Isn't saying that Clinton knew what is best for the people than the people themselves kind of elitist? I know most politicians think that way. The partisans from both sides also. But it's like I said earlier, if the Democrats had paid attention to what the people were thinking, wanting or should I say not wanting, they would have won easily. The Democrats choose a candidate that 56% of all Americans didn't want, at least according to that February 2016 poll. The words the non-affiliated, swing voters, independents used to describe Hillary was elitist, aloof, fake, arrogant, superior, disdainful. Of course the words used to describe Trump was obnoxious, uncouth, childish, bully, disgusting and a few more. So it isn't any wonder why 54% of all independents disliked and didn't want neither candidate to become president.
Like everyone else, I assumed an easy win for Hillary. But I didn't anticipate her being so lazy letting Trump both outwork and out campaign her 116 campaign visits, stops, rallies to Clinton's 71. That 71 looks larger than what it was as it included fund raisers to deep blue California and New York.
What was even more amazing was that Hillary Clinton raised and spent 1.191 billion dollars on her campaign to Trump's 646.8 million.https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/
This was the first since 1964 when the candidate with the most money lost. What's worse, the money game wasn't even close as Hillary had an almost 2-1 advantage in money. By the way, in 1964 Goldwater raised and spent 12 million to LBJ's 10 million.
Yes, 2016 was a fluke. Everything had to go perfect for Trump to win. The earth, moon, the sun, the planets and even galaxies had to align perfectly. They did. Thanks to Hillary's laziness and her very inept campaign strategy which I didn't address.