Well, several things to consider:
Trump's presidency has almost certainly exacerbated America's issues with anti-intellectualism, political divisiveness, and the rejection of truth and science. A Clinton presidency probably would not have seen as widespread a radicalization of the uneducated.
Trump's presidency led to the politicization of COVID-19 in large part because his administration is stuffed to the brim with people that will push his narrative regardless of the consequences -- so you end up with a government that offers the controversy a platform and adds fuel to Trump's fire.
More decisive action, rhetoric, and leadership would almost certainly have had a major impact on the responses offered by state governments. Don't forget that a solid portion of the red governors are forced to play to Trump's every whim because disagreeing with or rejecting the man has come to mean political suicide for the GOP. Go back to the republican party we had before the 2016 elections, and ask yourself whether it was more likely or less likely to disagree with Trump.
Even where states have been fast to respond and diligent in implementing measures, the support they've received from the federal government has been limited at best, and at times even crossed over into what one could argue to be sabotage. I don't think that a Clinton administration would have mishandled things to this degree.
A large part of what allowed things to get this bad was our lack of knowledge early on, and Trump's cutting of the early detection program in China and his rejection of the WHO as a chinese pawn only served to hurt that.