Apparently people in 30 out o 50 primaries did like her. And in the general, 3 million more people liked her than Trump. Drop the "progressive" tales of woe please. Trump used division and resentment in any way he could which gave him votes in small rural towns in the rust belt, aided by a Russia disinformation campaign that also helped Trump get electoral votes. Then we have voter suppression whereby over 200,000 people were unable to vote in hose rust belt states.
All of that I agree with... but it doesn't take away from the fact that Hillary was an awful candidate who ran an awful campaign. Another Democrat would have won, easily.
Had Sanders won, he would have got destroyed by the republicans who had films of him standing with South American dictators denouncing the American government. Then we have the matter of a paper he wrote whereby he stated that women fantasize about being raped. His vote for the Clinton Crime bill. His vote to move toxic waste out of Vermont into a poor Hispanic neighborhood in Texas, Campaign finance violations. some 2,000 of them. I mean Bernie had some skeletons that you did not want to see.
Oh, I have no love for Commie Bernie.. but he probably would have fared better than Hillary in the general. For one thing, he would have resonated better with white working class folks who have seen their jobs in the Rust belt vanish.
But what the Democrats SHOULD have done is nominated someone more mainstream than either of them. They didn't. Hillary scared all the other candidates out of running, Commie Bernie was supposed to be a Ringer whose purpose was to make her look more mainstream, and it turned out primary voters liked him better and she had to cheat to beat him.
You j ust have to look at this board, where the more honest, almost decent people who voted for Trump will rationalize it with "But Hillary was corrupt."
She was. The Democrats never, ever should have ran her again.