Liberalism is, but the party that's supposed to represent it isn't doing a very good job of it. The Democratic Party has become the party of Wall Street. Liberalism values workers rights. The two are diametrically opposed, which is the single largest variable as to why the Democrats lost the election.
Make the Democratic Party great again, like FDR and LBJ great, only better. Make it great or purge it from existence and let a new, legitimately liberal party emerge that actually represents the middle-class and end the Republican stranglehold all across the country
Liberalism is doing just fine, it's just not always winning elections. The Democrats have won the popular vote 4 of the past 5 elections. The one election we lost was 2004 against incumbent Bush 2, who wouldn't have been there in the 1st place if we elected presidents by direct popular vote.
So I view the 18th century voting system as the biggest problem here. Obviously, all votes don't count equally. And only the winners can consider that to be fair, and only because they won.
Just because you take money from somebody, it doesn't mean they own you. Those that donate money are trying to get some degree of influence, but maybe as little as having their preferred party in power who historically has benefited them in the past.
It doesn't mean that you'll get everything you want or even anything you want. It's more like 'playing the percentages'. They have an opinion that this candidate will be better than the other to their business.
I worked for a multimillion dollar metals company that routinely donated to BOTH sides in senatorial races. They wanted help against what they viewed as unfair trade and foreign gov't. subsidized dumping. Sometimes they got help, sometimes not. If a profitable company files a trade complaint, they sometimes lose just because they are profitable and appears that they're just whining or trying to get a bigger piece of the market.
Just because Clinton got money from certain people didn't guarantee those people a thing. So I don't think the 'wall street control' thing is as 'controlling' as it appears in campaign donations. Certainly I'd like to see some reforms in the investment communities. I think there was a better chance of that had Clinton won, despite campaign contributions. Maybe they're aware that the whole economy is driven by consumer confidence and the Democrats would be more willing to bail them out if another 2008 happens, as opposed to letting everyone suffer through a depression again. Maybe.