Since you know me to be a "reasonable poster", then you'll know I tend to try and remove emotions out of the conversation. Your posts seem to be a little too skewed because you are using emotion instead of logic, so allow me to break things down for you in a more nuanced way, and hopefully now you will understand the point.
The article you mentioned LITERALLY mentioned all the points I mentioned as to why Bernie would have been the stronger candidate in the general elections.
At least three key types of error have emerged as likely contributors to the pro-Clinton bias in pre-election surveys. Undecided voters broke for Mr. Trump in the final days of the race, or in the voting booth. Turnout among Mr. Trump’s supporters was somewhat higher than expected. And state polls, in particular, understated Mr. Trump’s support in the decisive Rust Belt region, in part because those surveys did not adjust for the educational composition of the electorate — a key to the 2016 race.
1. Independents OVERWHELMINGLY preferred Sanders to Clinton (64%/34%) and that is statistically significant as I'm sure you would agree.
The Other Huge Demographic Split Between Clinton and Sanders
2. Hillary Clinton lost to Trump in the Rust Belt states - a region where Bernie was decidedly popular. Specifically, Bernie was popular in rural counties of the Rust Belt states for his proposed trade policies. States like New York and California are inconsequential obviously because they always break Democrat. Bernie won in Indiana and Michigan and then also in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Hillary lost 3 out of those 4 states. She won in already traditionally Democratic States. Even in States like Pennsylvania and New York, she was weaker in rural counties than Bernie (she was heavily popular in cities).
Hillary got upwards of 90% of the black vote in Southern States (the the so called Southern Firewall) which she barely worked for other than offering platitudes and jive talk. 91% in Alabama ; 91% in Arkansas; 89% in Tennessee; 89% in Mississippi; 86% in South Carolina; 85% in Georgia! Other than Tennessee, all these these have over 50% black votes. These are facts, not emotions.
Lastly bruh, you need to look at things once again from a nuanced perspective, otherwise you fall victim to emotions like the person accusing me of being a "Bernie Bro" despite being an independent thinker. I was only excited about a candidate pushing for universal healthcare, criminal justice reform, income disparity - all issues that affect the black community disproportionately.
So when we look at the polls, you have to look at the margin of error, and also understand that the popular vote. Hillary was projected to win by 3% of the popular vote (she won by 2%). She still won the popular vote, but only won in States where she was supposed to win, and lost in some States that she shouldn't have - i.e those Obama working class voters in key swings states. I'm not sure why this point is still not being recognized. Bernie was projected to win on average by
11% in polls. That is an INSURMOUNTABLE lead in terms of polling when you consider margin of error. He simply would not have lost the Trump. It has nothing to do with the quality of the polling, but for the aforementioned reasons.
I hope you understand a little bit better breh.
