If you go by the commentators, it was hugely biased toward Clinton;this was the "inevitable" Clinton victory. If you looked at the polls, it was a close election.
Here is the final RCP results, with no tossup. It shows a Clinton win, with 272 electoral votes:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html
She was leading in NH by 0.6 points on the RCP average; the polls could be off by 0.7 points for it to be a Trump victory. Yes, pundit after pundit called it for Clinton, sometimes big for Clinton. Even Fox had nobody insisting that Trump would win.
Frankly, the polls looked like 2012. And in 2012, an Obama victory was a foregone conclusion. That's not bias, that's objective analysis.
It's very hard to make an objective case for Trump having a realistic chance, given all available data. Nate was derided for giving Trump a >30% chance, but Nate was absolutely correct: too much volatility, too many states where Clinton had not topped 50% in the polls, and way too many undecideds. But it was difficult to see.
If you showed me the exit polls for WI, leaving out vote breakdown, I would have told you Clinton won the state by 5 points. The way people voted, compared to their opinion of the candidates, defies all logic and reason. It means we need to fundamentally change our assumptions when designing polls.
You can see what the final RCP averages were. Without tossups, Hillary had 272 electoral votes, with at least one state (NH) where she had a 0.6 point lead.
Were the polling failures? Yes, in the Midwest, WI, MN, IA, and MO. The latter two were showing as a Trump victory.
PA? RCP average was 2.6 points off. MI, 3.7 points. AZ 0.5 points, but in Clinton's favor.
Arizona raises a good point. The RCP average was 4.0 points for Trump, but AZ was listed as a toss-up. Same with Georgia. The RCP average was 4.8, but it was listed as a toss-up. Same with OH, 3.5 points. These were 45 electoral votes.
Yes, they were sort of doing the same to Clinton, but, but there were only NM, ME (statewide and ME-2), and VA, for a total 21 electoral votes.
With one exception, WI, a candidate that was ahead by 3.5 points in the RCP average carried the state.
When you are looking at 3.5 points in an
average of polls, that should be enough. Using that, there were 223 EV for Clinton, 209 EV for Trump and 106 toss up. You didn't have the commentators saying that.
I don't know if it was because they hated Trump, loved Clinton, or couldn't believe that someone that never held a major governmental post would be elected. Even at best, the math was not showing a big Clinton win, yet a number of commentators were saying just that.
