This article is wrong starting on paragraph 3. The article talks about the 2016 Democratic Primary election where Clinton’s competitors were Democrats but the link provided referred to the 2016 General Election where Clinton’s competitor was a Republican (Donald Trump). The link also referred to Clinton losing the 2016 election when she actually won the popular vote. Most analysts blame the Electoral College and Clinton’s pro-rigged-trade policies effect on the rust belt for Clinton’s loss.
Bernie Sanders’ attacks on Clinton were originally left-wing, now populist attacks, see example here:
Hillary Clinton accurately stated that Trump used Bernie Sanders attacks against her in the general election.
The Democratic Party, to my knowledge, has never treated women candidates as tokens and a plurality of Americans chose Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.
This article is a distraction from bigger issues in the 2020 primary, namely that all candidates other than Bernie Sanders have a neo-liberal track record that is being hidden by the mainstream media including the author’s favorite Elizabeth Warren.
Another issue that is more real and important is the fact that the mainstream media and Hillary Clinton has been attacking Congresswoman Gabbard as a Russian asset with no evidence to back it up.
As candidates, I continue to think that Klobuchar and Harris should head for the exits instead of drifting along around the 2-4% support range while espousing the same middle-of-the-road policy stances as pretty much every d-party candidate outside of Sanders and Gabbard.
And before I’m accused of singling out two women, I’ll mention that Booker and Castro can bow out too. I’d mention Byedone and Mayo Peat Bog but they’ve got the polling numbers to justify hanging around. That is until Byedone’s inevitable implosion is finalized and Mayo Peat’s conversion from candidate to identity politics MSDNC poster child is finalized.