Politics is the art of compromise. The only ones who refuse to compromise are dictators or useless blowhards.
That's all the people have done since Reagan - make compromise after compromise after compromise. And for every singe "victory", like SCHIP, has come with a dozen far more serious defeats, like NAFTA/DMCA/NDAA etc etc.
Sanders' could have insisted on all of his principles, refused to endorse Hillary, and possibly handed the election to Trump, undercutting virtually every policy objective he had.
The only two democratic constituencies to have gotten anything out of Obama during his presidency were the two who threatened to sit out his re-election in 2012: gays and latinos. You don't get the party to move by being a yes man, you get the party to move by threatening their election chances.
Or he could endorse Hillary, hope she'd win, and watch her do 95% of the same things he would have done.
Horseshit. That 93% nonsense is based on looking at their shared time in the Senate, where Hillary spent most of her time....naming post offices. With the exception of her Iraq War vote, Hillary's right-wing freakshow has taken place OUTSIDE of the Senate.
Calling black children super predators?
Making BFF's with the world's worst dictators?
Acting as an arms merchant to the same?
Helping Obama start a war without Congressional authorization?
Making the world safe for fracking?
Pushing the TPP?
All done outside of the Senate, making the "they voted the same way 93% of the time" utter sophistry.