; both created game plans based on the existing rules, and both recognized that those rules, some of which were established years in advance, would remain unaltered once the process began in earnest. In other words, as Sanders himself now acknowledges, the fix wasn’t in. The Sanders and Clinton campaigns played by the agreed upon rules, and one campaign appears to have come out on top by earning more pledged delegates, superdelegates, votes, and contests. It’s precisely what made the senator’s comments on Sunday so noteworthy: Sanders doesn’t see a conspiracy or nefarious scheme, but he does see a ‘dumb’ nominating process in need of reform. Is he right? Maybe! In Democratic politics, I suspect there are very few people who would look at the existing system and say it’s 100% flawless and any proposed changes must be rejected out of hand."