I agree, Sanders would have been a much tougher opposition to Trump, and I would have preferred him over Hillary any day, unfortunately Clinton's friends in the DNC actively sabotaged Sanders's campaign from within. As reported by Wikileaks, not by Trump campaign, mind you. So much for fair primaries...
...and then Clinton, already the easiest political target in the US, fell to the oldest trick in the book: trolling. Trump "accidentally" lets out a gaffe, Hillary camp bites into it like rabid piranhas, and forgets to convey what was her agenda, if any. See, Sanders actually had clear ideas how issues should be solved. Clinton's version - as conveyed by the local media - soon devolved into "please tell us what you would like us to do". It's nice to listen to the people but at some point you have to take leadership if you want to be a leader. Values are great in a mission statement, but people who want change need concrete action plans.
The final mistake was when Hillary started targeting not Trump, but Trump's
voters. Amidst all the muckraking, the infamous "deplorables" line was a new bottom low. It was as if swing voters did not exist and would suddenly feel guilty instead of enraged when being called names.
---
The social media outrage amazingly still continues unabated. It seems to have cyclic movement, people wind down in the evening and wake up relatively peaceful, but as the day rolls towards evening, they become more and more frenzied due to exposure to social media forming a feedback loop. And I'm becoming rather embarassed at the columns in the newspapers when the editor starts the
nth tirade on how her entire world collapsed overnight and she realized that the universe is evil and how can she tell about this to her children (won't
anyone think of the children?). Though I'd like to see even
one US artist keeping his or her word of moving to Canada if Trump gets elected. Considering the massive flow of emigrants after similar threats in 2000 and 2004, I am not exactly holding my breath...
What is surreal though is that (according to news, though of course they only pick the juiciest subjects) there are demonstrators on the streets demanding an assassination of Trump. It did not go this far even when W. was elected first with popular minority, not even when he was
re-elected. Two wrongs make one right? Democracy is acceptable only if it gives favourable results?
---
If the election system constantly gives biased results, surely there would be at some point an initiative to change it? Even if the proportional method is kept, "winner takes all" is just stupid and practically guarantees a two-party system. I don't know the particulars, but has any US politician even tried to suggest a change? Silly me. Of course not, because politicians being politicians they think that next time they are going to use the system to win.