Ake, don't be disingenuous. Even a cursory look at Senator Sanders' own website -- www.berniesanders.com (blickifier not working yet) -- tells the tale.

The reasonable answer on Senator Sanders' support (or lack of same) is that not enough Democratic Party members believe that he can push his program through Congress.

Most of what he says makes perfect sense to Brits like you and Canadians like me, who have lived most or all of lives with socialized medicine and substantial public support to higher education, but these ideas are political poison in the United States. Senator Sanders proposes to fund his program with swinging taxes on corporations, Wall Street speculators and the super-rich, but you and I both know that such a plan has no hope of success unless the Democrats take both the Senate and the House of Representatives in a landslide, as well as the presidential election.

President Obama's health care plan is badly flawed precisely because it was designed around the insurance industry, a huge money-spinner in the U.S. economy, and money-pit in the household economies of American families. Senator Sanders' plan would cut the insurance industry out of most health-care spending. How do you think that's going to fly, knowing what you should know by now about how politics is financed in the United States?

Likewise, taxing Wall Street to fund post-secondary education for the un-monied classes is a non-starter in the absence of a revolution in public thinking about the significance of (a) education and (b) social mobility to the well-being of the American polity.

I'm not holding my breath on that.

The pragmatic Mrs Clinton, with all her history of compromises, looks like somebody who can muscle a legislative program past the obstacle course of Congress -- Realpolitik is her middle name. Democrats more interested in winning the election than in overturning their society are planning to vote for her.