One of these days Hillary Clinton will concede publicly that she and her campaign team are largely responsible for blowing a very winnable presidential election.

Wednesday was not that day.

Clinton unveiled at least two new excuses to explain her stunning and humiliating loss last fall to Donald Trump, a former reality show host.

First, she explained, there was an unfair expectation from the get-go that she was a competent candidate. Secondly, she added, the Democratic National Committee was utterly worthless.

"I was the victim of a very broad assumption that I was going to win," Clinton claimed during an interview this week at the Recode conference in Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif.

Indeed, having big leads is just the worst if you're running for office. We can't expect candidates to win when they're given baked-in leads. Just ridiculous stuff.

Clinton also blamed her loss on the Democratic National Committee itself, claiming that the organization was basically useless during the 2016 election.

"I set up my campaign and we have our own data operation. I get the nomination, so I'm now the nominee of the Democratic Party. I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party," she said.

Her interviewer, Verge executive editor Walt Mossberg, asked, "What do you mean 'nothing'?"

"I mean it was bankrupt, it was on the verge of insolvency, its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it," she responded.

"This is the DNC you're talking about," Mossberg pressed, prompting Clinton to reply in the affirmative.

(She's not wrong about the DNC, by the way. Complaints about the group's general ineffectiveness have been a frequent fixture within Democratic circles for years. Some criticisms go so far as to accuse former President Barack Obama of basically gutting the DNC to feed his Organizing for Action operation. For what it's worth, the DNC's current chair, Tom Perez, kicked off his bid for chairman by noting that the group had been left to rot during the Obama era.)

Following up on her general criticism of the DNC Wednesday, Clinton also drew a contrast between the Democratic group and the Republican National Committee.

"[The RNC] basically said, 'we will never be behind the Democrats again.' And they invested between 2012 and 2016, this $100 million to build this data foundation. They beta tested it. They ran it, somebody was able to determine about 227,000 surveys to double-check, triple-check, quadruple-check the information," she explained.

"So Trump becomes the nominee and he is basically handed this tried-and-true effective foundation," Clinton added.

Absent from her election post-mortem Wednesday was any mention of her campaign's many missteps.

Clinton didn't mention that she didn't set foot in Wisconsin once during the entire general election. She didn't mention her team's initial decision to frame the campaign in terms of how voters could help her ("I'm with her!") and not vice versa. She didn't mention the moment she claimed at a fundraiser in New York City that "half" of Trump's supporters were "irredeemable" bigots.

Clinton did, however, trot out some of her usual election loss excuses Wednesday.

She blamed the Russians. She blamed the Federal Bureau of Investigation for its review of her private State Department email server. She blamed "fake news." She blamed misogyny. She also blamed WikiLeaks for publishing emails stolen from Democratic National Committee staffers and from her campaign chairman, John Podesta.

These things may or may not have played a part in Clinton's eventual loss to President Trump, and we can debate over which played the greater role.

It's hard, however, to argue that any of these mentioned excuses outweigh Clinton's own missteps, of which there were a great many.