The version that was officially released to the public represented the product of years of negotiation. That version was settled on and was then taken back to each prospective member for that nation's ratification process -- on a yes-or-no basis.
That was just as true of the United States as of the other nations. If Obama had chosen to submit the proposal to Congress, pursuant to the trade promotion authority bill that had already been approved, it would have been before Congress on a yes-or-no basis, with no amendments allowed.
Hillary talked in general terms about what her standards for trade agreements were. In addition, however, she quite properly recognized that the immediate issue was this particular (untweaked) text. On that text, she announced her opposition.
What would have happened if she had been elected? With other nations already having ratified the version she opposed, would there have been any realistic prospect of substituting a renegotiated version? My guess is No.
Hence, if the OP is correct that the Harley-Davidson decision was made solely because the United States is not currently a party to the TPP, then that decision would have been made even if Hillary had become President.
You may of course disagree with her about the merits of the proposed agreement that was sent out for ratification. I personally agree with her. What should be clear, however, is that "politicians...[who] bash [trade agreements] before they know anything" is not a description that can be applied to Hillary Clinton.