Is Bernie Sanders at fault for Clinton's loss?

[Adam Griffin]

Before the election, I didn't think he would have enough of an impact to upset the difference between win and loss. The supposed margins in polling was the primary justification for that opinion. I never think candidates are "at fault" for merely running in elections; it's the job of individual candidates to secure their victories on their own, and that never occurs in a vacuum. Just like Bernie failed to secure a majority, so did Hillary.

From a purely technical standpoint, though, the specter of him as a choice for many - followed by that disappearing and being replaced with Clinton as the only realistic alternative remaining - probably was enough to tip the balance in MI/WI/PA, and therefore the election. I can't tell you how many people I know who were perfectly content and Ready for Hillary before Bernie's announcement, but who turned into raging - practically rabid - anti-Clintonistas by the time the GE arrived. Nothing actually changed over that time period: they just became disillusioned from a relative perspective because they were given a better choice in their eyes for a time.

So yeah...Bernie running followed by his loss in the primary probably did create enough negative/angry sentiment to cost Clinton the EC in a way that almost any other candidate wouldn't have caused. He's not "at fault" for it, however, any more than any other candidate running in an election would be.