The issue of sexism and whether it hurt Hillary is an important question. There isn't yet equality for women in the USA, not to speak of elsewhere. There needs to be. But the argument is apparently still raging.
Albert R Hunt of Bloomberg news lays out an elaborate case about why Hillary's sex was not what hurt her.
The case is much simpler and can be definitely demonstrated. Hillary didn't win what was hers for the taking because of a political judgement. Had she voted against the Iraq war she would have been the candidate, long ago. She talked about her "experience", not least in her White House years. But these ensured that she and Bill knew how weak Saddam was militarily and that he didn't have weapons of mass destruction. They fully understood the politics of the decision. She also made her call knowing how unpopular it would be with the younger generation in the Democratic Party.
The point I'm making is this: if she had not backed Bush on Iraq, Obama's early, critical distinction would not have existed. She was in poll position to take the nomination, she lost it because she made a fundamental mistake of judgement. The media will go on about how she ran a flawed campaign, was "out-strategised" and so forth. It's nonsense - the media loves to talk about style, methods, techniques, appearances, perceptions, all of which feeds its narcissism. It was political judgement that lost if for her, just as it would have done had she been a man.
