Seems impossible to tie down Hillary's loss to a single category let alone a single item.

Many of the issues she raises in her book are (legitimate) external factors that fed into her own flawed internal choices which then generated further external factors that impacted her negatively.

I don't understand PVC's characterization of US voters. Dynasties and relational ties are not really considered; voters really focused on the personal images they present, e.g. 'legitimate', 'establishment', 'outsider'. Keep in mind establishment is not a condemnation of her familial ties to a former president, but a disgust to her presence inside government institutions for X number of years.

As far as Sarmatian's position: "And she still doesn't understand, looking for reasons why didn't people vote for her. Because you didn't offer them a reason to, only a reason to vote against your opponents."
Voting against your opponent is a legitimate position to make. Liberal voters need to play fucking ball and stop asking for a candidate that promises them all the candy and rainbows they want. If you don't want to vote for the lesser of two evils, you get the bigger evil. That's what happened in 2000 with Nader supporters and it happened again in 2016. Oh how history repeats itself.