Catch-22.
The more she campaigned, in person, the more swing voters she lost.
They had to pay people to show up at the few in-person events she would appear at with her ever-present medic, injector at the ready, ambulance-on-standby, and specially outfitted medical van reinforcing the ill-health stories the LSM kept burying.
That's not to mention collapsing at the 9/11 memorial ceremony.
The optics were not good, and besides, "she was entitled to be the first woman POTUS".
"What does it matter" that she didn't work anywhere nearly as hard as anybody else that went put themselves up?
Well, except for the people that were in it for matching funds, only to drop out after the scamming.
If she'd gone to Wisconsin it would have been more to energize the party faithful than to win over swing voters.
But she didn't think it was necessary.
And she'd have had to reorient her campaign to be able to do hold on to the voters she needed to keep to win.
Still, if people are saying you're sick and you're not, you have to prove to them that you're healthy, otherwise they'll assume you're sick.
You don't necessarily have to give long speeches, but you can't be taking day after day off from campaigning.
I don't think the scandal headlines in the tabloids had much impact.
People already knew Hillary was under investigation.
The idea that she might not last out her term wasn't something you heard much from the established media.
The more she campaigned, in person, the more she stumbled or fell down.
Rock meet hard place.
Can’t have the electorate see the hero candidate being sickly and weak.