I don't think juries are really as "bitter" as people say. In my opinion there is basically a three-tier system that determines how people vote:
Tier A: Personal Connection
-Regardless of whether they were blindsided or not, people tend to vote for finalists that they established a strong positive connection with on a personal level, and vote against contestants who they had a strongly negative personal connection with. This is just human nature. There is nothing in the rules saying juries must vote for whoever was the most "strategic" and if someone asked you to vote for someone out of a random group of people for a million dollars, who wouldn't vote for a good friend, or vote against an enemy.
Tier B: Alliance Loyalty
-If a jury member doesn't have any personal connection with the finalists they tend to either vote for people they stayed true to an alliance with them or vote against people who weren't true to their alliance. People might call the following type of voting "bitter," but why shouldn't people vote that way? If there weren't any punishments to breaking alliances, what would be the point of making them to begin with? If people knew that everyone would just vote for you in the end anyway, people would go around backstabbing each other, a form of gameplay that is not good for anyone. You have to have some sort of structure in place to keep people in line, and if someone breaks your alliance, voting against them in the end isn't personal, it's just part of the arrangement you made when you entered the alliance. "We all stick together and support each other in the game, and if one of us breaks the agreement, they will face the punishment." It's not fair for someone to reap all the benefits of an alliance, and then not have to incur any of its costs. Voting for someone to win that betrayed you on a strategic level is magnanimous, but a lack of magnanimity doesn't necessarily make someone bitter.
Tier C: Disconnected Players:
-People that have no connections to the finalists, either personally or strategically, tend to just vote for whoever seems most like a leader.
People act as if the Galus voted against Russell because they were in Tier B, but I think a lot of them were drawing their motivation from Tier A as well. They weren't just upset that he voted them out. They honestly thought that Russell was an objectionable human being.
--
My bracket wasn't good enough to beat SuperNiceDog's in the GameFAQS Rivalry Rumble. Congrats!
This is Yesmar.