Both options were dicey. People saw the collusion between the justice dept, the media, and the DNC and apparently decided those actions were a bigger threat than mean words.
That, and, Trump spoke to the issues of a suffering majority, instead of playing the minority against the majority as HRC and the left typically do. They can claim he ran on divisive, negative rhetoric, but that is the whole democratic platform, accusing anyone of racism for being concerned about criminal aliens and terrorists. Lecturing american christians on the crusades after ISIS arose. Parroting misleading feminist statistics. Michael Moore called Trump the biggest fuck you ever recorded in human history (
https://youtu.be/YKeYbEOSqYc). David Gelernter, a professor from Yale, called him 'a message from the voters', 'the empty gin bottle they have chosen to toss through the window.' (
http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-and-the-emasculated-voter-1476484865)
Why would they do that? They see a toxic culture corrupting and twisting americans' view of themselves and everything around them and they oppose it.
some relevant/interesting posts
This country is fucked.
http://imgur.com/gallery/5Je4dxbhttp://imgur.com/gallery/SxpJChttp://imgur.com/gallery/HO5TThttp://imgur.com/gallery/l2LZhThe point if you don't want to read it: thinking people didn't vote like you because they are evil or stupid, is deluding yourself. People had valid concerns about HRC as much as they did about Trump; her domestic policies and the culture she represents, plus her hawkish record and carrying on Obama's legacy, which amounted to billions going into Iran, Saudi Arabia, and ISIS, and rising US-Russian tensions...
the world is bigger than the liberal media bubble.