Not sure what your target is here of "lefty flim flam" is, but as to distinctions that can be drawn between the neoliberalism of Clinton, Obama, and the rest of the corporate servicing post DLC New Democrats and the likes of Paul Ryan, well there aren't that many distinctions to be drawn.
The problem is corporate power, and if you don't think that the Clintons, and Obama have ultimately brought us Trump, then you need to get up to speed on some of that "lefty flim flam" that informs of the corporate takeover of our country largely enabled by those corporate servicing Democrats.
As to you pointing to right wing Sinclair taking over markets…you do understand that such a takeover would not be possible, if it weren't for the neoliberal economic policy driving Clinton Administration pushing for the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and Bill's subsequent signing that Act into law, right?
More neoliberal economics during the Clinton Administration…
Financial Services Modernization Act (GLBA)....which among other things, repealed Glass-Steagall
Commodity Futures Modernization Act
Those three Acts, pushed for and signed by Bill Clinton consolidated corporate power in this country in huge measure.
Clinton's campaign that did everything it could to discredit a true populist backlash against such corporate governance is the reason we have Trump.
As you know, I'm just as annoyed as you by what I have deemed the "alt-left" who not only promoted Trump as a peace candidate and true populist, but even went so far as to vote for him.
I'm not arguing that a Clinton Administration would be doing what this fascist Administration is doing, but I'm just putting my two cents in regarding the fight that needs to be taken to the current corporate power structure at the center of today's Democratic Party, and that Paul Ryan and all other corporate servicing Republicans (which are all Republicans of course) have dependable allies in the Democratic Party in that corporate servicing club.
Clinton's corporate speech tour was done for a reason. It was to demonstrate to those corporations whose side she was ultimately on. Another reason, that she lost.