Would Hillary Clinton have made a better President?

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Unemployment going down, growth in the economy, debt levels under control relative to other countries, dumb wars being scaled back, I am not sure what more could have been done given the situation left by George.

Maybe (d'uh :wink:) the economy will bring back Mr. Obama for a second term. However it does seem that other people feel as I have done that his need for consensus before action diminishes his impact when compared to the style of HRC. I certainly prefer thoughtful consensus to what went before, but sometimes a leader should be seen to lead and carry the consensus with them. This is what I don't see that Mr. Obama has done.

Perhaps it is in the nature of the one term nobody and two term legacy presidency that holds back too much in a first term and the reality that people don't want more tax to pay for things when they are making less money. The NHS costs us in the UK £1500 per person a year, that's about $2400. I don't think say 5% increase in tax would have made him reelectable. Perhaps next term.
 

B_Boy_Boy_Boy

Just Browsing
Joined
Dec 2, 2010
Posts
58
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
41
Just suppose that she would have been elected by the US electorate.

I have kept out of US politics since our friend Mr. Bush left office, but outside the US we are now seeing HRC in action and imho she cuts it.

Will she get another chance?

Have I mised something about her?

If trolls come here to feed, please resist.
In one word: yes. Her husband was one of the few presidents that became more popular as his term went on. How? After the 1994 election he moved from left to center left. He balanced the budget while maintaining a growing economy (though his policies didn't really last; and could/were fixed).

What stopped Hillary was that she knew what was and was not possible. Obama sold a dream that he had no ability to bring to reality.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
What stopped Hillary was that she knew what was and was not possible. Obama sold a dream that he had no ability to bring to reality.

What actually stopped Hillary is that she thought the Democratic nomination was "in the bag" and she ran a poor campaign. It also didn't help matters that she and her husband made a few questionable verbal gaffes along the way. And I can say this as someone who did vote for her over Obama during the primary.

You know, if we need to bring historical fact into the discussion. Because everyone knows not even a Clinton could predict the future.
 

D_Tully Tunnelrat

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
258
Can I borrow this to fertilize my flowerbeds?

Depends on what kinda flowers you are growing? Roses no, sunflowers, maybe.

Hilary had a lot of baggage, which is part of the reason Barrack had immediate appeal. Plus he promised to get the US out of the Iraq war, which he really has not done, and he has plunged us deeper into Afghanistan. Nor did he eliminate rendition, and indefinite detention, issues created by BushII. To say nothing of the Obama's Administration's total lack of prosecution of any legal or ethical violations committed by the former Administration or Wall St.

The main reason Hilary lost the nomination is that her advisors totally missed the memo on the then new proportional representation scoring system to be used in the Democratic primaries, which allowed Obama to score points, without winning States outright. If we had the old Democratic winner take all program, Hilary would have won easily. I don't think she'll be up for RoundII, and probably doesn't want to cover for Barrack's dithering in his second admin, if he gets it. It's one thing to be cautious, or to try and be seen as Presidential. It's quite another to be absent, or to seem uncommitted. In retrospect, Hilary better understands how to wield power, but would have made as many enemies, as she would have been effective.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
322
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
There's sure a lot of revisionist thinking going on in this thread. Until McCain (via Bill Kristol) foisted Sarah Palin onto the world's radar screens, Hillary Clinton was --by far-- the most polarizing political personality in the US.

Her positives were large: she was extremely well known; she worked very hard to be an excellent Senator; she had "relationship" with most of the players on the world stage (which she conflated with "experience, IMO); her reputation as a "tough broad" was legendary; she had the support of (nearly) all of her party's power brokers.

Her negatives were troublesome, though and came out in the campaign; she fought a dirty, dog-whistle blowing mudfest, especially in PA, when her hubris morphed into panic; she expected a coronation and, as has happened before and still happens, made the mistake of underestimating Obama's core strength (his pragmatic deliberation on everything); if memory serves correctly, she also had some internal staffing issues that played out poorly in the press, besides.

The least appetizing feature of Mrs Clinton, though, is how she manages to turn everything into something about her. She plays the victim card better than she really has any right to, considering how sharp her elbows can get. We did not need Eva Peron in 2008, and I for one am glad that the Democratic electorate felt the same way I did.

In innumerable ways a Clinton presidency would have resembled what we've had so far, at least from an economic and foreign affairs perspective. But on social issues such as DADT or DOMA (both legacies of her husband's two terms), I think Obama's actually made greater progress than she'd have.

How anyone can think of Hillary as a conservative is just beyond me: fifteen years ago she was a militant feminist intent on bringing universal health care to the US. Now she's conservative? Give me a break!
 

JacobFox

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Posts
709
Media
6
Likes
340
Points
308
Location
Chicago
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
The least appetizing feature of Mrs Clinton, though, is how she manages to turn everything into something about her. She plays the victim card better than she really has any right to, considering how sharp her elbows can get. We did not need Eva Peron in 2008, and I for one am glad that the Democratic electorate felt the same way I did.

Well, I have never met a bigger Hillary Clinton fan than myself. I actually knew who she was before I knew who Bill was. However, I have to say that this is right and one of the big reasons she lost.

One of the strangest moments in the election for me was when she was having a primary debate with Obama and was asked the first question, to which she lost her temper about being asked first all the time and told the interviewer to ask Obama (I do think it is disrespectful to refer to any president by only their last name, but he wasn't president at the time, so writing this is difficult) the first question.

I think things like that are what did her in. She really made herself out as a victim just like Bbucko said. I am not making excuses, but if you delve into her history, people were saying she would be the first female president since the 1970's. Most people seemed to think there was no way she would not win in 2008, and Obama blindsided her. I think as Obama got more support, she fell back on the idea that she was destined to be the first female president and even made the points several times that she was a girl and Obama was black to show how diverse the world is getting.

However, I do think she would have made a better president. I also agree that it would not be vastly different than what we have now, but I think it would slightly be. Despite being a liberal, she reminds me a bit of Margaret Thatcher in that she would be fighting, stubborn and pissing a lot of people off. My major problem with President Obama is that he doesn't stand his ground as much as he should. I think Hillary would have.
 

JacobFox

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Posts
709
Media
6
Likes
340
Points
308
Location
Chicago
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Seems to be a very common complaint

Well, my boyfriend is a conservative republican and I am a slightly left democrat, but this is something both of us have talked about. I hated President Bush as a president, but he stood his ground, didn't back down and let you know what he was thinking. President Obama seems very distant and it is hard to know what is going his mind. I can NEVER understand the pressures of the position, so I feel bad criticizing. But even though President Bush was a crappy president in my view, he was always upfront about what was on his mind. I respect that and hope President Obama will be more like that.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
322
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Well, my boyfriend is a conservative republican and I am a slightly left democrat, but this is something both of us have talked about. I hated President Bush as a president, but he stood his ground, didn't back down and let you know what he was thinking. President Obama seems very distant and it is hard to know what is going his mind. I can NEVER understand the pressures of the position, so I feel bad criticizing. But even though President Bush was a crappy president in my view, he was always upfront about what was on his mind. I respect that and hope President Obama will be more like that.

Columnist Maureen Dowd (I think) coined "The Spock Factor" to describe this aspect of his character. Personally, I find it more satisfying than having a Decider-In-Chief, which Hillary would have followed-up on in spades.

Governing by consensus at a time of terrible polarization is a messy (and perhaps even quixotic) thing to do; it also leads to some compromises that, however dissatisfying, actually get shit done. I've said it before, but I'm terribly grateful that right now we have a president who seems like the only adult in the room.

Perhaps what we are really missing is a Pitbull-type VP. Biden is simply not up to the task (and I don't think Obama wants him to be, either). And, of course, I'm as underwhelmed by Harry Reid's leadership style as I was by Nancy Pelosi's, though they did get health care reform pushed through in an extremely ugly feat of sausage making.
 

JacobFox

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Posts
709
Media
6
Likes
340
Points
308
Location
Chicago
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I haven't understood the last two vice presidents. Bush was good under Reagan and Al Gore may be, in my estimation, the best vice president ever...but Cheney seemed a weird choice to me and Biden seems nonexistent. I think the Biden thing was a big FU to Hillary.
 

parr

Just Browsing
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Posts
433
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
51
Age
71
Location
Florida
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I was never a big fan Hilliary Clinton, however this lady should never be underestimated because she's a woman. She has the fortitude to stand
to her ideals and I might add very intelligent. For those qualities she has
my respect.
 
Last edited: