Sanabel wrote:Imagine how incredible things would be if Hillary won in 2008
This but unironically. Obama had two years of big swinging and massive liberal reform before quickly losing his house majority and then suffered about six years of gridlock due to a backlash against him. Hillary Clinton meanwhile, I believe, would’ve been able to pragmatically approach the issues and implement incremental reform over her tenure rather then pursuing major action at once, stemming the Tea Party backlash or even removing it. I know many probably would prefer two years of major reform than 8 years of slow progress, but I just think Clinton probably would’ve been able to accomplish more. There would’ve been no birther manufactroversy, thus removing Trump from the spotlight also. She would’ve had a better relationship with the Congressional GOP; Clinton had a reputation of moderation and being able to reach across the aisle. Karl Rove, during her tenure in the Senate, once tried to bar Republican congressmen and women from speaking to her because she was that good at getting them to see her way. She also was part of the Congressional Prayer Group, a group largely dominated by Republicans. Not saying her relationship with the GOP would’ve been perfect, but it wouldn’t have been as rocky and I doubt she would’ve repelled their base enough to lose her majority on her first midterm.
