http://graphics.wsj.com/elections/2016/how-clinton-won/

hillary won black voters by an over 50%(!) margin. they virtually split white voters (despite any pervasive rhetoric to the contrary).

ideologically self-defined...clinton and sanders virtually split 'very liberal' voters. clinton won 'somewhat liberal' voters by a healthy margin and ran away with moderate voters (who make up the plurality of voters...especially in the general).

age/education/income...bernie won voters under 30 (the least active voting bloc) and got curb stomped everywhere else at all ages, all incomes, and all levels of education (puts the bernie white working class folklore to rest).

clinton won 80+% of cities and 75+% of suburbs lol. those are where dems absolutely have to run up the margins to win statewide and national elections and bernie got absolutely crushed there.

bernies only advantage was in rural white counties and college towns.

sending a dem nominee into the general who is severely lagging behind in support from those many constituencies in the dem base was not the move lol.

once again...bernie was just the weaker candidate *all around*. thats the way it goes sometimes.

theres zero objective way to arrive at the conclusion that bernie would have turned out dem voters better than clinton. all objective evidence actually concludes the opposite.