What Happened polarized book critics. Jennifer Senior of
The New York Times said:
What Happened is not one book, but many. It is a candid and blackly funny account of her mood in the direct aftermath of losing to President Donald J. Trump. It is a post-mortem, in which she is both coroner and corpse. It is a feminist manifesto. It is a score-settling jubilee. It is a rant against James B. Comey, Bernie Sanders, the media, James B. Comey, Vladimir Putin and James B. Comey. It is a primer on Russian spying. It is a thumping of Trump. A review in the
Chicago Tribune by Heidi Stevens stated that the passages in the book about Russia's involvement in the US election "read like a spy novel".
Thomas Frank in
The Guardian contends that "Unfortunately, her new book is less an effort to explain than it is to explain away. ... Still, by exercising a little discernment, readers can find clues to the mystery of 2016 here and there among the clouds of blame-evasion and positive thinking." An analysis by
Ezra Klein, editor-in-chief of
Vox, saw a different role for the book, making reference to Clinton's belief that progress is best made by working within the political system: "
What Happened has been sold as Clinton's apologia for her 2016 campaign, and it is that. But it's more remarkable for Clinton's extended defense of a political style that has become unfashionable in both the Republican and Democratic parties." David L. Ulin of the
Los Angeles Times wrote in his review for the newspaper that the book is a "necessary—if at times clunky and unconvincing—retrospective" and that "She should have been president, and she knows it; regret and loss is palpable throughout the book. And yet it's also the case that she remains unable to reckon with just what happened in the 2016 election, looking for explanations, for reasons, while at the same time never quite uncovering her own complicity." Sarah Jones of
The New Republic wrote: The real problem with
What Happened is that it is not the book it needed to be. It spends more time on descriptions of Clinton's various post-election coping strategies, which include chardonnay and "alternative nostril breathing," than it does on her campaign decisions in the Midwest. It is written for her fans, in other words, and not for those who want real answers about her campaign, and who worry that the Democratic Party is learning the wrong lessons from the 2016 debacle. A 2019 study in the journal
Perspectives on Politics tried to evaluate the veracity of reasons that Clinton presented for her loss in the 2016 election. The study found that "more often than not, HRC’s assumptions are supported" but that there was little evidence that the
e-mail scandal, including FBI Director James Comey’s intervention shortly before Election Day, contributed to her loss. ==Awards and honors==