As you can see from the numbers of voters above, he could've been beaten. Next time, just choose a better candidate to go against him:

"She was the Democratic candidate because it was her turn and because a Clinton victory would have moved every Democrat in Washington up a notch. Whether or not she would win was always a secondary matter, something that was taken for granted. Had winning been the party’s number one concern, several more suitable candidates were ready to go. There was Joe Biden, with his powerful plainspoken style, and there was Bernie Sanders, an inspiring and largely scandal-free figure. Each of them would probably have beaten Trump, but neither of them would really have served the interests of the party insiders.

And so Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both."

He got less votes than Romney and McCain and she still lost hahahaha, this is what you get for rigging the premaries

The problem with the 3rd parties is they just don't have a grasp on how to make use of the new means of promotion and lack the resources to contend in the conventional means.  Independents face the same issue.  Basically, the only people who can run as independents with much hope are people like Trump, Buffet, Gates, basically those with the wealth to self-fund their campaigns.  Thing is, the majority of those people have no desire whatsoever to be President :P

I do hope either a third party or independent makes a major move next election.  Having two overwhelmingly dominant parties is not healthy.

Well, they dominate the news media, entertainment, the education system, and the bureaucracy.

Well, it used to be that way. But with Social Media etc actually they would have a shot. They just need to get 5% to level up and unlock further funds as a legitimate party going forwards. That 5% could well be the tipping point into relevance.

That's what I meant by new means of promotion.  Clearly, indepedents and 3rd parties haven't found a good way to tap into that.

Maybe that wasn't a good example, true. Nevertheless, the latest elections, a party took one million votes and had two seats on the parliament, while another one with a quarter of that took 8. So that doesn't add up very well. If a party has strong support in one region (there are 17 in Spain) but has no support in the other 16, it could be better than having a somewhat strong support in all the regions. Which is not fair at all imo.