Hunter over at Daily Kos analyzes the crowingcrowning mistake of the Clinton campaign.

The Clinton campaign was premised from the start on the notion that Clinton would win, and nobody else could…. It was not a narrative, but a meta-narrative. She was electable because she was electable, and anything that disproved that theory was dismissed as an exception. It was the campaign equivalent of Intelligent Design.

It was, in short, a terrible, mind-bendingly awful strategy. That is not to say that there was not substance discussed, in the debates — but the campaign was not about that substance. That is not to say that there were not good points to be made in “electability” — but her spokesmen made them shabbily. In the end, it was not an argument that could convince.

But Clinton would never have been in such a position had she not fallen behind to begin with, and that is where I think the more damning mistakes of her campaign lie. If I could wrap all critique of the Clinton campaign up into a single sentence, it would be this: her campaign did not campaign.

Edit: fixed typo above.