More important, this minimizes the undeniable fact that Trump's "win" was premised on explicit appeals to white nationalism and overwhelming support from white men. Needless to say, tens of millions of women, people of color, immigrants and LGBTQ, the ones whose rights are threatened, feel differently, despite the self-serving statements of the octogenarian socialist from Vermont.

1. "explicit appeals to white nationalism" - Explicit appeals to nationalism, 'yes,' but white nationalism? No. One can argue that there were implicit appeals to white nationalism. One can also argue that people only inferred that the nationalistic appeals were explicitly racial because they were so used to people walking on egg shells regarding minority identities that someone with an unrepentant IDGAF attitude appeared to be a Nazi by contrast. Also, by focusing focusing on the allegation that it's 'white,' you're in danger of missing the point when it comes to the importance of the popular appeal of the explicit appeals to nationalism which really cannot be overstated.
2. "overwhelming support of white men" - So what? Their votes are as good as anyone else's.
3. "tens of millions of women, people of color, immigrants and LGBTQ, the ones whose rights are threatened" - Horse puckey.

Second, it's more than a little ironic to blame Democrats for "losing" an election in which we got 3 million more votes

Those 3 million votes- are you suggesting that that indicates the DEMs didn't f@#k up, because to me it indicates that they did. When you have that big of an advantage and still lose, it means that someone doing a bit more legwork and using a few maps would have been able to prevent the loss. If anything that bolster's Sander's point that it was the DEMs to win and they screwed the pooch.

by standing up for civil rights and inclusion, the environment, immigration reform

If you word it differently... By emphasizing the importance of the environment and seeming not to care about the jobs of people working with fossil fuels. By adopting a strategy which was so laser focused on appealing to particular demographic groups that it fell prey to a counterstrategy which appealed to the demographic groups being ignored. By making yourself look extreme in the eyes of huge swaths of the public when you embrace policies that are unpopular or reject ones that are popular to cater to the targeted groups. By pandering to interest groups focused on allowing foreigners to break our country's laws for economic benefit and calling that a form of justice. More importantly by arguing that rejecting your policy stances are a sign of bigotry so that people who disagree will no longer lend credence to you when you complain of prejudice.

an authoritarian monster who threatens our Democracy every day

LOL