Up until the mid-1990s....the Democratic Party had some understanding of the people and land that lay beyond urbanized America. They could enter a US election and expect to take 40 to 50 percent of the non-urban vote. By the end of the Clinton-era, the Party was more or less fixated upon the idea of messaging strictly toward urban ‘topics’ or special interest groups. After that, they never crossed the 25-percent point in rural voting.
The Democrats (or Hillary) can still win an election...if they can get a mass vote situation with urban zones. But if they don’t get those votes out (as we saw in 2016), then you can’t win an Electoral College vote.
So if you move toward 2020 and 2024, unless you find another black candidate to generate a big urbanized showing at the ballot box, you lose. Or you can change the dynamics of your national strategy (not likely at this point).
I would toss in one other Hillary-problem....the Russians still hold her responsible for the meddling in their elections in 2011/2012. Even if she wants to run in 2020, they will return to pay back the debt to her for all the hassle generated in the Russian election.
Right. I recently read a piece on South Dakota politics. That state once had a strong Democratic Party and gave us George McGovern and Tom Daschle. Today there is not one Democrat holding state-wide office there.