Well, that explains it! I read only the second version, and at the time, I noticed several jarring tone-changes that seemed to contradict the article’s main premise. Though we all interpret through our own filters, a careful reading of the original article does not reveal it to be biased pro-Bernie. It was positive but even-handed and based on his record. The second version is deliberately anti-Bernie — it does not alter the facts only the tone in which they are presented. Worse than that, it’s just poor writing, ruining the flow and point of the piece.