In the harsh light of day, I don't blame any of the voters - primary or general. The people I blame most are the DNC, first and foremost, and Hillary Clinton, second.
My personal view was that Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate - for a number of reasons, but including that she was essentially baggage with a person attached to her. I made those views clear 18 months ago - that I did not think she was electable. I even wagered $100 that she would not be elected president (
@cstu ) I argued with anyone who would listen, and a few that would not, that she was a bad general election candidate. During the primary, I was admittedly angry with Clinton supporters who could not see what I thought were obvious flaws. To be fair, some saw the flaws, and did not care.
But, at the end of the process, I can look back and see that most people did not have a chance. Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate, but she, Bubba, her team, and the DNC (to the extent they were not one in the same) were a very good political machine. They locked down all the big donors, they locked down all the endorsements, they locked down favorable relationships with various major media journalists. The messaging they put out was enough to convince millions that Clinton was not only the best choice to pursue the DNC agenda, she was the only choice. So, millions of people looked at that evidence, and agreed - hardly an egregious conclusion. Yes, I wanted people to pull their heads out of the sand. I wanted them to see that the emperor had no clothes - but my view was drowned out by a carefully orchestrated narrative.
The Clintons and the DNC were so consumed with obtaining and keeping power that they were willing to overlook the obvious flaws. The Clintons amassed as much political capital as perhaps anyone in our history. They were fund-raising demons - sending money to key allies. They used their pile of political capital to ensure they had all of the endorsements. They literally drove every contender from the race, except a crotchety old Socialist, an ex-GOP marine who seemed to kill for fun, and old senator who could not remember his first vote, and a true liberal best known for his smarmy role on HBO's "The Wire".
Should primary voters have seen through the smoke and mirrors? Ideally, maybe. But hard to expect voters to go against the evidence put forth by the machine.
But, at the same time, should we blame voters who went 3rd party here? Of course not. The candidate, and the DNC, have the responsibility of earning votes. Votes should never be taken for granted - and that was a massive error in judgment on the part of Clinton and the DNC in the general election. They took large swaths of people for granted - and it cost them, dearly. I have said repeatedly that Clinton does not inspire voters - and I think that was shown in the voter turnout.
The DNC should have not been swayed by the promises of glitter and gold, and taken a long hard look at Clinton before going all in. The DNC got greedy, and failed to do their own due diligence here. They did not vet the candidate - in light of current political climate - and they did not adequately understand the concerns of their base, and the voters in general. Clinton was doing what ambitious politicians do - it was up to the DNC to provide the checks and balances - they failed, miserably.
Voters, even educated voters, often just do what they are told, trusting that the process has worked behind the scenes. So, I blame the Democratic Establishment first, Clinton, and her campaign (as an aside - This is not going to look good on Robbie Mook's resume...) second, and I'll give a pass to the voters.