After all the smoke finally clears from this deficit debacle

[Tom Rinaldo]

...and we are all left to deal with whatever deals went down; ponder this. Pretend in some alternate Universe Hillary Clinton got elected President instead of Barack Obama. If her record of dealing with this Congress, including which issues ultimately dominated the agenda and how "President Hillary Clinton" framed those issues to fellow Democrats and the American people, exactly matched that of President Obama in this universe, how would the Democratic Underground there have reacted to her?

I'm not asking whether she would have done a better or worse job than Obama has under the circumstances. I assume some here would say better and some here would think worse - and yes there is no way of knowing for sure etc, etc. I'm instead asking if things somehow ended up playing out pretty much exactly the same with President Hillary Clinton instead of our real President Barack Obama - would dynamics on DU regarding the leadership provided by the Democratic President we elected be essentially the same were it Clinton rather than Obama providing that leadership?

I figure there would be some loudly arguing that President Clinton was doing a damn good job under the circumstances, and some others attacking her for not standing up strongly enough against Republicans and in favor of core Democratic priorities. But would those camps be more lopsided one way or another than they are here now?

Would Hillary Clinton's strongest former backers at DU during the primaries be more willing to accept the way things have worked out so far if Hillary were President owing to greater respect in her judgment about what is and is not possible to achieve today while America is under attack by Republican economic terrorists? Would Barack Obama's strongest backers now be attacking Hillary Clinton for caving into Republicans and selling out liberal ideals if the Presidential tables were turned.

Do we ultimately base our judgments here about a Democratic President's accomplishments on how satisfied we are with the results, or instead is our willingness to at least tolerate results we might not find pleasing determined by our own trust in that President's true intentions, and his or her ability to win as much as possible under the circumstances?

How many of us would be shifting the tone of our commentary if it was Hillary rather than Barack inside the oval office today?

[peacebird]

1. I think it would be the same as now. Progressives upset that a DLCer essentially sold us out

to satisfy the rightwing fringe of the Repuke party. I do not see the final outcome any different if Hillary had been Pres vs Obama as Pres.
Both love them some corporations (as did the Big Dog), both are willing to pony up a little bone for the progressives, mostly to keep us quiet and voting for them.

Not sure that approach will work any longer.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. Yeah, except one thing

I believe that some of those who now are defending our current President still identify themselves, often with good cause, as Progressive. I don't believe it is only DLC type DU members who believe Obama is doing as well as can be expected under current circumstances. Some here retain trust in him and think he is playing out the cards dealt as well as possible, factoring current circumstances and the need to position himself to win in 2012 etc. for the greater good of Democrats long term.

[CakeGrrl]

2. I'm pretty sure that some of those excoriating Obama

would be coming to Hillary's defense. Instead of saying she caved or capitulated, should the outcome favor Republicans, they would say "At least she put up a good fight!"

To wit, a short while back, there was a thread retroactively excusing Bill Clinton for DOMA/DADT going in on his watch, because he was boxed in. That came courtesy of some of the same people blasting Obama for not acting on DOMA/DADT fast enough. Where is the logic in that reasoning? There is none.

Despite claims to the contrary, there are some who never wanted President Obama in office. Every issue becomes an opportunity to express their dislike and inevitably turns to suggestions that he be challenged or quit the Presidency.

I've said in other threads that those wishing so badly for Bernie Sanders to run would, if he inevitably crashed into reality on the way to his Utopian vision, choose to credit him for trying rather than viewing any failure or gain for Republicans as a failure.

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. Sure, I'll agree there are some like that

It is easy to agree as long as we don't assign persentages to how many there are that fit that description. By the same token though, I think that would have been true in reverse. There would have been some here much less willing to accept a compromise made by Hillary than they are to accept a compromise made by Obama.

[dsc]

15. stop telling tales you like instead of the truth

The facts of DADT, not the opinions, not the guesses, but the facts, are that Clinton got defeated on DADT. He tried to let gays serve openly, just like both Kerry and Kennedy, and when he got defeated on letting gays serve openly he signed DADT, just like Kennedy and Kerry voted for it. Those aren't our delusional fantasies, they are history, and I would appreciate that either you one, open a history book and learn history or stop posting on issues you clearly don't give enough of a damn about to learn the history of.

[CakeGrrl]

18. Nobody said anything about "delusional" so stop trying to pick more fights.

My point to the OP is made. I believe some would definitely give a kinder assessment to Hillary, all other things being equal in this scenario on the debt debate.

Some simply flat-out do not want to give President Obama any credit for anything, whatever their reasons or motivations.

Off-topic, DOMA/DADT could be repealed next week (ONLY a hypothetical), and some would say the President really didn't have all that much to do with it, or that he didn't really want to do it.

ON-topic, we could come out of this with a clean bill on the debt ceiling and some will continue to complain about what they think the President wanted to do, ignoring the fact that Congress failed to do their job and forced him to enter the debate. They'll never give him credit for any strategy that has exposed the crazy of the Teabaggers and the general do-nothing obstructionism of the Republicans.

[dsc]

21. since you brought it up

The fact you apparently think DADT and DOMA are the same thing speaks volumes to the amount of time you have spent on gay issues and the amount you care about them.

[tularetom]

5. Most of us voted for Obama because we thought Clinton was too aligned with "centrist" Dem policies

Boy were we disapponted.

But I don't believe things would have been any different. Obama has pretty much governed as I imagined Hillary Clinton would have so I'm guessing the reation on DU would have been essentially as it has been - 65% disappointed or dissatisfied with the president, 25% happy, and 10% unsure or no opinion.

[Tom Rinaldo]

8. I think most people saw it the way you described at the time

I always thought they were very similar in political orientation. I thought Obama would be better able to inspire Democrats and Americans to back his policies than Hillary could, but I thought she would be stronger at trench warfare. I went with the latter which is why I backed Hillary in the primaries.

But there is a personal level to political loyalty. I admit I am effected by that also. If I have a lot of faith and trust in the character and ability of a potential leader - even if i don't always see eye to eye with her or him, I am more likely to grudgingly accept that something that disappoints me is the best that can be won at that time under those circumstances. And I am more willing to defend the barricades for that person also.

[Whisp]

11. Clinton wouldn't have the jam to stand up to pressures like these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tngWyRHIjYU

Just for one example. She can't wing it without looking like an idiot. Take her off balance and she goes completely loco.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. I Voted For HRC In The Primaries But I'm Glad She Lost

America's problems are intractable and the economy would be in the toilet regardless of who was elected president. By losing the Clinton brand which is synonymous with relative peace and prosperity remains untarnished;at least in my opinion. Future generations of Americans will look back at the 90s as the last era of relative peace and prosperity.

What I find interesting is that many of President Obama's most stalwart supporters are now some of his most stalwart opponents.

I empathize with him. He inherited the worst economy in nearly one hundred years.

[OHdem10]

7. This is not a fair comparison. Hilary most likely would have

taken a different approach and delayed HC. Some would
be angry with her for different reasons.

Just a thought, Obama is feeling the heat of lot
accumulated anger with the whole Democratic Party.

IMO, any logical observer cannot miss the fact that
elected Dems including President are willing to operate
in Republican Territory which automatically sets up
the GOP to win. Home Town Advantage.

Some will say Bill Clinton did this andthat and now
you yell about Obama.

No one understand the seething anger felt for Bill Clinton
by some Liberals(more than you think) because of the
Republican Lite Policies of his administration. This anger
was already there so when Obama comes in and quickly moves to
the right of Richard Nixon, the steam guage blew completely
off. We are coming to grips with our party being a Moderate Republican
Party and as Liberals we are essentially told, support us
and give us your money because you have no where to go.

It is more Obama came in at a bad time. He is getting
all the anger left over plus the anger felt for the
Spineless Democrats .

[treestar]

9. Hillary's strongest supporters would be the cheerleaders

I'd be one of the cheerleaders, I know.

Obama's strongest supporters might do the same - fault Hillary and wonder if Obama would have done better.

There is also that group that would be doing the same to Hillary as they now to do Obama and just blame her for everything.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. I think about stuiff like this because I "cut my teeth" at DU during 2004 primary wars

It's obvious to me that many of us react strongly to the person we are drawn to and not just to the stated policy positions of the various candidates. Sure we latch onto this or that statement as ammunition to defend our choice, but that just ends up being the tip of a submerged ice berg in many cases.

In 2008 so many of us went to great pains to argue that there were dramatic differences between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in where they wanted to lead the nation and how - even though there was plenty of evidence to indicate that they had very similar stances and goals on most everything. Primay battles here often take on comic book sensibilites, with stark heroes and villians domination our commentary. Same thing happened in 2004.

And yet the core character and motivation of a leader does matter. Some felt strongly for Howard Dean, Wes Clark, Russ Feingold, John Kerry, Al Gore, or Barack Obama (no doubt others as well) because we believed in them, at least at the time, as leaders we could trust and support. Much of the time we then went looking for issue arguments to back up our inclination to support one of them against others.

We need to pull out whatever lessons we can learn from that track record.

[Armstead]

12. It would have depended on how she handled it, I guess

I supported Obama strongly because I wanted a change from corporate conservative phony centrism.

I am much more angry now, because he has dashed even my lowest expectations for him.

If Hilary had shown more backbone in this, I would have been thrilled. If she had sold us out like Obama is doing, I would have been pissed.

[kickysnana]

13. I would rather go back and put the elected President Al Gore

in and have 911 never happen. No fracking, no tax cuts for the rich, no looting the Treasury and sending it who knows where, no treasonous Supreme Court... but that didn't happen either.

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. Sure, but we still discuss why some of us supported Nader

...amd if that is where the blame should lie for stuff that followed. I think it is worth reflecting on why we react the way that we do in politics. we sure enough make enough mistakes that there is still some room for improvement.

[AtomicKitten]

16. There's no mystery to this really.

The hardcore HClinton supporters would defend her to their dying breath; some still think she was robbed of the crown. Many have continued to frag President Obama every chance they get. It's the caliber of human nature that's been exhibited here all through the primary election to today.

On edit: FTR I came to DU as a strong Clinton supporter in 2005. Had she not acted the fool in the primary and had she won fair and square and not tried to post votes that were deemed out of play, I probably would have supported her in the office. But that's not what happened and a "win" would have come only with a grotesque distortion of the rules in which case I would not be a happy camper.

[dsc]

17. I think I would be fair

On health care I would have been more patient with a Hillary embrace of a mandate since she actually campaigned on one in the primary. I would have been equally appalled if she had been as tone deaf to gay concerns as Obama was. I would have been equally upset over a gay free cabinet. On the plus side I would be happy with hate crimes, ending dadt and some of his appointees. I think health care was about as good as we could get under the circumstances.

[woolldog]

19. I would be saying the exact same things I am now.

I'm not a fanboy or a blind loyalist. I backed Obama in the primary and couldn't stand Clinton. I realize I was wrong. She's more of a fighter than he is. Obama might've made a good President in a different time, but with the polarization of this country, the political climate etc., clearly Hilary would've been a better choice. She'd dealt with the GOP when Bill was President and had no illusions about what it was going to be like. In retrospect neither was a very good choice, but Clinton slightly better because she has a brass set that Obama lacks

[zalinda]

20. Not me. I'm an issues person.

I don't care who the person is, or whether I like them or not. It doesn't matter if they are nice, bitchy or anything in between, it matters what they do for EVERY American, not just for the rich or maybe the middle class.

zalinda

[JoePhilly]

22. HRC and Obama's positions were almost perfectly aligned.

And I seriously doubt she'd have done much different.

That's why their primary was so close.

And the right wing hates the Clinton's almost as much as they no hate the black guy in office. And that may be the one difference.

The GOP could not have created a Tea Party if Hillary were President. The right wing sexism isn't nearly as strong as the racism its had to suppress for the last 40 or so years.

Sadly, the Clinton use of race as an issue during the primaries in SC gave the GOP the insight they needed to light the fire under their crazy base. Just tell that base that THEY were NOT the racists, but that Obama and his supporters were the real racists.

And so you had Fox News, Rush, Beck, others singing that song ... Obama is a racist, hates white culture, never loved America, wasn't even born here, used affirmative action to get into college ... the whole nine yards.

I'm sure that the GOP would have come up with something to attack Hillary on, but it seems clear to me that it would not have been anything like the tea party.

As for our tone ... I really only care about one aspect of that ... and that is the selection as to WHO it is we should be fighting and where the left's anger should be focused.

Not on Hillary, or Obama ... but the GOP.

It would be tough for any President to focus on moving forward against this GOP, and it much harder when those who are supposed to be behind that President, are endless screaming that no matter what he or she does, they're doing it wrong.

[Autumn]

23. I said during the primaries that they were both pretty

much the same, Obamas Senate record was not a lot to go on and it bothered me when he praised Reagan, that really pissed me off. I hate that SOB Reagan with the heat of a 1000 suns. I supported Hillary because as an old woman I had hoped to see a woman President in my lifetime.

One thing about Hillary is that she has no illusions about the republicans, she knows what they are capable of. I kept her as my avatar for a long
time after the election, because I have a lot of respect for her, but she did something that pissed me off ( now I can't remember what it was :rofl: ) and changed my avatar. She is a very compassionate, caring woman. Very secure in her values.

If Hillary had done the same things Obama has done I would be just as pissed at her. Guess I am not invested in any President, I am however invested in Democratic values,they mean much more than the person.