In the last election, it seems safe to say, a fairly large number of people crossed themselves, prayed for absolution, hoped no one was watching and pulled the lever (or its equivalent) for Hillary Clinton. They considered her at least a sane and a rational adult human being, or at least a better alternative than giving control of the nuclear arsenal to an erratic, unstable, self-obsessed zillionaire, touchy about the size of his crowds and his extremities, given to paranoid outbursts, denials, and fantasies when things went against him.

Now these voters are coming to realize there was never a choice. We were doomed to elect a deranged zillionaire from the beginning. For Clinton, ever more dazed by her second straight failure to crack the glass ceiling, now stands on the edge of the cliff of delusion, about to slide into the abyss.

If you doubt this, please read the transcript of her appearance at Code 2017 (on the website www.recode.net), and ask yourself if she hasn't had too much of the Chardonnay she said she was drinking, or if Trump really did drive her crazy, or if the concussion she suffered some years ago caused her more problems than one at the moment had thought.

Did you think that the scandals — the server, the speeches, and Clinton Inc. — were the problem, along with a bad campaign plan, tone-deaf advisors, and indifference to the struggles of hard-pressed working class voters in the upper Midwest? Not at all.

"Her main takeaway," the Washington Post's Dan Balz tells us, "was that she lost in large part because of Russian interference, hacking and meddling."

"She is fluent in the vernacular of how the Russians interfered, tossing out comments about ‘bots that are just out of control' and the proliferation of fake news ... as she long has done with details of health care," Balz tells us. "Based on the discussion ... she has spent many hours deep in the weeds of the 2016 campaign, analyzing data from a variety of sources and replaying events so that now, nearly seven months later, it is as if all this happened yesterday." There is no explanation for why, if this went on for so long and was so effective, she had what she says was a sizable lead on Oct. 28. But she may not feel one is needed. It was Clinton's friend Sidney Blumenthal who was called "Grassy Knoll" for his conspiracy theories, but it's she who sounds like the better exemplar. Any day now she may tell us it was these Russian agents (in collusion with the Mercers and other GOP donors) who helped Ted Cruz's father kill JFK.

Of course, it wasn't fake news that lost the election for Clinton, but the very real news created without Russian agents by her and her friends. The private server she used for government business had brought on the investigation by the federal government. Her husband's visit to Loretta Lynch last summer had made her recuse herself and give Comey discretion. The emails were discovered on the laptop of the husband of her closest assistant, seized by authorities pursuant to his trial on charges of sexting a minor, for which he may soon go to jail.

If Clinton had had a rational mind or a sound moral grounding, she would know this already, but she hasn't and doesn't. She's not better than Trump, just a little bit different. We had no one to vote for at all.

Noemie Emery, a Washington Examiner columnist, is a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard and author of "Great Expectations: The Troubled Lives of Political Families."