OMG. Who ever heard of ANYBODY EVER claiming victory with a mere two point advantage?
How dare that uppity Hillary claim victory with a final delegate score of 23 to 21!
It was all so gauche.
Doesn’t she know how unladylike her behavior was? How presumptuous and self-important and impolite? And so SELFISH -- not to concede to Bernie the “virtual tie” he so fervently believed belonged to Him.
The nerve of that woman, arrogantly announcing her win merely because mathematics proved there was no way for Him to close the gap; and Iowa rules provided for no recount. Did she actually expect she’d be allowed to think for herself?
To apply logic and reason and come to the inevitable conclusion?
How dare she not know her proper place, which was to sit quietly and wait till the Big Boys at the AP -- or at Sanders headquarters -- finally did the math and figured it all out.
BUT FINALLY:
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/02/02/bernie-sanders-challenge-caucus-results-hillary-clinton-wins-iowa.html
No wonder the Bros are still shouting “Bern the witch!”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-trumble/bern-the-witch-hunters_b_9145148.html
Bern the Witch-Hunters
Being a foreigner in an adoptive land, this was my first close-up view of American democracy in action: a civil, non-violent difference of opinion with a common goal shared by all.
SNIP
The Sanders campaign has no need for attack ads, their supporters write infinitely more toxic slurs and accusations in countless blogs, tweets, Facebook posts and memes. Bernie doesn't have to talk about Clinton's "damn emails", his fans have already upgraded to analysing every caucus coin toss for the merest hint of conspiracy. Neither does he have to resort to the indignity of calling his opponent names, as his loyal mob are already calling her, AND her supporters, every name in the book, and only show signs of getting worse. Even the beloved chorus of "Feel the Bern" has been warped and twisted from its original context, abrogated to the more violent and misogynistic chant of "Bern the witch!", less a policy-based mic-drop and more of a social media petrol-bomb.
And the saddest part: Bernie most certainly DOES NOT approve this message.
_________________________________________
If there’s anyone left who still believes it was a 22/22 tie, here is the AP explaining why the best person won. 23 to 21.
FROM THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_2016_ELECTION_RACE_CALL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Q: If Clinton won the caucuses, why didn't she get all the delegates?
A: It's not winner take all.
Iowa Democrats award delegates proportionally, based on the statewide vote and the vote in individual congressional districts. Clinton won two more delegates than Sanders - the tally was 23-21 - even though the vote was very close to a tie. That is because she got the most votes in one congressional district. Seven delegates were at stake in the Third District; she won 4, he won 3.
Also, a pot of 9 delegates was awarded based on the statewide vote. By narrowly winning the statewide vote, Clinton got 5 and Sanders got 4.
---
Q: So, what's the delegate count heading into New Hampshire?
A: Clinton has a big lead, thanks to the party establishment.
Party officials known as superdelegates can support the candidate of their choice. When superdelegates are counted, Clinton has a total of 385 delegates and Sanders only has 29. More than half of the party's superdelegates have decided whom to support - though they can always change their minds.
It takes 2,382 delegates to win the Democratic nomination for president.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Noted by the pundits at the time.
But that's not the M$M narrative we hear now! 
