Draw, even tho I clearly won?

You accidentally drew your opponent through a stalemate.  Stalemate is a rule where the game ends in a draw if the player to move has no legal moves.  Here, you unfortunately made a move which resulted in your opponent's king having no squares to run to, and the king is not in check which means it is not a checkmate.

https://www.chess.com/terms/stalemate-chess

That is a draw by stalemate, white is not in check and has no legal moves. 

1. On the point of the draw, as two other players have noted, it's stalemate which counts as a draw.

2. On the point of rating loss, you are probably higher rated than your opponent at the start of the game, so the pressure is on you (as the higher rated player) to win the game. Think of it this way. A professional player winning a random amateur player would be pretty normal, but it will become a very big news spreading around the world if the amateur player actually won instead.

Stalemate is one of the drawing rules of chess. It happens when the player who has to move has no legal moves available The game then ends immediately in a tie, and each player is awarded half a point. In your case your opponent did not have any square to move his king.

For more information you should read this article

https://www.chess.com/terms/stalemate-chess

Stalemate 

This is what I consider very poor sportsmanship.  The White player has been clearly lost for many moves and should have resigned as a gentleman (or woman) when the lost position was obvious.  Flaggers are despicable.

Change the title to ‘Draw, even tho I clearly drew’

Interesting. As a beginner I was taught to always play through to checkmate even in a lost position, because my opponent might blunder the game away. Is that generally considered poor sport by most people?

I have to disagree, you can be down significant material and still have a book draw/ stalemating tricks in time trouble.  If white went looking for stalemate tricks then good for him/her.  If black played around too much and accidentally drew, then he/she learned a lesson as well.  I don't see anything wrong with making the other player prove they can beat you.

I also disagree with you...

As a begginer, I like to see the game to the end. See in fact why my position on midgame was a losing one. Also, as Shamus said, it's part of the game.

I've lost games like that and learned my lesson. Never rush into chechmate, mostly when the king is alone.

I agree, ColsonBaker's rating is around 500. At that level, not resigning is fine because many don't know how to convert, even with extremely large material advantages. 

The clock is a piece. Grandmasters will try to flag people when it is plausible. It is 100% part of the game, especially in blitz/rapid with no increment. 

If my opponent wants to use too much of the clock planning an elaborate attack, I'm perfectly justified exploiting that by forcing them to finish the game in the allotted time. 

And yeah, at the 500 level where people aren't clear on the concept of stalemate then resigning even in daily chess is silly seeing those games are almost entirely about blunders. Plus everyone needs practice finishing these things out anyway. 

The quickest win was probably 31...Ne4 32.Kb1 Nc3+ 33.Ka1 Ra2 mate.

Flaggers are not good sportsmen.  They also cheat at golf, a proven fact.  Trump would be a flagger if he could concentrate long enough to learn the game.

Nobody has ever flagged anyone, really.  

Running out of time is always the fault of the person running out of time. Whining about "flaggers" is just being a poor sport about having poor time management. 

Yup, it's stalemate

Stalemate

As the guy who's usually running out of time, I can say it's always been my own fault. That's why I don't play fast time controls, its almost a different game.

thats for begginers