Saying she isn't over and over again doesn't make it true either.
I know that because Trump is bad, there's this desire to make Hillary sound like a good person. She's not. They picked the absolute person they could have run as their standard bearer, and cheated a good candidate out of the role in the process. Had it been anyone but Hillary, Trump would have lost. And that is a very bitter pill for Democrats to swallow, because that means Trump is their own fault. They don't want to admit that Trump is their fault. So they have to pretend Hillary isn't a corrupt warmonger who ran on a platform of "I have a vagina" and whose only virtue was that she had a "D" instead of an "R" after her name on the ballot. She really is Dick Cheney in a pantsuit.
I agree that your accusations apply to some, but not all Democrats, and I therefore think you paint with too broad a brush. I would suggest that you qualify "Democrats" as "some Democrats" to avoid the appearance of bias gone out of control.
In fact, Hillary probably lost because a large number of Democrats were turned off by her and lost the necessary motivation to vote, possibly for some of the very reasons you enumerated too. Hillary didn't lose only because of Republicans voting for their Republican label. That she did not receive enough Democratic support was also her failure.
Yes, some Democrats no doubt thought she was a glowing ray of sunshine and integrity, and some of those Democrats might even hang out here. But long before the election, many Democrats here have been extraordinarily clear that Hillary was the lesser of evils in their opinion. In fact, while she had the support of most of the forum, it was quite clear (well to me anyway), that she wasn't inspiring much in the way of a presidential image among many forum members.
Yes, it's probably a bitter pill for Democrats that Hillary was the wrong choice as a nominee, and to some degree that is their fault, but it might be more the fault of the Democratic Party that offered a lack luster list candidates, possibly to ensure Hillary's success. I remember back during the debates before the Democratic primary. The stage offered an abbreviated selection of unknowns of questionable ability and no charisma, with the exception of Hillary and Sanders.
Some Hillary supporters still insist Sanders would have lost to Trump. We will never know. That's too bad, because win or lose, I'd like to know. Perhaps no Democrat could have beat Trump. We will never know. For all the lack of knowledge and qualifications for president that Trump can't provide, he was a dynamic personality for the Republicans. He's a great salesman, and ran a wildly crazy sideshow that sold well to voters. Hillary, may not have provided a sideshow, but she still fell far short of what many voters want to see in a president, and it is clear that a great many Democrats felt that. Well it's clear if you don't make the assumption that all Democrats are dizzy space cadets.