August 11th, 2011
06:00 PM ET

Would Hillary Clinton have been a better choice for Democrats?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Looks like some Democrats are having buyer's remorse when it comes to President Obama and wishing they had gone with Hillary Clinton instead.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/11/art.hillary.jpg caption=""]
The recent negotiations over the debt ceiling are being seen by many as the lowest point in Mr. Obama's presidency. And it's not just Republicans who are comparing Barack Obama to Jimmy Carter or saying he'll be a one-term president.

One Democratic strategist tells the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph that Democrats are worried that the president "looks weak. He doesn't say anything that grabs you, and people are looking for some kind of magic."

Apparently some Democratic activists are asking if the party needs someone tougher to fight the tea party. Someone, say, like Hillary Clinton. They point out that Hillary, like her husband Bill Clinton, has tougher political instincts than President Obama.

During the 2008 campaign, Hillary Clinton claimed that although then-candidate Obama might be able to inspire the masses, she was the one who had the experience to get the job done.

Hindsight is 20-20, but it's easy to see why some Democrats are now nervous about the president's re-election chances. His approval ratings are at or near all-time lows for his presidency and only one-third of Americans approve of how he's handling the economy, which is the No. 1 issue.

What's more, one recent poll showed 44% of registered voters say they are more likely to vote for a generic Republican in 2012. That's compared to 39% who say they're more likely to vote for Mr. Obama.

When you lose in a hypothetical matchup against an unknown opponent, that's not a good starting point from which to seek to be re-elected.

Here’s my question to you: Would Hillary Clinton have been a better choice for the Democrats?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 6pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

Filed under: 2010 Election • Democrats • Hillary Clinton
soundoff (370 Responses)
  1. pat in michigan

    Personally I think she is more savvy.She was right there for 8 years.Don't kid yourself she knew everything that was going on.Why do you suppose she is such a good sec of state.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:33 pm |
  2. Gerry

    Thats like asking if you would rather have AIDS or Cancer. Both would have us be a Third World Nation under the United Nations. Both equally dangerous.

    Ash Fork, Az

    August 11, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
  3. James C

    Yes and No. Yes, she'd be a better choice due to the lack of compromise and have the means to unite both parties into such compromise. No, she'd also be overshadowed by Billy I did not Have sex with that woman and his accomplishments as President. Too many questioned her as leader, and too many still do. Rather it's best that she stay from the White House, and just concentrate on being our third Madame Secretary of State. Besides, she's outshining Albright and Rice.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:41 pm |
  4. Peg from NY

    Yes! There has never been a doubt in my mind that she would have had a much better grip on the Presidency. She has a lifetime of experience and knows the value of compomise and bipartisanship.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:43 pm |
  5. David of Alexandria VA

    Reguessing history is difficult. But, who knows, the way tings are going for Obama, they may have a chance to run that race again and find out.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:45 pm |
  6. Ed from California

    Perhaps.... I'd just wished we elected a Democrat as president, not another republican't or republi- no as our leader. Or maybe, at least one with negotiating skills. I'm thinking Michael Bloomberg or Mr. Buffett, would be a great choice for president. As a Dem, I'd vote for him. I don't think I can vote for pres. Obama again, he has no balls!!

    August 11, 2011 at 1:49 pm |
  7. Dennis in Los Angeles

    Yes. Obama has had a free ride ever since he was anointed by the media. His inexperience, lack of leadership and liberal policies have devastated this country. "Obama" will become the next Jimmy Carter example of a failed liberal presidency.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:49 pm |
  8. John in Alabama

    Jack: In looking back at 2008 no, but I believe she would make a great Vice Presidential candidate with President Obama in 2012. This would only be possible, if Vice President Biden, wanted to step down from the office. Vice President Biden has many friends in the Democrat Party, and even some Republicans; therefore, do not step on his toes. There is a belief that Secretary Clinton wants to be a grandma more than doing her current job. But the Vice President's job could lead to the White House in 2016.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:51 pm |
  9. J.D.

    Woulda, coulda, shoulda. We'll never know. I suspect since Hillary knew the right wing in all their glory, there would have been more knocking up side the head and less attempts at compromise had she been president. Mr. Obama seems hell bent on getting Republicans to like him, even if it means destroying the country by giving them everything they want.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:52 pm |
  10. Brad, Portland, OR

    Yes. Obama is either very weak in fighting for what he believes in, and always gives in to the other side, or he actually believes in Republican principles, just pretended to be a Democrat to get elected, and is really a Trojan Republican.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:55 pm |
  11. Bob D Iowa

    Jack, I supported Hillary Clinton in 2008 and would again but that isn't the question. I don't think that there would have been the opposition that Obama has received. Obama has not been a bad president by any means but when from the day of the election there has been no let up on the direct attacks on the man. MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan told it like it was the other day and gave some very good advice for Obama to follow and to take the power back and the people of America will follow. We are all tired of being played with by both the right and left and need someone to standup for us and lead and we will follow.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:57 pm |
  12. mon

    YES.Pelosi and Dems pary big shots made a real bad choice. Hillary won the popular vote.

    August 11, 2011 at 1:59 pm |
  13. David in Mississippi

    Hillary is doing an excelent job and the President made a good choice. I still see Obama as the better choice because he is going to have to make changes that a true party Democrat would have problems with. In order to solve America's problems party lines will have to join in the middle and the outer edges need to be ignored.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:01 pm |
  14. AB

    No Jack, Hillary Clinton would have been a bad choice, given her lackluster performance as a U.S. Senator and her poor judgement with respect to her decision to vote for giving George W. Bush the authority to invade Iraq, which turned out to be a grave and gross mistake. The American people are fortunate to have voted for Barack Obama and will realize their good fortunate once the economy improves towards prosperity next year.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:01 pm |

    There you go again. No. We voted for who we wanted. At least I did. Cut the drama, Jack.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:01 pm |

    The Republicans were waiting for Hillary Clinton so they could drag her down the mud, too. Remember her that who are Democrats.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:02 pm |
  17. gunny

    I think Hillary would of been a great president, she has the intelligence.
    Hillary would of had the same up hill battle with the republicans and teabaggers. We are in deep trouble and I dont think either side will be able to fix anything unless they start agreeing on something that can make both sides happy. I'm very dissapointed with the dems and the republicans. I think Hillary would of been tougher on the republicans.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
  18. O'dell Florida

    Hey! I'm for "buy one get one free" anytime. I'm sure Hillary has enough....well let's say guts...that she would kick you know what and take names now. I voted for Obama but recently everytime I hear him speak it seems like cherubs are flanking him throwing rose petals in the air. I do hope he awakens soon.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
  19. John James

    Oak Hill West Virginia: She would have done a better job as Obama is so wishy washey, and does not stand up for the middle class. There can be thousand of jobs in coal and gas if EPA would be brought under control. We need jobs now and Obama does not get the message and the republicans feel thet everyone else should pay taxes except them and the democrats need to have Hillary run in the next election as we do not need Sarah Palin to become our president.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:07 pm |
  20. Russ in PA

    Nope, Ron Paul should have been the obvious choice. You guys just can't seem to catch on to that...

    August 11, 2011 at 2:12 pm |
  21. Rich McKinney, Texas

    Sadly no. Had Hillary divorced Bill a long time ago when it was discovered that he was cheating on her i think perhaps she might have made a good president someday. Unfortunately she stayed with him and was tainted by it. Hillary can not be anything more then what Bill's past will let her become. No mater how good the economy might have been under Bill Clinton those were different times and different circumstances. All Obama did was make Bill and Hillary's dream of healthcare come to life. That was something that neither Bill or Hillary were able to do.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
  22. Ken in Seattle

    That increasingly seems to be true. She would have brought Bill's baggage along with her and that could have been very distracting. However, she would have gone before the country and forcefully promoted her views on how the country should be and she would have fought like hell for what she believed in.

    Obama may in fact have strong convictions but he seems incapable, with very few exceptions, of expressing the strength of those convictions to the American people and he doesn't seem willing to fight for them. Dispassionate lecturing has replaced the lofty oratory of his campaign. Leadership is in part about convincing people to follow you. He's doing a very poor job of that.

    Like Jimmy Carter, Obama may go down in history as a very
    intelligent, compassionate president who simply lacked some of the qualities it takes to be an effective one. One can agree with Hillary or not, one can like her or not but she would have been a very strong president. And she would have stood toe to toe with the right wing of the Republican Party without flinching.

    The country is currently like a rudderless ship in the mist of a terrific storm. And the captain has apparently decided to take a nap, or in Obama's case go on vacation and then go for an extended bus ride. All of the campaigning in the world won't replace ineffective leadership. Let's hope Hillary knows where she put her running shows.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
  23. Richard, in Kansas

    Yes, at least she has a pair.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:20 pm |
  24. Jack B. Panama City, Fl.

    Really Jack, would that not have turned into the Real House wives of Washington DC?

    August 11, 2011 at 2:23 pm |
  25. Janey

    What a question! The answer is obvious. YES. She's done an outstanding job as SoS, even with an indecisive President.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:24 pm |
  26. David in Tampa

    In several words, Obama is what we have, Clinton didn't win so we don't have, and thus the question is moot. Don't forget that the Republicans absolutely hate the Clintons so things just might be much worse.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:24 pm |
  27. Ed from Texas

    Maybe, but Republicans would probably not have acted any differently. So, more than likely, we would still be at the same place.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:30 pm |
  28. Loren

    For all of Hillary's faults, not the least of which being in the pocket of Walmart, the number one killer of our economic base, she is a hard worker, she has a world view in line with most Americans, and could have worked with the Republicans. I guess the country wasn't ready yet for a woman to lead our country.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:32 pm |
  29. Jim

    As much as I hate to admit it Jack, I believe so. My reasons being that I think she would have been a much tougher negotiator and would have stood up to the Republicans, unlike Obama. I also think that she had a better understanding of inner goverment workings and foreign policy. Finally, being a proponent of health care for all, she would have emerged from the negotiations on this issue with a much better plan including a public option. Personally, I'd vote for her in 2012 over Obama if she would run. somebody has got to save us and the country from the Republican extremists.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:34 pm |
  30. Dan in Aluququerque

    Hindsight is always great, but I suspect the obstructionism would have been the same from the Tea Party and right wingers. The only advantages I see might have been avoidance of the vitriolic lies about birth, Communism, Socialism, being a Muslim ( and, heaven forbid, black!) Another advantage might have been more ptivate advice from Bill Clinton, the most fiscally and politically astute president we have had in memory.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:34 pm |
  31. J. Santiago

    I really think she would've been better. I never really liked Obama, but I voted for him. Considering her high approval ratings, Obama's low approval ratings and the terrible GOP candidates. Sounds like the perfect chance for her to come in. She has my vote.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:40 pm |
  32. Lori - PA


    Yes. Hillary would not have allowed the Tea Party to bully her into backing down from the stand she would have taken had she been President of the United States.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:41 pm |
  33. Brian from, Colorado

    Hillary Clinton would be a better choice for Democrats, because she has the mind of a finical advisor. She can scoop the economy out from underneath everybody’s nose without notice, but then praise the bad economical times, laughing at our expense. A true terrorist!

    August 11, 2011 at 2:41 pm |
  34. Darrell - Brunswick Ohio

    Hillary would have been better the first two years, her and Bill know how to gets thing done. However with the just say "No" House and the T'Baggers, it would have been hard for her as well. She would have gotten a budget and had the 'Debt" raised in the first two years and jobs would have been moving in the right direction. I voted for Obama, he fooled me once.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
  35. Michael Bindner, Alexandria, VA

    Only if she had immediately ended the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy – or made it job one after Specter switched sides. You are assuming that attack dogs in the Tea Party would have been easier on her than they are on Obama. I find such an assumption hard to swallow.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
  36. Jane

    Yes, she would have been a better president. Too bad we discovered this fact too late. He needs more "stones" .

    August 11, 2011 at 2:43 pm |
  37. Mel

    She would be the perfect spark we need. I wish she would run

    August 11, 2011 at 2:43 pm |
  38. Jenna Roseville CA

    Would Hillary Clinton have been a better choice for the Democrats?

    That is a good question Jack.

    Originally I would have said, NO. However with Obama abandoning his base and trying to apease the GOP at every turn I would have rather had Hillary in office.

    If I were Obama I would put my BIG BOY UNDERWARE on and go back to the base and play hard ball with the GOP. He might get his base back if he does. Otherwise the 2012 elections will prove a hard battle for him.

    Roseville CA

    August 11, 2011 at 2:44 pm |
  39. Bizz, Quarryville Pennsylvania

    I really don't think it matters what democratic president got elected. Things would still be the same. You would still have the tea party and their refusal to compromise. Even the speaker of the house cannot control them or work with them. Then how can you expect a democratic president no matter who she or he is to get anything done. To tell you the truth President Reagan could not have worked with them because he also seen the need to raise taxes.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:45 pm |
  40. James

    That's exactly what we were saying in 2008. The Dems didn't get it right in 2008, so this is their chance to get it right. Go Hillary!!!!

    August 11, 2011 at 2:46 pm |
  41. Mike from Texas

    Jack yes I believe she would have been. The fact is whoever the Democrats chose they were doomed to fight the Republican/Tea Party machine funded by big business. We know Hillary was for healthcare reform, so she would have had the same uphill fight as President Obama. We also know that anything she proposed along the lines of undoing the damaged caused by the previous administration policy, such as fair taxation, reduction of war, and spending for new industry and jobs, would have met the same NO response as President Obama has received from the Republican party.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:47 pm |
  42. kenny

    NOt when she cant solve middle class problems but instead goes to the 3rd world ties the military hands and forces u.s. to help prop up hate...while she plays devils advocate with race

    August 11, 2011 at 2:47 pm |
  43. Dave

    It's hard to say. There is a significant number of people who did not vote for Obama because he was black, and there would have been a lot of people not voting for Hillary because she was a woman. Had she been elected, I think she would have been more effective. Having been part of the administration in the 90's, she probably would have been a little less naive and more politically astute in dealing with the Republicans. Seeing as how the Republicans have filibustered 80% of the legislation in the Senate, its difficult to see how anyone could have changed things. I truly believe the Republican party is more devoted to winning the Presidency back than creating jobs or doing the right thing for the American people.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:49 pm |
  44. Bobby E. Lahmon Jackson MS

    yes more than likely the country would have had more patience with her and she probably would have been given much more room for error than President Obama from day 1 it seem as if people were expecting Obama to wave a magic wand and fix everything immediately or get off the stage and that's just not fair considering the unusual opposition he's faced not to mention the dire shape this country was in before he took office in short he's doing a damm good job but he's just not getting any credit for it

    August 11, 2011 at 2:50 pm |
  45. Wilhelm von Nord Bach

    obviously YES, Jack, BUT then I think ANY of the Democrate 2008 candidates would have been better than this gutless wonder we have in the White House right now.

    and I AM a Democrate.

    people voted for Obama thinking they were getting a 21st Century FDR. instead they got WORSE than Jimmy Carter. I personally think he's just "running out the clock" on his Presidency.

    the ONLY way he wins in 2012 is IF the Republicans select a complete NUT as a candidate, which, from what I have seen so far, is VERY possable.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:51 pm |
  46. robbowski

    Yes she would of been a better choice, and not because of ability, but because of the color of her skin. She's the ultimate Sarah Palin, just alot smarter. Face it people don't like President Obama because he is a black man in a place where they don't think he should be. People quickly forget he inherited this situation and the move the administration made to keep the economy afloat are now seeing as failures. And if they think it's bad now, wait until the congress takes away unemployment insurance, medicare, social security, etc. etc...So that the rich can continue getting richer.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:52 pm |
  47. Rafael Cardoso

    I voted fo Mr Obama, but at this point any one will be better than him.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:54 pm |
  48. Jim, Denver CO


    Nope. It doesn't matter which Democrat is President; Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama or even Bill Clinton. The current Republican and Tea Party people would be doing the same thing. Mess up the works so bad that any Democratic President could not be re-elected.

    That is the game plan. Thanks a lot you moron's.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:55 pm |

    tampa, fl if you mean that if the dems wanted to fix America's problems, i doubt it. the clintons have a colorful past, when voting you get two for the price of one. America will only be "fixed" when our politicians finally stop selling us out, and that means getting rid of all incumbents.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
  50. Stella-Northern New York

    Hello Jack. YES, YES AND YES AGAIN. Hillary knows every time you spend a dollar at Walmart that money goes out of the Country and creates more jobs in China. These trade agreements would be on the chopping block and tariffs in place to discourage job creation overseas. Which will bring jobs home to America. She has devoted her entire life to making things better for all Americans and our Country. I think Hillary may be one of the few people in Washington who actually is listening and hears the people of this Country. She knows what is wanted and what is needed. She would be the last person standing when it comes to a showdown with the vultures in Congress. Perhaps President Obama should not run again. He does not know how to fight with a pack of wolves. Hillary is indeed a VERY BIG MOUNTAIN LION with A VERY BIG BITE!!! We've saved the best for last and that's HILLARY.

    August 11, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
  51. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    Yes, and it's not too late. She could resign as S of S and win the nomination and beat any of the lame GOP candidates. Hope she does.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:09 pm |
  52. Sylvia from San Diego

    Yes, yes and YES!!!!!

    August 11, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
  53. Dave - Phx, Az

    In hind sight I would say oh god, hell yes.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:13 pm |
  54. Michael "C" Lorton, Virginia

    Jack-No. America has been there and did that-–same situation--but a different gender!

    August 11, 2011 at 3:14 pm |
  55. Patsy, Texas

    How do we know who "the better choice" is, was, would have
    been for any Party. President Obama is working very hard,
    making concessions, presenting ideas, putting forth plans
    that aid unemployment, ie badly needed infrastructure that
    would put thousands to work.
    How does he fight those who are hell-bent on destroying
    every idea he has because they hate him. How can he
    get anything done with the likes of the Tea Party/Republican's
    personal President, Grover Norquist, funded by the Koch
    brothers telling them every move to make from "pledges" to
    who they want on the so-called Super Committee. I am sick
    of these dogs, bringing us to the brink of disaster and
    refusing to help us find answers. Regardless of what "they"
    say, it is NOT all President Obama's fault and he cannot
    do it alone.
    The "better choice" would have been to elect reasonable,
    intelligent, "put America first" people to sit in Congress and
    do their jobs. Working together for the people who pay
    their salaries, their health care, their perks they love so
    much. The best choice is to dump them in Boston Harbor,
    and start over. Let them drink tea, while America rebounds.
    Thank you

    August 11, 2011 at 3:19 pm |
  56. Alex in Bremerton, WA

    No, Jack. Hillary Clinton may be a much better negotiator than President Obama, but she never would have won. I voted for President Obama but I would have voted for McCain had Clinton won the nomination. (And hope and pray he didn't die in office!)

    August 11, 2011 at 3:20 pm |
  57. James Harrison

    Jack, I voted for Obama but am having a little bit of buyers remorse. As a Democrat, I am still waiting for Obama to do something Democratic. I do not understand why he is following Republican ideas like the Bush Tax Cuts that we know will do nothing to help the country. If Obama is going to lose the next election, I wish he would have at least be losing on Democratic principles. I don't believe Hillary would have backed down so easily to the Republicans. That's where experience would have helped and Hillary has a lot of White House experience.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:22 pm |
  58. Sam Martin in PA

    As much as I despise the Clintons, the did have a little guts. I have no confidence Obama will hold any lines. He never even brought up a real health system, violated his word by extending the Bush tax cuts, and most of us roll our eyes in disbelief when he says he will veto anything. Many people I know have started calling him Jimmy O as a reference to Jimmy Carter's Presidency is being repeated. He is a nice guy, just not much leadership is showing up.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  59. Nelson M. Powell Tampa, Fl

    In retrospect Hillary definitely would have been better choice than the man with a plan.
    All Obama seems to do is give speeches that mean absolutely nothing.
    As to Hillary I don't understand why she doesn't resign her position now and Challenge him for the Democrat nomination .
    Seems to me "an Independent voter" she would be a shoe in for the Dems.

    Nelson M. Powell
    Tampa, Fl.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:26 pm |
  60. Ken from Pinon Hills, California

    Sure Jack, if she subscribed to the way her husband Bill took care of business.
    Bill added 23 million jobs, watched a booming market, balanced the budget, and still had time for some hanky pank.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
  61. ivan

    I don't know but right about now I'm guessing she's thanking G-d All Mighty that she didn't win and wind up with the crap that Bush left behind!

    August 11, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
  62. Steve, Clifton, VA

    Timing is everything Jack, and it was not time for Hillary back in 2008. It could have been a time for Bill Clinton but not Hillary. Because the country is now ready for a "take no prisoners and take no names" mind set, Hillary's time may have arrived.....

    August 11, 2011 at 3:29 pm |
  63. bob z fr ,pa.

    any thing would be better than obama

    August 11, 2011 at 3:34 pm |
  64. Randy

    Simply put, "Yes", she is more than a speech maker. Obama is better suited to selling Sham-Wow's......

    August 11, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
  65. Jeff in Bishop, Georgia

    Mr. Cafferty, Jimmy Carter would have been a better choice at this point. Since he only served 1 term previously, he could've thrown his hat in the ring.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:37 pm |
  66. Dan

    absolutely not.
    I believe she would have been worse, if that is possible.
    Obama is doing good for those that are rewarding him, that is too bad for the taxpayers.

    All things are possible with patience and tenacity, Dan
    Western North Carolina.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:38 pm |
  67. Regina Sullivan

    I believe any President who followed Geo. W Bush would have had to deal with this economy. I don't know what Pres. Obama could have done differently and if anyone has a quick fix please step foreward.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:41 pm |
  68. Ken in Victoria BC

    My answer is that there is two election for President. First election is between two GOP people and Two Democrats. After one month,the final vote between the two winners for each party plus all the third party want a bees. Double the fun.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:42 pm |
  69. Clara, NM

    Where is Hillary, Jack?

    August 11, 2011 at 3:42 pm |
  70. FireTheTeaParty

    No, Obama is the better executive, she is the better diplomat. So they are both where they should be. The problem is not Obama or Hillary, it's the bickering in congress.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:49 pm |
  71. Mary Steele Yorktown VA

    Bush would have been a better choice, and that coming from me says a lot of about how bad Obama is because I cannot stand Bush and think he should have been impeached and put in jail too!!

    August 11, 2011 at 3:50 pm |
  72. Pat (Missouri)

    I was a Hillary supporter early on but I changed my mind after listening to her very closely. I still like her and support her but I am more impressed with O'bama as time goes by. He is deliberate and calm and intelligent. He doesn't "snap" except strategically I think he is guiding us through these difficult times better than any other candidate could have. I believe the media blows with the wind and hates him one day then loves him the next so he doesn't pay much attention. I think he does his best to keep all Americans informed of what he is doing and why and this leaves him open to a lot of criticism but I admire him for continuing to try to tell us and then doing it.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:50 pm |
  73. Curtis in Philadelphia

    I don't know Jack, we complain about two parties creating gridlock in Washington, what would happen if two families: the Clintons and Bush's alternated the White House for over twenty-some years. I don't know, but I don't thinkl that would be good either. Don't forget, hindsight is always 20/20.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:50 pm |
  74. Jamie in St. Louis

    I don't know. Their resumes are so similar. You have a guy that had no experience running anything, was a community organizer, and refused to take stands on any divisive issue by constantly voting present while in the Illinois Senate. How much time did he actually serve in the US Senate before he started running for President? Maybe a couple of months. What was his major accomplishment there? Beats me. The guy had no experience and has proven it through his incompetence. The only thing he had going for him was his charisma and the ability to put on a good show. For that reason, I call him the first "American Idol" President. He got voted in by people that jumped on the hype train and were to busy watching American Idol to actually educate themselves on his qualifications. I don't know if Hillary or McCain would have been a better President but there is absolutely no doubt that both were more qualified.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:50 pm |
  75. Tom from Nebr.

    I guess you'd have to ask the GOP about that Jack. Would they have been as single minded making Hillary a 1 term president as thy have been for Obama? They seem to care for nothing else. Would it be as bad in their eyes to have a woman in power as it is to have a black man in power? I'd love to know the answer. The single worst thing about this congress is that it strives to make our country fail because of dislike, no let me rephrase that, the H8 of the man in the WH. If the country fails then this president fails, or at least that's how they see it. They could be right. They have certainly expended enough energy in making it happen to the detriment of the country and its people.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:52 pm |
  76. Nasiru Suwaid

    It seems with the celebrated leadership deficiency of Obama presidency, the momentary fright when the situation requires resolve. At least a Hillary Clinton presidency, with the added impetus of Bill, would never be found wanting in toughness.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:52 pm |
  77. Rosemary

    No Jack, the sole reason the Democrats elected Obama over Hillary was because they feared she would side with the Republicans just as Bill Clinton did when he was President!

    August 11, 2011 at 3:53 pm |
  78. Noel Sivertson


    I think Obama should announce he is not running and let sme other Democrat, preferably Hillary Clinton, get the nomination.

    It would destroy the Republicans. They have only one single issue, get rid of Obama. Without an Obama to run against they are in a canoe without a paddle.

    New Mexico

    August 11, 2011 at 3:53 pm |
  79. Reggie

    Jack, you don't have to ask that question a second time. She is far superior to what Obama has in experience. But America lost out when the democrats decided that they wanted to make history making a black man their nominee. The media picked up on it and crucified Hillary when we all knew that she was the more qualified candidate. America is now paying for this "making history" because we are far worse off than we were in 2008. The democrats made their biggest mistake ever by allowing this to happen and we are all suffering for it. I hope we have learnt our lesson here and the american voters have to give Obama his walking papers in 2012 if we want to have a prosperous country again.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:53 pm |
  80. dan in capitola

    I doubt it, Jack. If there's anyone the right has demonized more than Obama, it's the Clintons.
    She'd be fighting the same uphill fight against incoherent rage that Obama faces, plus she'd be continually defending decisions made in the first Clinton White House.


    August 11, 2011 at 3:54 pm |
  81. Mel - Houston

    In hindsight she would have probably been a tougher negotiator than Obama. However, regardless of the democrat in the office they would have received the same negativity from the right. We all know by now that no democrat is qualified to be President of the United State. Hillary Clinton has learned so much from being Secretary of State and has given the office a womans touch while gaining world wide respect from the nations of the world. If she choose to run for office in 2016 she will be a formidable cadidate.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:57 pm |
  82. Tina Tx

    Hillary would have been more of a pit bull and not a poodle on working with the Republicans and they would not be pulling this nonsense they have been doing. She would have bit and not let go of many behinds in D. C and they would have gotten the message to quit pussy footing around and get the job done.

    August 11, 2011 at 3:58 pm |
  83. Lauri L., Baltimore MD

    Maybe, but it's too late to go there now. Anyone out there thinking of running a Primary challenge to Obama? If so, I'd be interested in hearing from you...except if you're Ralph Nader.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:00 pm |
  84. Larry in Omaha

    I think whoever was elected, GOP or Dem, would have had a problem. I think the economy was in really poor shape, and nothing was going to fix it overnight. I don't think Hillary could have done any better. McCain would have been much worse. In my opinion, the economy has done a little better than I expected, but I still think it is going to take 10 years to recover, unless Business starts spending the Trillions of dollars they are hoarding.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:02 pm |
  85. Gary H. Boyd

    Hind sight is always 20/20 Jack and, considering the mess this country is in today, Clinton couldn't have done any worse and, since she's got the insight of "Slick Willy", probably better. Yes, I would say Hillary Clinton would have been a better choice for Democrats than Barack Hussein Obama, hands down.

    Gary in Scottsdale, Arizona

    August 11, 2011 at 4:04 pm |
  86. Ken in Portland, Oregon

    Hindsight is 20/20 Jack, and in this case I believe Hillary would have been tougher with the radical Republicans. After the Healthcare battle Obama should have realized that the GOP wasn't going to behave "reasonably" and use his bully pulpit to expose the fallacies the GOP is promoting. Instead he gives away too much and rules out things he should leave on the table. He is not the leader he made himself out to be during the campaign

    August 11, 2011 at 4:07 pm |
  87. Jessica

    It may be that Hillary Clinton would have been the better choice, but without a Congress that's willing to work together it doesn't matter who our president is, we'll still have economical problems.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
  88. kelly

    Oh please Jack! Do you really think the Republicans would have given any more respect to a woman then they are a black man!! Sorry Jack but their hatred for this President is based on falsehoods and lies but most of us can clearly see the elephant in the room and the only difference in Hillary winning would have been a female elephant! The repulicans cannot take responsibility for the mess they made and it doesn't really matter who is in the White House because they will never man up to fix the problems with compromise!!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:11 pm |
  89. Dave, Orlando, FL

    Yes, hindsight is so clear. I remember 2008 and how much hope we had, how relieved we all felt that “our long national nightmare was over,” only to come slowly to the realization that we had inadvertently reelected an impostor and an incompetent to serve Bush’s third term.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:11 pm |
  90. Mitoosense Fort Lauderdale, Florida

    If I could withdraw my vote I'd vote for Ron Paul

    August 11, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
  91. fayes

    Jack, you just can seem to give this up. Hillary, while she has done a good job as Secretary of State, did not run a good campaign. She is still trying to pay off her campaign debts. Hillary does not make any independent decisions she follow the script. The answer is no, The people voted and their voice was strong.


    August 11, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
  92. FireTheTeaParty

    No, Obama is the better executive, Hillary the better diplomat. So they are both where they should be. The problem is not Obama or Hillary, it's the bickering in congress.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
  93. david

    she has attended the bilderberg meetings as well, so no.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:16 pm |
  94. Mr. D

    Obama is too much of a lightning rod. We really didn't know what we were getting when he was elected. Hillary, on the other hand, is a better known quantity. She would have been a "better" choice. But I do not know if this country is capable of electing a "better" choice, especially if it's a woman.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:16 pm |
  95. Jerry; Johns Creek, GA

    NO, Hillary Clinton would have been a horrible choice for the Democrats. At least now the Republicans have a shot at the oval office, if they can get their act together.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:17 pm |
  96. david

    you know, bilderberg, the group of people who you dont report on. i find it hilarious that major politicians like hillary clinton, tim geithner, ben bernanke and rick perry go to bilderberg, thereby violating the logan act, and the fine journalists at cnn refuse to report on it. and now i will await my comment to be moderated...

    August 11, 2011 at 4:19 pm |
  97. Pete in Florida

    Hillary certainly would have been a better choice in 2008.....and would be a FAR better choice for 2012. Obama has let Republicans bluff and bully him nonstop. They've made it clear from the get-go that their top two priorities are to deny Obama a second term and prevent the Dems from passing any meaningful legislation, yet Obama doesn't have the smarts or the guts to publicly call them on it. I voted for him, but Obama has proven himself way too weak, way to disconnected, way too politically inept to be given a second term. RUN, Hillary, RUN!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
  98. Kent - Iowa City, Iowa

    Hillary Clinton would have had more political backbone, but in the end nothing would have changed. The TEA Party would still be out to kill Medicare and Social Security and adamantly refusing tax increases for the wealthiest 3% of the country that pay less taxes than the people that work for them.

    This is not to mention that along with Hillary Clinton's political fierceness, she also come off as less likeable that Obama. Congress would just be less likely to work with her, not that they are throwing Obama any bones either.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
  99. Slim

    Hillary Clinton is astounding as Secretary of State. No Ben Franklin or Winston Churchill, but astounding.

    She is better as Secretary of State than as President. In all honesty, Hillary was the power behind the throne.

    Travel Gate? The carefully constructed rogs, docs, and admissions for President Clinton's impeachment?

    If Shakespeare wrote Julius Caesar today...

    He is a great observer and he looks
    Quite through the deeds of men

    Such men as he be never at heart's ease
    Whiles they behold a greater than themselves,
    And therefore are they very dangerous.....

    Caesar would not have been concerned about young Cassius.

    Thus Julius Obama chose Joe Biden. True Joe Biden does not fit the VP of Caesar's description:

    Let me have men about me that are fat;
    Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights:

    Still....Joe Biden is Vice President, not Hillary Clinton.


    August 11, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  100. Frances Georgia

    I think she would have been a stronger leader. I chose Obama, but have been disappointed. If I could do it over what what I know now, would vote for Hillary in the primary.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
  101. Terry in Virginia

    YES! YES! YES! I'm an Independent who votes for the candidate and not for the party or platform. The GOP has nothing but self-serving extremists and hypocrites running so far and Mr. Obama has proven himself to be an ineffectual leader. I voted for her in the primary and I'll gladly write in "Hillary Clinton" for President in 2012.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
  102. Donald in New Mexico

    We"ll never know Jack. I'm still pulling for our President. I wish he had more help from Congress. Hillary Clinton is doing a very hard job, very well. She needs to stay on task for all of our sake. She will make a great president in 2016. Hopefully she is up to all the stress. The OBL Sit.Rm. photo shows how hard all these great leaders work for us. Congress should work as hard on JOBS!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
  103. David from Herndon, VA

    As much as it pains me to say it, yes. Hillary had all sorts of problems, but I don't think she would have capitulated to the GOP like Obama has on every single issue.

    We all know the right wingers have gone off the reservation, but Obama's greatest failing is his insistence on starting negotiations in the middle. If you start with single-payer, then the public option IS the compromise. If you start with public option, you get this garbage that we passed.

    Hillary would have done better with that.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:30 pm |
  104. Jan From DE

    We will never know. One way or the other, it is what it is. I just hope Hillary is chosen for VP and that she will take it. Biden has done a great job but would be a terrific Sec. of State too. I think the switch
    would make a big difference and save Obama's reputation. Then, maybe he could put Bill Clinton as Sec. of Treasury too. Wahoo.....this country would be great again !!!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  105. Wm in PA

    Y E S.

    But, she may choose not to run in '12.

    Maybe we should rehabilitate Tricky Dick one more time. Being dead does not have to hamper his re-re-election. Being dead has done wonders for M Jackson's income and Elvis' too. Many stars make more dead than alive. Either of his daughters would gladly fill in for him on an interim basis.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
  106. Ralph Spyer

    With Congress and the President on vacation this month the economy will inprove.Hillary Clintion would have been a better choice because she has a larger set of balls than Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  107. wayne, va beach, va

    Hogan's goat would have been a better choice then Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  108. Pete from Georgia

    At this point, let's face it, Pee Wee Herman would have been a better choice.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
  109. John from San Diego

    Hilary would be yoked to the same economic and unemployment issues that Barack is now. If John McCain had won then he would suffer the same. The guy in the White House really isn't in charge. Wall Street and the media run the sentiment of the people and turmoil is profitable to them.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:37 pm |
  110. Jo

    Who said that? Hillary would have lost in the general election as soon as Bill got out of hand again. Really the generic GOP candidate, but a name to it and you will see the numbers go up. Are like new at this politics stuff? Also, where the is the fake outrage for the stock market going up like you had on Monday?

    August 11, 2011 at 4:43 pm |
  111. K. Promislow

    Yes, I have long regretted that I never got to vote for Hillary,
    being from Michigan,we did not even get a primary that year!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:43 pm |
  112. Pat, Costa Mesa, CA

    Yes Jack, Hillary would have been a much better choice. Obama is just too weak to be effective and has let the Republicans run all over him.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  113. Harold, Phoenix,AZ.

    no, the process picks a winner. there are no guarantees.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  114. Ann from Charleston SC

    This question is unanswerable and you know it. She may have handled the Tea Party better, maybe not. We will never know. Had she been elected president, she would have had low points just as Obama is having one now. If you want to count Obama out at this point, be my guest. I'm waiting to see what happens between now and November of 2012 myself.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  115. Zeta411

    Hillary would have been a better candidate any day.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  116. Dennis north carolina

    I disagree wit every thing that you said. the clintons could not get health care buy Obama did!!!!!!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  117. Alex in Toronto

    Jack, what's the point of stirring the pot just for the sake of asking the question?! Hind-sight is 20-20, no-one can accurately answer how Hillary Clinton would've faired in the job had she gotten elected, so what's the point of diverting the attention from real issues? Let's move forward by focusing on Democrats' chances and candidates for 2012, otherwise the country will go to hell in a handbasket faster than Bachmann can spit out another sensationalistic, polarizing slogan.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  118. Ron

    Do you have a source of the notion that people like me have buyer's remorse, Jack, or are you just stirring the pot?

    I'm not happy about a lot Obama's done, but with the Republicans never accepting any Democrat as a legitimate president, it becomes near impossible for any Democratic president to accomplish much of anything.

    Hillary likely would have fared no better.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
  119. Felix Giordano

    Yes, Hillary would have done a better job at focusing the Nation and the Congress on our country's problems. However, she would not have beaten John McCain in the last election because of the "Clinton Factor" among independents and to have Palin within a heartbeat of the presidency would have been worse than Obama as president.

    Felix Giordano
    Ashford, CT

    August 11, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
  120. P.H.Mani

    Hillary would be certainly a better choice. Women, in general, manage the finances better. She would have worked with the republicans and avoided this brinkmanship.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  121. wilson

    Unless Obama is willing to step aside and let Hillary run in the next election, this whole conversation is rather pointless. However, it would be interesting to see if Obama throws himself on the sword and bows out gracefully. You know, for the good of the party? That might give someone like Hillary an opportunity to get in there. I would vote for her for sure. The problem is, there are many (including Obama himself) that think he is a no-brainer for 2012. That's probably not going to happen unless the american public lay down their pitchforks.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  122. Rob H

    No she would not have been a better choice enough said!!!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  123. jl

    Hilary Clinton would have suffered through the same impasse or worse. Republicans hate her husband and dislike her as well. All efforts would be a rehash of Monica in an attempt to keep her from doing the job.
    Please make an feeble attempt at fairness – what would McCain and Palin be doing right now?

    August 11, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  124. Daniel Copher

    Obama can still make his mark in history by choosing to be a one term president. He can then make crucial, unpopular leadership decisions without fear of any political ramifications. Hillary in the White House is our hope for the future...still.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  125. Jerry Ufnal

    I'm one of the Dems with buyers remorse. I thought Obama would bring an end to the acrimony between Repubs and the Clintons. It is clear now that whichever Dem is elected, there will be acrimony from the party of no. So we might as well have a tough cookie in office. Hillary, please run and bring that balance that Obama yearns for but can't deliver.

    Disappointed in Phoenix.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  126. Stacy

    Jack, eighteen million of us were not wrong. It would have been so much better to have had the "pant suit" rather than the empty suit.

    Stacy in Dacula, Ga

    August 11, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  127. Kathy Heckman

    I say put Hillary on the ballot. I wrote her name in on mine the last election! Obama is way to conservative and has no ability to stand up to the Republicans and Tea Party members of the Senate and House. We need a leader and it is Hillary.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  128. bal

    Told you so, Hillary is the ONE. Talk is cheap and so is Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
  129. Toni

    I still wonder how he won the primary. I was completly disturbed by that. I do not know anyone that voted for him in the primary here in California. I as impressed at first but his lack of willingness to fight back for progressive values has caused my support to wane drastically. Some of my friends and I have even said she should try to run against him, but we realize that is impossible! I want to be proud of him but he really needs to for lack of a better phrase "grow a pair"!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
  130. Bob

    We don't ever really get good choices. Our governmental and political system guarantees that condidates will be wealthy and connected to the small group of power brokers who actually run the country, probably not terribly intelligent, generally completely scientifically and technically illiterate – at a time when science and technology are the dominant intellectual and creative forces in uman civilization. I can't think of any election in which I wasn't voting for the lesser of two or more poor choices.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
  131. Rebecca Thompson

    Remeber when Hillary made the comments she was called racist, even by Chris Matthews. No one wanted to hear that even though then canidate Obama was very carismatic, he was short on experience. The Democrats only wanted someone different from Pres. Bush. Now they say Where is the leadership? Why isn't he passionate? Pres. Bush was passionate and they didn't like that, remember? They thought they were getting a tiger...it turned out to be paper!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  132. E.C. Hernandez


    Your question I assume is a" no answer needed question"

    Of course the country, democrats and the world would have been better off with Hillary! I am a democrat and I can say we were wrong with OBAMA, we were wrong and now we are paying the price, the real question is...Will Democrats stand by their man? The answer is NO, if nothing changes between now and election time wer WILL NOT stand by our man, we will want Hillary to stand with us. Another intresting question is WHY has OBAMA NOT used hillary more, why is she not out in front of cameras. why doesnt he use her more...O thats right he made her secretaery of state to make sure she was out of the control most of the time.( hes afraid she will pick up the 3am call when the phone rings)..

    E.C.- From Manassas Virginia

    August 11, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  133. Tom

    The Democratic Party had its best candidate in my lifetime (Hillary Clinton) and the far left wing of the party once again drove the train off the track. It sickens me to think of the opportunity we lost by sending that spineless doormat Obama to the White House.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  134. Pat Vaughn

    Mrs. Clinton would be treated about the same as Obama is today. She would be the first woman President and the "little lady" would be under scrutiny and be undermined by the Republican Party, wanting her to be a one term President also. Period.

    Pat Vaughn Crossville, TN

    August 11, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  135. D Clarke

    President Obama exibited the same squishyness during the primary campaign, but the rose-colored glasses that his supporters viewed him through kept them from seeing this. Hilary is tough as nails, and politically brilliant. She was torpedoed by the progressive media who saw Obama as some kind of miracle candidate and who portrayed Hilary as strident. She was the better candidate then, and she's the better candidate for 2012 now.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  136. Anna Thumim

    Yes! She would have been a much better choice not only for the Democrats but for the country as a whole. She is a more pragmatic leader without naivite shown by this administration over and over again. David Gergen in his recent opinion called for a "Churchill" like leader for the US. I think Hilary fits that profile better then anybody else, regardless of the party affiliation.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  137. Kate Hanni

    Hillary has the strength, authority and determination to fix our economy, and that's exactly why she didn't win the primary. No woman as powerful and savvy as Hillary can pull out the male vote in this country. A hurdle I hope we can overcome for the sake of our country, and our party!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  138. Brian, NJ

    many will say yes but what has Obama done that she wouldn't have? Obamacare is really Hillarycare. He campaigned for a government option to compete with private insurers and she called for the mandate, which is what we have.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  139. fran

    Hillary is exactly who we needed. The Dems threw away the most qualified candidate they had. Too late now. Whoever the Republicans nominate, I'm sure will win. Say what you want about President Bush Jr. like him, or hate him, he said what he wanted and did it. President Obama is much too elusive and definitely does not inspire confidence in what he is saying.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  140. Viki Soady

    If Pres. Obama really cared for this country, he would willingly and proudly hand the mantel of leadership to the ONE AMERICAN who can get us out of all theses messes – HILLARY CLINTON. If he loves his country as much as he says he does, he should let us have a President who is tough enough to flatten the T-vangelists and obstinate Republicans with one blow. Obama is just another politician. Hillary is also just a politician, but one with the talents needed to be a politician. She processes faster, smarter, and shoots straight and fast. She derives from the working class of middle America and it is no suprise that she and her spouse are the most admired people in the world. I am a lifelong, yellow dog democrat!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  141. Mary Miles

    There was no question then; no question now – America got it wrong – woefully wrong.

    Do Americans want to be inspired by sparkling rhetoric or led by a strong, decisive individual with good, strong instincts.

    Such a waste, such a shame.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:52 pm |

    At this stage of the game, of course she would have. Hell, Mickey Mouse would have been a better Democrat. I sincerely don't know how Obama is going to bow out gracefully.
    What ever happen to the days when true patriotism was prevalent in Washington DC?

    August 11, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  143. Chris

    It's not the president we have to worry about, it's congress. I believe we should get rid of the electoral college and have all the people vote and whoever has the more votes win. But again that's "politics". My personal belief, is, its rigged. I figure congress chose's who they think would be the best president and boom it happens. This country is corrupt (coming from a united states enlisted personnel).

    August 11, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  144. ray

    I was an "anyone but Clinton" zealot. I was wrong. Barack Obama is the worst thing to happen to America since the Civil War. Mo Howard would have been a better choice.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
  145. Marcus

    Hindsight is not 20/20 in this case. Secretary Clinton's ability in office is still an unknown just as much as anyone else would be. The question that I keep asking is "What should the President do?" People keep talking about he is not showing leadership. Again, "What should the President do?" I am not saying there aren't places that I wish he had done more, but don't just throw out these broad statements without giving concrete examples of what could have been done. Not just what you wish he could have done, but REALLY do in a given situation.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
  146. Jerry5555

    Of course she would have been a better president – Obama was a learn on the job president with absolutely no experience. It's like asking a person with no tech experience to be Microsoft's new CEO and his/her only explaination for why he/she will be a good CEO is because they will bring change... That's how this joke of a president won the election. Hillary was experienced, is tough and extremely smart. Obama is just a good speaker.

    I never, ever, ever thought I would say this, but even Bush is better than this guy.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  147. Marcus Trumble

    As a conservative Republican, my feelings towards Hillary were pretty negative before the 2008 election.

    But I really grew fond of her and was dissapointed that she was not made the nominee, and she was not even made VP.

    I definately would have voted for her.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  148. BIll in VA

    Hillary Clinton would have been a better choice for all of us, not just Democrats. But then so would have John Edwards (before the unpleasantries), Bill Richardson, Evan Bayh, Tom Vilsak, Dennis Kucinich (OK – maybe not Kucinich) and yes, even Joe Biden.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  149. Benjamin Carter in D.C.

    It's easier to say 'what if' than to understand the reality. Hillary's resume includes her failure as First Lady to spearhead health care reform in the 90's, selling out to private money. Obama in the meantime did it in his first two years as President. I'm not as happy with Obama as I was hoping I would be when he was elected, but it's grass-is-greener syndrome to think Hillary would've been any better.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  150. AC

    No one said the road going forward would be easy. My vote in 2012 goes to President Obama

    August 11, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  151. Nancy

    Hummelstown, Pa. I am a huge supporter of Hiliary Clinton and have been since her husband ran for President I was very disappointed that she did not get the nod from the Democratic Party in 2008. I feel had she been elected, she would have been much more the decisive decision maker as opposed to the mediator that Barack Obama has played out to be. I for one hope that she reconsiders her role in politics in the future.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  152. Nick K

    In my opinion, it was obvious that Clinton was the better candidate. Unfortunately, Democrats in the primaries went the flashy, novel candidate (Obama). Hillary certainly learned some lessons from Bill when he was able to balance the budget. She would have fared much better than Obama in fixing out debt and economic crises. As far as one-term presidents, I think Clinton, Obama, or McCain would be one-term presidents because Americans would be too impatient with the slow recovery that the Bush administration put us in.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  153. Ian from MN

    Hilary would not have gotten health care done, and everyone would hate her as much or more so than Obama. Bill Clinton got chastised by the left for looking week and working with republicans, and he won in a landslide.

    The only thing you could argue might be better with hillary is I don't think Republicans and especially the Tea Party would be as obstructionist and as hateful to a woman president as they have been to a Black Man. But you don't pick your candidate based on who your opposition might be less bigoted towards.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  154. Diane Gissell

    I think Hillary would have been a great choice!

    August 11, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  155. David Lerner


    No need for a long winded story from me. YOU HIT THE NAIL RIGHT ON THE HEAD !!!!!!

    In your blog, you said, "During the 2008 campaign, Hillary Clinton claimed that although then-candidate Obama might be able to inspire the masses, she was the one who had the experience to get the job done."

    That is what I told everyone I knew in 2008, and I still tell people that !!!!!

    All I can say is this country was a better place before Obama and of course "W".......

    David Lerner, Glen Allen, VA

    August 11, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  156. rehman

    Yes, she has strong nerves and knows how to get the job done. She still can be a better President than Obama. Republicans have not provided enough space for Obama. He could have done great things for the country and all American people but unfortunately his hands were tied.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  157. Ben in LA

    Hillary is a great Secretary of State. Obama is a great President. Leave it at that.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  158. Lois, Ontario, Canada

    No!!! Hilary Clinton would not have been a better choice than Obama. When we were in TX last winter, I read in the U.S.A. To-day paper that the Americans expects too much from their President.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  159. Andrey

    I am Republican who immigrated to US and quickly became Democrat before changing parties. Take it from an immigrant.
    The closer is US President to the core of what this country always was about, the more success we all we see. Hillary is closer to traditional American values than President Obama.
    She is still left wing Democrat, but much closer to Americans than Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  160. Randy from East Point, GA

    Yes, Hillary would have been a better choice. But don't throw Obama under the bus just yet. He was served a giant pile of crap from W and pulled us out of it the best he could, all the while with rabid wolves chewing at his ankles. And Jack, go get some anti-depressants. They work.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  161. Gustavo

    Yes, I now truly believe Hillary would have made a better President. With her past experience dealing with Republicans she already knows what Barack Obama still have not figured out. The Republican Party does not like you and will not work with you. She would have proceeded with business not counting on them and not trying to have Koombaya moments with Republicans. She has more b***s than most of them in the Democratic Party. I wish now I had voted for her instead.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  162. David

    What type of silly rhetorical question is this Jack? I wish I had bbq for dinner last night but I didn’t. We elected Obama and we need to stay the course. Everyone has a weakness. The only issue I had with this president is that he is always trying to compromise and please the people that will never vote for him any way even if their life depends on it. Give him a break he can’t please everyone, even Jesus disciples betrayed him.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  163. Lynne Cadenhead

    For heavens sake, she's doing a good job now and it's harder than ever before. Most opposers are afraid of her too strong and way too smart. I believe they are more comfortable with a Sarah Palin type. God forbid. I have a sticker on my car that reads I MISS BILL! Not many people care now about his sex life. They just know that he made the country better and he was human. Get Hillary get the war room back and get going. Come to think of it the war room could benefit Obama. What has he got to lose? I say this and I am A Democrat . My father said that the Republicans were for the rich and never forget it and the Democrats are for middle America. Bill and Hillary Clinton are the American dream come true. The proof that anyone can do it with hard work and an education and CARING. No silver spoon kids they.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  164. Herman Portland OR

    Yes, I am not a big fan of her public speaking but she very well qualified and would have been good for our country. If she ever needed an second opinion she could consult with Bill. As presented senator Obama was sold as a qualified candidate and Democrats and the American people made the wrong decision at the time. President Obama ran with many promises and needed to change the path when the economy inherited continued to decline. By sticking with the liberal policies the economy has continued to decline.

    August 11, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  165. Joe from Arlington

    Well Bill Clinton was the last president to balance the budget and start to pay down the US debt while keeping the stock market happy. The Clinton administration also developed a post cold war approach to foreign intervention such as the Balkans without wasting $4 trillion dollars. In retrospect, I think Hillary Clinton could have shaped a new world view vs the Bush view that Obama has followed. It may be time for Obama to think about another job.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
  166. Holvis

    Absolutely, Hillary would have been the right choice. President Obama was a mirage in the middle of the desert...and stil is. He has Have not been able to do anything and when he finally does something, it is half way...look at the health care bill, the recently debt deal, the wall street bill?...just a mirage.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
  167. Jerry

    This in essence is crying over spilt milk.
    San Mateo, CA

    August 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  168. Nedward

    Hillary would have been better - she has the cojones, Obama has proven that he doesn't!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  169. Kassier

    There is no doubt Hillary would have been a better choice. She has the requisite skills, these include among many others, ability to negotiate, the ability to garner respect even from her most vocal critics. She would have also been a much better selection for VP. One would think that with the vast experience Biden has, he would have been able call on old colleagues on the other side in both the HoR and the Senate and get support needed to carry out the President's goals. The two of them (Biden and Obama) are a major source of disappointment.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  170. NYCitizen

    About a year and a half ago, I said Hillary would have been a better President. I don't need to say "I Told You So." And nobody wanted to listen to me, either personally or on the various blogs, when Hillary was running for President that she would be the better choice. Obama is an orator, not a leader and his "speech-a-fying" has become weak and ineffectual, and he comes across small. You can't even say that the killing of OBL is an achievement under Obama's belt because that would have happend no matter who would be President by the time we found OBL. Makes me wonder if Obamacare would get entirely or partially repealed because of economic crisis and we really can't afford Obama care now. But you can seriously count on a Republican President next election!!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  171. appcomplain

    Yeah. Sure thing jack, I would definitely vote for her. I've always been a supporter of the clintons. Hillary has the experience, has contacts and knows washington on a more personal level. Moreover, she can always consult her husband for his input.

    It is a sad, harsh and pitiful reality that "Rhetoric buys presidency and not Qualifications".

    August 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  172. pooch

    Here’s my question to you: Would Hillary Clinton have been a better choice for the Democrats?


    (well, you didn't say discuss, or expound upon.)

    August 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  173. Sibyl

    I always was a Clinton supporter and would support her again. She is smart, savvy about Washington and can be tough as nails. Obama is smart – that's not enough, sadly. His inexperience has caught up with him and the people are paying for it.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  174. Anyone But Obama

    Yes, Jack, anyone but Obama. At least she has experience.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  175. Alan

    She might not have won the general election in 2008, so from a retrospective standpoint, she would not have been a better choice. I supported Obama in the 2008 primaries.

    Now, however, I think Hillary Clinton should be the candidate in 2012. I really like Obama, but he doesn't seem to be up to the incredible political challenges he now faces.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  176. Kelley

    I think so – I certainly voted for Hillary in the primary. She had, and still has, the experience, intelligence, and backbone. -from Frederick, MD

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  177. BC

    Yes of course, we are sorry Hillary, we fell for a smooth talker, is it too late for you to run in 2012!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  178. Joe in Arizona

    Easy answer on this one. YES!!!!!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  179. Paul Cooper

    The idea that Hillary Clinton would have been better at confronting the tea party movement is stupid. Hillary Clinton wold never have let it get to this point. She's smart enough to understand that you don't force that much spending on the nation on straight party-line votes and then blame the other side when you don't get any results from your binge. She understands that at some point you simply must take responsibility for the office you hold and stop blaming your predecessor. I would bet she even warned them that ramming something like ObamaCare down the country's collective throat was the political equivalent of cutting your own.

    I've never been a fan, but Hillary is without a doubt far smarter than Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  180. Kelley

    The fact is that no person would have a great or even good rating at this trying time. There is no easy answer for our current economic situation. I think Hillary Clinton is probably glad she didn't win at this point. I think that congress actions or lack of actions has created an even more uncertain atmosphere in a time of much uncertainty and unwillingness to invest and create jobs. America is a leader and how we have carried on over the last months or so has had a great impact in how other countries look at us. Obama probably wanted to say some harsh things to this congress but would it of made the siltuation any different. I don't think so. Congresssmen, like the one who represents my state, have personal objectives and has ruined Americas reputation. They simply don't care and I hope the voters wake up when election time comes around......I also think that if Obama wasn't Obama and hadn't won as he did he wouldn't be getting disrepected. No matter what your political affiliation the President should be respected no matter what...

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  181. ricky sotelo

    hillary is tthe better choice. she would been a better president too. she has been doing good things she is tougher then obama and others and when she talks folks listen. i think she has what it takes to be the leader of the country. maybe one day she will be the president .

    san diego baby!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  182. Johnnyringo

    If they had gone with Hillary John McCain would have been the president!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  183. J Sullivan

    Of course Hillary Clinton would have been a better choice than Obama.

    Inexperienced Obama's on-the-job training has been painful and expensive for Americans. He should have been about jobs jobs jobs from day one, rather than letting his incompetent and emotional Democratic party elders set his agenda.

    Even today, he's weak and indecisive. Your country's debt is downgraded for the first time in the nation's history and you don't even publicly fire your treasury secretary? Are there no consequences?

    At least Hillary's opponents know that she's got convictions... and guts.

    JSull, Boston

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  184. stacie

    Hindsight is 20-20? More democrats voting in the primaries should have used a little foresight. Hillary Clinton was clearly the better choice – believed it when I voted for her in the primary and believe it to this day.
    Mill Valley, CA

    August 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  185. Jane Bowles

    Hillary Clinton has experience. This debacle about the debt ceiling would never have happened under her watch. She is a leader, Obama is not as is so painfully obvious.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  186. Scott Frock

    I live in Stratham, NH and work in corporate finance and treasury. I don't think it would have made much difference who the Democratic President was. It was clear from day one that despite the rocky economy after the 2008 meltdown, talks of bi-partisanship were lies on the part of Republicans. They have been against anything proposed by Democrats, even if they originally supported the same ideas in the past. Hillary may have been a little more successful, if only because the undercurrent of racism in the birther movement would have been absent.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  187. Joy Gayle

    Hillary over Obama any day of the week. She has the experience, the toughness, the smarts. He used to give a better speech, but not anymore.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  188. Bill

    1) Obama campaigned on change but is scared to implement too much change. Having been rocked by allegations of being too far out of the mainstream, he wants to be seen as centric. Allegations: he's a Muslim, Arab, not a born citizen, too black, too white, too liberal, Marxist, Hitler etc. etc.
    2) Obama seems to always on campaign mode, over exposed and talking too much instead of taking charge.
    3) People want a leader who can stand up to the bullies and show that he's on their side. Bill Clinton rocked in that. Bush was clearly on the other side. Obama inspires, but fails to act or talk tough.
    4) Bullies cannot be appeased, you have to stand up and fight. Politics is a blood sport and bipartisanhip is only an occassional means, not the ends.

    The nation voted for change, for a real leader. Instead, we have little noticeable change. Obama must lead or leave. Else, yes Hillary Clinton must lead.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  189. Lulu A.

    Yes, Hillary was definitely a better choice. She had more experience and was a more seasoned leader. I thought Obama would make a good president "someday" but Hillary would make a good one today. It's too bad that things went the way they did.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  190. Don in Las Vegas, Nevada

    The government structure has not changed much in 200 years, yet the world has changed immeasurably. We are using old tools, models, and attitudes to deal with a world that is changing fast. Obama might not have been the right choice, but to think that one person has the cure (or the poison) is antiquated in thought. The entire system seems to be outdated. Left or right wing aside, it would be nice to have a real leader in the office, like William Wallace or MLK.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  191. Alan in U.S.

    For the Democrats? Probably. For Republicans? No. For America? Too hard to say, definitively, even with 20/20 hindsight.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  192. Derek

    Davis, CA

    I was a staunch supporter of Hillary in 2008 throughout the entire primary battle she waged against Obama. It wasn't that I did not like Obama, I too was inspired by his words and his background as well as his promises of change. However, I saw Hillary as much more experienced and prepared to tackle the strenuous office of the presidency at the time. I definitely would have wanted Obama as a president, just not at the time. Flash-forward 3 years and I am even more confident in my original position. He just does not have the Washington edge that comes with being in the the political arena for decades. That LBJ quality of congressional compromise or FDR sense of assurance that came seemingly naturally. Obama struggles to get anything done simply because he does not stand firm and charge against the Republicans. If he did that, he would get so much more done. It's that quality that great Democratic Presidents had and one that Hillary has. Buyers remorse is not what I would term Obama's ascension to the presidency, but I would have preferred Vice-President Obama and President Hillary Clinton without a doubt.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  193. jacthomann

    I believed then and now that Hillary was the best choice for the country. Obama never liked a one on one confrontation with the republicans and now lacks any pivotal point in his tenure- any time he stood up and fought for his ideals, principles and looks 'uninspirational'. Obama should hand iover the regin of the democratic party and the nomination to Hillary and for those who endorsed him in the beginning should be the ones to tell him that- he should go.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  194. Sam Ohio

    It isn't news to anyone that Obama lacks the skills to lead (in a time of crisis). It isn's a question of his knowledge, his dedication or his passion. He has all of the qualities necessary to be a presidential advisor but few of the qualities necessary to be President.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  195. Beverly - NYC


    Coulda, shoulda, woulda. I don't think Hillary and Bill's 3rd term would have been any better, the abuse currently heaped on Obama would have been the same or worst for Hilary. Not only would she have to contend with the Tea Party but all the good old boys who missed their chance to get her husband would focus their wrath on her.

    Our current President's main fault is believing his opponents were reasonable adults willing to do what's best for the country. The current crop of tea party hobbits aren't content to just cut their noses off, they are willing to cut their heads off .

    August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  196. Annie, Atlanta

    Not if she was aligned with her husband who gave us Free Trade Agreements and replacement of Glass Steagall with Gramm Bliley, that prompted the Wall Street driven theft and subsequent meltdown. Now if you said Elizabeth Warren, you might have something.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  197. Mike

    Each time Mr. Obama is in front of a camera and has the full attention of the media, I watch, wait patiently, looking for something to buy into. But, its just not there. Wonder why Mr. Obama's numbers continue to slide in a downward direction? Because he has lost his "hope and change" message that helped him get elected President. Just today, Mr. Obama stated that we Americans should take charge and push our congressional leaders to do the right thing. Hang on Mr. Obama, don't pin this mess on us. And, by the way, we will take charge on election day. You can count on that. Hillary Clinton, I believe would have used political intuition to confront the economic turmoil head on. Would it have made a difference? We'll never know. But maybe Americans would feel like there was someone in charge taking a leadership role. That would be nice these days.

    Mike – Hewitt, TX

    August 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  198. Trudy

    Yes on hindsight Hillary would have been a better president. At the time I felt she was polarising and Obama was a better candidate as he seemed to want to work more across the aisle. But as time has gone on he has not dealt with the overwhelmingly important issue of the unemployment. Unless he creates jobs, jobs, jobs people are not going to vote for him in 2012.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  199. sue

    Unfortunately, I am one who believed that at some point we would regret not having had Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee in 2008 and as President. I wished for the best for Barack Obama; however, the cracks in the armor came out when he started working the Healthcare program. Despite some highlights, here we are – in the dumps.
    I do not believe with the continuing set of Republicans in WDC we can ever expect a compromise or even fair play; they do not represent the interests of the American people. They are always on the opposite end of what Democrats want or envision just for the hell of it.
    Hillary lived through this while Bill Clinton was president; and she learned the rules of the game. She would have been tougher at getting a deal done that would not have mortgaged the US future.
    The economic problems we face have their roots in a failed financial system and a lack of leadership. We needed and need a whip, a liberal, a go-getter and a communicator. We needed Hillary to tell us, Americans, the story first, and then make sure the story came true.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  200. Tom Leykis

    I supported Hillary from the beginning. Obama tries, but his "unit" is considerably smaller than Hillary's.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  201. dems be dopes

    Zippy da chimp would have been a better choice.

    When the phone rings at 3:00 AM he will answer it but not have a clue on what to say or what to do.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  202. Jose Echevarria

    I voted for Obama and believed in his promise to change how Washington works. In hindsight, I was wrong. I should have known the better choice was the tougher politician with similar convictions to mine - Hilary Clinton. She already posseses the attributes of a skilled infighter who knows how to negotiate and achieve intelligent compromises to get people to side with her agenda. It may be asking for too much, but Obama should think about stepping aside for the stronger candidate. If not, I fear the Democrats will lose the White House, and the USA, to one of those crazy Republican presidential "hopefuls".

    JAE from Orlando, Florida

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  203. Marc

    Absolutely, and she should run against Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  204. Bill Reed

    I think Hillary Clinton is very intelligent and would have made a good president. But, let us not give up yet on President Obama. He is a far better choice to be fair and get things done for the American people than anyone the Republicans have so far offered up to run in 2012. He has made a great deal of sense by trying to come up with a compromise to our spending problem between the liberals and conservatives. I think some of the conservatives do not care to solve any problems. They just want to make President Obama look bad!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  205. erin bennett -- Brick, NJ

    Hillary would DEFINITELY have been a better choice for the Dems AND the EVERYONE ELSE in the USA! After the debacle of the DNC picking Obama, I joined the PUMA Party.... and am Still with Hill! Clinton 2012

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  206. Mel Perry

    The novelty is starting to wear off on having our first black president for many of the folks who couldn't see qualifications and experience should have determined the primary. America isn't angry at one particular party, they are angry at all politicians but having someone who is actually capable of leading would have lessened many of the problems we have today.

    Melinee Perry
    Lodge, Illinois

    August 11, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  207. Benjamin E. Bagaoisan

    Yes, actually I voted for Hillary Clinton in the primary, but since she lost I voted for John McCain in the Presidential. As of now I can't see anyone from the Republicans that can match him so I may be voting for him in the next election.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
  208. Straight Shooter

    She sure as hell could not have been worse. If you were paying attention in 2008 you knew that Obama was the most liberal seated senator by his own voting record. You knew his only experience was as a labor organizer. I did not vote for him and I think he's the worst presedent that our nation has had in modern times for his poor leadership, his failed initiatives and his vilification of people who actually pay taxes. I would not have voted for Hillary either. I disagree with her fundamental political phylosphy but I have a great deal of respect for her as an indiviual and feel that she has the best interests of the entire nation at heart. Hillary would also have found a way to lesson the over the top excess of the democratic majority. The backlash to witch gave rise to strong grass roots response in the form of the Tea Party.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
  209. CSnord

    Clinton would probably have been a better choice for the Democrats, but not any better for the country. She is a big program, tax and spend liberal, like Obama, which is the last thing we need right now. The government is too big as it is and it is time for a fiscal diet. Clinton would not be good under the circumstances.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
  210. Mike Lauth

    I believe that Hillary would have been a better pick for President. I am a republican, and if you would just look at the way Obama is handling the economy, compared to Bill Clinton, it’s a no brainer. Hillary has the best in the business when it comes to bouncing economic ideas off of late at night in bed, Bill.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
  211. marybeth, massachusetts


    I voted for Hillary in the primaries. I think she's tough as old Army boots and would make a good president.

    Whether the Republicans would have obstructed her as much as they have obstructed President Obama I do not know....I suspect that they would have still been the party of "no" and made their sole goal to make her a one-term president.

    But I also think that gender would have come into everything as an issue–just as racism has for President Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
  212. Ben Bope

    Of course Hillary would have been a better choice. I admire President Obama and I voted for him but he would have been better off, the Democrats would have been better off and the country would have been better off if we now had a second President Clinton.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
  213. sambo

    We don't need someone to fight the Tea Party or anyone else. We need someone who has the ability and leadership qualities(missing in this ameteur..Obama) to bring people together and not divide them

    August 11, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  214. gary from virginia

    The best choice would have been Bill Clinton if he could have run for president again. He knows exactly what needs to be done with the budget and the deficit although the Republicans "Tea Partiers" still would not like it. Actually it's the same things President Obama wanted in the first place.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  215. Paul P.

    Possibly yes. She certainly doesn't have any of the economic mess on her hands to deal with and she can also drag her husband around with her on campaign stops, highlighting his success with the country's purse strings and how she will do the same thing. I think Bill probably owes her a few favors anyways.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  216. john spencer

    even us repubicans nowwould rather have Hillary!!! It was the first time i voted for a democrat since the nixon years. try and find at age 56 when you havent worked i n 2 years and lost your house and savings.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  217. Gigi Oregon

    Yes, she would have...but if she would have won the Republicans would have sabotaged her as well so we wait... till after President Obama's vacation and then wait... for congress to have their five week vacation, then they can all come back and play government again. When government has been allowed to stack the deck against the people what choice do we have. It's time to not vote those out but time to vote in those government leaders who will demand term limits, no benefits or pensions. If you run on that ticket win and get it passed I'll vote for your second term..

    I didn't vote for President Obama but I will this time because I know who the Peoples enemy is. I'll say it again It's not the peoples health care that hurt the debt, It's the two plus wars Bush put on the Chinese credit card.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  218. Jim Tibbets

    Hell yes Hillary would have been a better choice, but more importantly she would have been the BEST choice out there to lead our great nation out of all the candidates who were running. She and Bill together would have our country back running on all eight cylinders as it were during Bills years as president!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  219. Matt

    Mr. Obama has been exactly the kind of right-wing Democratic president he said he would. His ineffectiveness is simply hiding what I believe are his true intentions with regard to being a corporatist. Hillary would have been a similar corporatist but wouldn't have put up with any crap, unlike Mr. Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:09 pm |
  220. Ken in NC

    I'm an Obama supporter that will have to hold my nose and vote for him again, however if Hillary was in the race, I would measure the drapes for her and help President Obama pack.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:09 pm |
  221. Roy McMahon

    Yes. Obama is a great public speaker and thats about it. Public speaking worked for the campain trail, but not working out for the actual job.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:09 pm |
  222. Jean Anderson

    At least Hillary has a backbone, more than I can say for Oama. I voted for President Obama, won't make that mistake again.

    Thanks for letting me vent.

    J. Anderson

    August 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  223. O.T.

    Anybody would have been better.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  224. Reuben

    Ofcourse! Are you kidding me! She is smarter than the whole Senate put together!! Wish she could run in 2012!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  225. steve

    no buyers remorse. no matter who was in the whitehouse, the repubs would've acted the same or worst. Jack, we made the right decision and we're sticking with him!...just because a few things aren't going as we'd hoped it should, doesn't mean you abandon the chief. Let's not catch any amnesia here...We all know why this isn't working....2 words Host-Takers which is another word for the GOPers!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  226. Jthompson

    It pains me to say so, but yes. However, a well trained beagle would be better in the job than Obama. No leadership skills whatsoever.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  227. KeithInTexas

    I don't think we need a President who "fights" for the progressive cause, but I certainly expected Obama to at least promote it. So disappointed in him that, yes, even I am wishing Hillary was in office. A loose canon on a pitching deck would have been better than one securely tied down that never fires a shot.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  228. AJ of OC

    Jack I voted for both of them in 2008. Hillary is a scrappy street fighter that will cut you down and you will say thank you. She survived the many battles and foibles of Bill, and learned from them.
    While in the Senate she was known as a compromiser and got things done for both New York and the Country. She is highly thought and respected both domestically and internationally.
    Hind sight is great and with that unique ability, probably would have been better at dealing with the many 3 AM phone calls that this administration has had to deal with. Clintonomics dug us out of the whole once, and probably could do it again..

    August 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  229. Sally from Fife Lake

    Hell yeah, Jack! She has more political savvy that Obama will ever have. The President seems to be long on words and short on action. It's obvious from the debt ceiling debacle that he can talk the talk but cannot walk the walk.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  230. Brian

    Bill, there is no doubt that Clinton would have been a better President. Americans shot themselves in the foot, trying to prove we are a post racial society.

    Clinton – while not a long timer in the Seante – still managed to sponsor and co-sponsor bills. She was a very active a participant in the process. Perhaps more than any other attribute, though, she has already taken plenty of shots from the GOP – across the bow and direct hits. She had / had no misconceptions about their obstructionist tendencies, and would not have wasted 2 years trying to prove that she could be the Great Assimilator, as Obama tried to do.

    As for Obama, I think he has actually tried to do precisely what he said he would. He wanted to try to govern through the reunification of the disparate parties. Unfortunately, he grossly underestimated the seal with which the GOP and the Tea Party would opposed everything and anything he had to say. When they started opposing a health care program that was essentially designed – years before – by Mitt Romney and / or Bob Dole, the writing should have been on the wall.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
  231. Dee in New Paris Ohio

    I think it was like this.

    The PEOPLE did not want a WOMAN president. They did not really want a black president, either, but at least Obama is a MAN.

    So, that tells us the pecking order in our country.

    Personally, I think that women and minorities need to rise up together and elect a LEADER.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
  232. Monie

    If a White Democrat was in office would the Tea Party even exist?

    August 11, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
  233. Mark, Oklahoma City

    Jack, A better question would be "What were the democrats smoking when they chose Obama over Hillary?"

    August 11, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
  234. Veronika Spahni

    We were 18 Million who thought Hillary would make a much better President; she has more experience, is more knowledgeable, shows much more strength, is tougher and does never talk out of both sides of her mouth.

    In today's situation though it doesn't even feel good to say "I told you".

    August 11, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
  235. Kyle

    Hillary Clinton would have run into different obstacles than Barrack Obama. There's no way to know how things would have turned out if Hillary had been elected. I wish she was President though, because I feel she could have better gotten us back onto at least the solid ground that Bill Clinton left behind when he left office. From there, we could better move forward.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
  236. Ken in Tennessee

    She would have been better at leading. After all, she has already led this country once for eight years. Obama couldn't lead a first grade class to the cafeteria. With that said, I'm not too sure anyone can fix this mess that the finest political system money DID buy has wrought on the American people. Free trade equals massive job losses, massive job losses equals less tax money coming into the coffers, tax cuts for those still paying taxes.......well, you get the drift. If the DNC & the GOP will siphon themselves away from special interests for the good of the American people and take time off from the re-election campaign fundraising, perhaps they can stop the coming depression by working together. If not, neither FDR or JFK or Reagan could fix that which we have coming to us thanks to both party's sellout to the highest bidder down through the years.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  237. Matt R

    Of course she would have been better. She would have started in the political middle rather than the extreme left like Obama. We probably wouldn't have had such an economic distaster because her wisdom would have steered us towards a Reagan-esque solution, rather than a spending solution. She would have been untouchable in 2012.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  238. Norma

    Of course she is a better choice... I voted for her because I saw from the beginning that Obama had more "inspiring" rethoric, but not the knowledge and the energy to lead this country. He had good ideas and vision, but he underestimated the conspiracy tactics and negativity of the Republicans. He tried to please everyone, but that it's not the job of a leader. When you know what to do – and when-, then you do it. From day one the GOP started working on the destruction of this president, by spreading lies, creating suspicions on different subjects, trying to block everything he proposed (even those supported for the Republicans in the past). To me, Obama and his staff should have pointed out the real origin of this mess. Political correctness can cost too much. They should have said that the Bush Administration "created" two unnecessary" wars, and that is the big spending of this country. Not the SSI, not Medicarre because these are SAVINGS from workers, they are not expenses. I hope we'll have Hillary Clinton as a candidate.,

    August 11, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  239. lin danek

    Of course, Hillary was the ONLY one w/instincts to have been President (recently mved frm WI to FL)

    August 11, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  240. Susan

    I'm proud to say I always "got" Hillary and what she was about politically during the last election. I campaigned and caucused for her, was a Hillary delegate, and donated as generously as I could to this amazing woman, Hillary Rodham Clinton - only to watch her be "dissed" by a Democratic Party Machine (and mainstream media) that was in love with the Obama charisma.
    Hillary is The Smart Girl. And unfortunately, even after all these years of women's liberation, our culture still doesn't respect The Smart Girl. What a foolish mistake, what a loss to our nation. She would have been one of the best Presidents we've ever known.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  241. Richard

    I am not a Democrat or a Republican, and I do not even like Hilary, but even I would vote for Hilary over Obama or any of the Republicans running at this time. We need a leader with a pair of you know what, and obviously Hilary has a bigger paid than Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  242. Ted San Diego CA

    Jack –

    Hillary would unquestionably have been a better choice as she is more realistic and savvy, and she would have been much more adept at deflecting the strong liberal bias of Nancy Pelosi. The Clintons know that one has to be a realist and that you cannot govern America if you are not a pragmatic moderate. Go too far to the right or to the left and the people won't have faith in you. Try as he might, Barrack Obama cannot now convince that vast majority of Americans who are somewhere in the middle, that in his heart he believes in the middle ground. Sadly therefore, his political goose is cooked.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  243. Deo Delfin

    We need to start a signature campaign to have Hillary Clinton run for President in 2012 and challenge Obama in the Democratic Primaries. I believe it is a more democratic way to elect somebody within the party who has a better chance at winning in 2012 rather than be left witout any choice than having the incumbent as the only choice. I might consider shifting to a Republican if it turned out to be a better choice than my party's candidate in Obama. With Hillary is the most experienced now to become president both addresing International as well as National Issues.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  244. Mike Andro - Canton, MI

    If Hillary Clinton was the Democrats choce, then John McCain would be the President right now.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  245. Rob

    Absolutely. Back in 2008, I believed we needed someone who could fight the tough political fights that we were facing given how divided our nation has become. We didn't need a great talker; we needed a great negotiator.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  246. Rick Wayne

    Yes she would have. In fact, as a republican I would have voted for Hillary vs. McCann had she won the nomination.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  247. rajeev

    jack the dems deserve this president. i was and still am a hillary suporter. she had the spine and the street cred to get things done in the senate and would have in the presidency. this is the problem with fringe bases setting the tone in the primaries. fyi i would rather take huntsman or romeney over any of the other rebulicans but we know that aint happening either. today there is no voice in the dem party. where where they during the debt ceiling debate? what happned to pelosi, reid or even mr luodmouth chuck shumer?

    sad...very sad

    August 11, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  248. Lloyd

    Hillary would've been a MUCH better President than this current disaster. While I was not a supporter of either candidate, Hillary clearly had vastly more leadership experience. Going into the presidency Obama had a short record of voting present combined with an incredible ability to speak. After more than two years of horrid leadership, we can say that he has done little more than be "present" and make speeches. He's been worse than many expected, and that is saying something. But, you get what you vote for.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  249. omegarising

    Anyone, and I mean ANYONE would have been a better choice than
    Barry Soetoro. Hell, Elmer Fudd is a better choice than Barry.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  250. Randy

    YES! Bill got 100 million after office and bush got his 100 million the first 100 days he was out of office. Hillary was next in line of oligarch pets to cash in and this other idiot got in the way. When you have wall street trash turning down invites to the white house to talk about job creation, it's easy to see who runs this country. Netanyahu marching the leaders of both parties (arch enemies) out in front of the american people to swear loyalty to Israel is another sign of who is running things.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  251. DaveRave in Texas

    Hillary was my choice all along. I voted for McCain because I believed then as I still believe now that the office of President is not for someone who needs "on the job training". I'm a lifelong Democrat. Hillary in 2016!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  252. Jack in Georgia

    Hillary may actually have dodged a bullit in '08. I doubt she can jump into the fray next year unless Obama should drop out for some reason. But she can bid her time and wait four more years and get in at then with a lot more to sell than '08.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  253. tom K

    Hillary is the person we need in next election. She not only has the brains but the guts to do what is right. She just needs to show more support for the military. She will get us out of the middle east while smoothing feathers and cutting foreigh aid. The right choice for America. I never liked her before. Now I realize after her stint as SOS she has the right stuff.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  254. David in Dallas

    Hillary would be a much better president. She can actually take a stand on something and has specific ideas. I was a supporter of hers in 2008 and was very disappointed when she didn't get the nomination. I thought that Senator Obama could give a good speach but had no substance and didn't stand for anything other than what was good for him politically. I held my nose and voted for Obama in 2008, but wished I would have stayed at home. If he is the Democratic nominee in 2012, I will stay at home as will most of the Democrats that I know.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  255. Mark

    Of course the democrats are having remorse, as Obama has been a horrible president. Hillary would have a better choice. There is a high probability that Obama will be a one-term president which, based on his performance, is best for the country.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  256. Liberals Rule

    Hillary needs to run against Obama in the primaries. He's been a disaster-she can beat any of these weak republicans (flakes and retreads) easy. Run Hillary!!!!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  257. Carl (New York)

    All I have to say is-Hillary, we're sorry, give us another chance to get it right in 2012.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  258. Brian F

    Yes, I voted for Hillary in the primaries and wish she was in charge now. The thing is, Obama did fight and get his hands dirty in fighting Hillary in the primary. I respected the man who outpoliticked and beat Hillary Clinton, voted for him in November. But that was the last time I saw any real fight in him. He needs to learn from her, and bring back the tough Obama that won in the primaries: that may be his only hope. It may be the country's only hope. We sure aren't getting any solutions from Republicans, just ideology, rhetoric, and obstructionism.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  259. Patrick D - Maryland

    Personally I think if Bill Clinton and Hillary ran as Independents on the same ticket they would win by a landslide. That is how pathetic the Leadership in this Country is right now. Its downright scary. Bring back the Clintons and give Saturday Night Live some new material.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  260. andy Fairfax, VA

    Two points about my girl Hillary: first, she's tougher than the President and far more experienced and second, she sleeps next to the best adviser any president could ever have.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  261. Reality

    People wanted to vote for Obama to make history there for denying this country the great leadership of Hillary Clinton. But those people were correct in the end they voted for history to be made such as the downgraded presidency of Barrack Obama first time ever that our credit was downgraded. Also made history with the failed stimulus and the apologizing tour around the world. Hillary should challenge Obama in primaries, but they wont because if they do they will call them the Clintons racist. Or did we forget what happens when you oppose Obama? Let me remind you, they call you a racist!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  262. Scott in Columbus OH

    Jack, It's a fair question, but I'd like to see the Barack Obama I voted for in 2008! His advisors have probably helped him run the executive branch as well as can be expected nowadays, but they have not helped him politically.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  263. sonny chapman, Villie Platte,La.

    Could the Repubs. hate Hillary more than Obama ? Yes, they hated Bill until their eyes were popping out of their heads & he was a Bubba. And WHY ? Because the Presidency is THEIRS by birthright and anyone who TAKES it from them must be destroyed.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  264. ED

    After the media and the Republicans got done with her by now she would not have any hair on her head. Just imagine how many news organizations and people make a living tearing down the government, the country and its president.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  265. Larry in WV

    I supported the President in 2008 but in hindsight think that Ms. Clinton would have been a better choice. Barack and Hillary have similar ideas. In 2008 I believed that Mr. Obama could lead by inspiring people. That never happened and appears likely to never happen. I believe Ms. Clinton would have stepped up and made the effort to lead. Look at how far being able to stand up and make your case proudly has taken the Republicans despite the fact that they have very bad ideas. Remember, the optimism of 2008. If almost any Democrat would have made their case as proudly as the Republicans, the mood in the country and the situation would be very different.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  266. Sarah

    I think what people are forgetting is that it's Congress that's the problem, not Obama. He's getting the heat because he's the face of our government. It wouldn't matter if Hillary was president – Congress would still be acting like a bunch of spoiled brats who are much more concerned about the destruction of each other than the good of the country.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  267. Tom from Houston Texas


    Yes more than likely she would have been a better choice. But
    who was supposed to tell the Black Democrats why Obama was
    dumped, and please get out and vote for Hillary? Obama got 90%
    of the Afican American vote, would Hillary gotten that much after
    'bumping' Obama out as the Democratic nominee. Same reason
    no one will challenge Obama on the Democrats in 2012, replacing
    Obama before a shot at a second term would Damage the Democrats
    in the Black Community for generations to come. After surviving generations of prejudice, can you blame them?
    of prejudice

    August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  268. Paulette in Dallas,PA

    Indeed she would have. I am hoping that the Democratic Party drafts Hillary to run in 2012. She certainly has the experience to take on our problems and the guts to do it too.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  269. JL

    Indeed, I'll admit bravely: I have buyer's remorse! I will not vote for "this" president again.. I only wish HRC had shown a more humane face during her campaign and had not political robots but human beings running her campaign and things might have been different for her. Alas, fooled once, not again.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  270. Goldie from Lynbrook

    Hillary Clinton would have been a much better president. She is smarter, tougher, and more experienced. The confidence of a Hillary presidency would have brought self-respect back to the U.S. and would have provided the leadership to get us through our economic crisis. God bless the politician who's willing to say and do the right thing without worrying about the next election. I believe Hillary would have been a great president.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  271. Ralph Nelson

    Absolutelly! Laura Tyson would be heading the economics team. Robert Reich would be creating jobs. Bill Clinton would be Treasury Secretary. John Kerry would be Secretary of State. Former New Mexico Governor Richards would be Vice President. And we would have had a well directed (spent on sustainable jobs) 1.2 – 1.4 stimulus package and be below 8 percent unemployment and have a clean energy war going on like Germany does. Energy jobs would be everywhere and Boone Pickens would have Clinton's ear. And the big banks would be busted up to regional and locals.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  272. Donna from Wisconsin

    I agree with Pat in Missouri–Obama has always been the adult in the room. Having to work with The Party of No for three years has really been hard. I like Hillary, but Obama could walk around anyone with his steady, calm, 'think before you speak' attitude. What is scary is another right wing idiot coming in from Texas who doesn't like to govern and has a sixth grade understanding of economics. How could Hillary do any better? Except with her it would have been the sexist jokes and jabs while with Obama it was the racist stuff. I really can't figure how anyone would vote Republican and go back to what we just had. Dumble down doodle.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  273. Henry Miller, Cary, NC

    Regardless of who would have been a better choice for the Democrats, Ron Paul would have been a better choice for the country. With Paul as President, we never would have been put in this economic panic.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  274. Ed

    Yes. Hilary would be better. Obama is just too weak and tries to hard to please everyone and pleases no one. He proposed a very logical plan to address the budget deficit but did not have the backbone to follow through. Unfortunately, he does not possess the same ability to convince the American public that his instincts are correct like Reagan or Clinton had during their respective presidencies.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  275. Natalie

    That's how stupid our fickle voters can be; they rather vote for an unknown from the extreme nutcake party than the one who is trying to get this country heading in the right direction. Obama has had nothing but opposition from the GOP from day one, where they made it their sole agenda to have him be a one-term president. They are so fixed on that objective, they've done all they can to see our collective economy spin to get their way. Voters are classic for voting against their best interests, so the middle class gets what they deserve. Hope you enjoy the wealthiest getting all the breaks.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  276. Mohammad, Los Angeles CA

    Are you kidding? Republicans were on a destroy-Hillary rampage the second she announced her candidacy for the 2008 election. It would have been no different regardless of who won.

    What you should be suggesting is for Obama to drop Biden and take up Hillary as his VP for 2012.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  277. Suzanne in Seattle

    Duh, Jack.
    Just like in high school, The Smart Girl doesn't get the respect she deserves until The Charismatic Class President/Jock falls on his face later in life.
    When will this country ever learn?

    August 11, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  278. Annie in Texas

    First of all, Obama inheirited a mess almost beyond comprehension thanks to be previous officeholder. And let's be honest, he doesn't exactly have much positive to work with when it comes to dealing with the current House & Senate. If BOTH parties would only start thinking about representing the people of this country instead of the "Us vs Them" mentality, things would be much better off. The Republicans, especially, have made it their "mission" to see Obama fail– how that affected the PEOPLE seems to be of absolutely no concern to them just as long as their PARTY comes out looking superior to the Democrats. I am sick to death of this juvenile bickering going on in Washington, and sick to death of brainless opportunists like Sarah Palin & Michelle Bachmann & Newt Gingrinch & Rick Perry who cater to the extremes only to benefit themselves. I think Hillary, while she can be tough as nails, is more of a concensus builder & definitely someone who would advocate for the betterment of the country and all the people as opposed to simply walking the "party line".

    August 11, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  279. testerbill

    Hindsight is 20-20 and while voters are not happy with the solution to the debt problem, they must remember that Congress drafts and votes on the laws. The President has no vote.
    And when the opposition controls the House, it is difficult to get what you want against those who will not compromise.
    I'm not sure Hillary would have done much better against the Tea Party.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  280. Cat

    Hillary would have been a much better choice. Hillary was prepared for the job and President Obama was not. Not only did he lack experience, he also lacked the important relationships necessary to build a constructive consensus. Experience and the ability to manage and have strong relationships with your colleagues are key to getting a good job done.

    I voted for the President, but I do wish he had waited a few years. I was originally a Hillary supporter.

    Cat in Los Angeles, CA

    August 11, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  281. Cliff V.; Los Angeles, CA

    Jack... you are asking the wrong question. I believe no one could have done much better. This Tea Party Congress is the problem. Not THIS President of the United States.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  282. Greg of Mechanicsburg, PA

    Funny how Obama polls better agains specific Republican candidates than a generic one. Perhaps the Republicans should draft Hillary as their candidate. She might even accept and she would certainly win.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  283. ceoman

    Yes. She is a woman and knows how to compromise. She knows the ins and outs of Washington. Yes she has baggage but at least we know her baggage. She is tough cookie, Obama is a softie. History will never know but I know we all have second thoughts about Obama and his qualifications. Too bad. Another 4 years down the drain.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:48 pm |
  284. Phillip

    no doubt

    August 11, 2011 at 5:48 pm |
  285. Lorna Hanson Forbes

    I am a lifelong Democrat and am saddened by Obama's handling of the Republican's. He does not have the experience. Hillary Clinton would make a far better President in 2012.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  286. Fred Schwacke

    Although I was in favor of her in 2008, I did not think she could win.

    Would she have been a better President, absolutely yes; after all, she had the best mentor possible. She has grown dramatically since then, and she (and her advisor Bill) would make a far better Presidential candidate & President than Obama in 2012.

    Had she been President, the debt ceiling "negotiation" would have had a far different outcome.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  287. Miro

    She is only Democrat I will vote for! Miro, Chicago,IL

    August 11, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  288. Orville in Ben Lomond, CA

    At the time Obama was the right choice...Hillary carried too much baggage and her election organization seemed disorganized and lacked cohesiveness...Since the '08 election, Hillary has been able to show off her strengths and it is clear she is probably more capable than many of us believed.

    Today, I worry about Obama's ability to convince those "on the fence" in '12 that he deserves four more years...If Hillary were to run, I would vote for her in a heartbeat which I wouldn't have done in '08.!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  289. Kenoscope

    I voted for Mrs. Clinton and continued to support her until she dropped out. I still believe that she was the better choice. Unfortunately what we ran into was not an educated or enlightened voter that year, but a mass hysteria popularity contest. I'm an independent, I vote my beliefs, but I fear we will end up with another Texas idiot in the White House in 2012, one more dangerous than Junior. At least Junior had no idea what he was doing, Perry knows exactly what he is doing.

    San Antonio, Texas

    August 11, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  290. squealy

    Well, she was my first choice. . . .I really want to love Obama, but he is not acting like a true dem.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  291. Matt in Colorado

    The presidency is more than just one man or woman and I feel that America had focused too much on the promise of "Change" when voting for Obama. What should have been the focus is who is the most qualified candidate which would do what ever it takes for the best interest of the country AND be capable of accomplishing those goals. When political parties stated from the start that their goal was to make Obama a one term president, what could possibly have been accomplished. As is evident now that we are now in a political gridlock for our finances which will ultimately damage our future and the future of our children.

    If democrates wish to win the 2012 presidency, Obama should stand down from re-election and an alternative candidate should be chosen. Someone who may not be as well versed but is capable of negotiating between parties to make political progress and move the U.S. forward.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  292. Julia - Iowa

    Remember when Hillary teared up on the campaign trail in New Hampshire, she got choked up displaying her passion for America and the election process? Wouldn't it be nice to see some kind of emotion from our president? I think Mrs. Clinton would have certainly handled the tragic loss of 30 American lives last weekend with much more sympathy and grace.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  293. bard999

    If a president doesn't have a super majoirty in the senate, if they don't control the house and if the opposition party is obstructionist about everything then it doesn't matter if they are FDR or Carter, the result will be the same.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  294. Rick

    I think a better choice would've been to have more than two major political parties to choose from. Let the third parties gain a little more power and a lot of this partisan politicking will stop.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  295. Dennis !erman

    Hillary would be my choice if she was willing to call off her vacation if her job, decisions, and ideas were needed to save those whose future depended on her. Hey, are we the people, the only ones sacrificing for those who depend on us?

    August 11, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  296. Toni from Tampa, FL

    Jack.. maybe yes, maybe no. She is a woman who was hated by the right both as First Lady and as Presidential candidate. And if she had been elected, how well would the right have taken to Hillary, a woman, with Bill as first husband, back in the White House? Would it have suited them any better than the first black man to be elected? Would the right have been as hell-bent to destroy Hillary as they have been to destroy Obama without a care that they will take America down in the process?

    August 11, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  297. Lisa H. Denver, CO

    Hillary Clinton was absolutely a "no-duh" choice for president over Obama. His social media election campaign and subsequent presidency turned this Dem into a Republican. The idea that he now has a BILLION dollar campaign fund raising goal is not only sickening, but should be downright criminal. Hopefully not even a billion bucks will get this guy re-elected.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  298. andy

    Ya think? She just had to go and vote pro war hawk along w gwb and his crowd to posture for her Presidential run. If only she had done the right thing like Obama and oppose the Iraq war??? Our country would be alot better off than it is w Obama caving in all the time to the right. Give me a true Dem I can believe in please!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:52 pm |

    Hillary wouldn't have blamed everyone else. That's not her style. The party and the media left her behind to make history in electing Obama. WELL, we are making history now!!!! She had my vote. Now it's to late and she probably wouldn't want to get into this mess now. WHO COULD BLAME HER!!!!!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  300. Rich in Boston, MA

    I voted for Hillary Clinton during the primaries and always felt she was the better choice. I support the President but he is lacking that fire in the belly. He needs to roll up his sleeves and take on the stubborn right wing extremists! Put out some ideas about creating jobs. At this point people need to hear that you are coming up with idea after idea on how to do this. The Republicans are not so it's the President's opening to take control.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  301. Redd Nekk

    I TRULY believe that Hillary would have been the better choice. Had I known then what I know now...

    August 11, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  302. Khalil

    Considering the problems that President Obama inherited fromt he previous administration and his efforts to thwart our country from entering into a Depression, I think he has handled himself well and has revealed the gaming playing that takes place in Congress. I mean honestly, his first year was fractured by Demoncrats failing to unify and now you have a Republican party that is fractured by Tea Partiers who are perhaps not as experienced. If anything, I wish he would have selected Secretary Clinton as his VP and Biden as Secretary of State. She was a well respected Senator who worked across party lines and I think should would have been an invaluable asset as his number two in the capacity and would have compensated for what many term his inexperience.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  303. Cyril Sheehan

    Obama or Hillary would make no difference considering the Tea Party's mantra – no new taxes. The time is past for the Iced Tea segment of the party to kick in, cool the rhetoric and get one with what's for the good of the country. Better yet, where is the Coffee Party – Wake Up America! If you make more you pay more, that's life.
    Palm Desert, Ca

    August 11, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  304. jonathan

    Obama said change the only change I see is the economy went bad to extremely worse

    August 11, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  305. Ali

    What I don't seem to understand is the American electorates themselves, you basically handed the GOP a tool to fight the President by giving them the majority in congress.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  306. Ronnie

    She has incredible political skillz but is a poor manager.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  307. Jerry

    I voted for Obama and I am completely disappointed in his total lack of leadership on any issue since he has been President. He seems to lack any plan on any subject thus leaving the fight to Congress and a complete void of leadership which could provide compromise.

    I still believe in the Obama mantra of 2008 Change. We need a leader and I am now firmly in the anybody but Obama camp for 2012. If the Dems want to hang with him I will vote for any Republican.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  308. Martin Williams

    NO Jack. Are you crazy? This is The United States of America. You see how the MEN in both chambers treated Nancy Pelosi when she was Housespeaker, and of course you see the treatment Obama is getting from both chambers also. The GOP especially wants Obama to FAIL and they all stupidly forgot that, if Obama fails The United States also failed. If I was the S & P's CEO, I will grade the US a D+. Your answer again is NO. today it is party FIRST, and country second per GOP/Tea Party idiots.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:54 pm |
  309. Tom Layman

    Would Hillary have been a better choice? Let's put it this way, I am a lifteime Independent/Democrat and I will NOT be voting for Obama. I don't know who I'll vote for, but he is "off the table".

    August 11, 2011 at 5:54 pm |
  310. Trini Calma

    Jack, Hillary would have run this country way better than Barack Obama. Any president who needs a teleprompter on practically every
    word he utters, IS questionable. WHERE'S THE BEEF, Mr Obama?
    America got the president it deserves, NO CLASS. Ever wonder why
    the Kardashians is such a hit?

    August 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  311. Jeff Gaster, New York City

    In my view, Hillary would have been the better candidate in 2008. True, Obama won, achieving the Democrats' short-term objective of winning back the White House. But, Clinton would have defeated Bush as well.

    We have experienced three years of the Obama presidency. The US, still reeling from the Bush years, was not on an even keel when Obama took office. He may not have had an optimum situation to build on, but he did not take full advantage of the opportunities he had. Both the Senate and House were Democratic in 2009, but he failed to enact some of the important policies that he campaigned on. Instead, he focused on health care to the exclusion of almost everything else important. He became a cause and target of divisiveness–so much now that the country is at a stalemate. He did not have the requisite experience or temperment for the office.

    I believe Hillary would have done a better job promoting the priorities of the liberal-centrist Democratic agenda and would have dealt better with the various warring factions. She had the enecessary experience and wisdom in her own right and as the First Lady. She would not have let the broad agenda be hijacked by health care.

    Now, we are approaching the 2012 election. So far, the polls show Obama in the lead against Republicans. He appeared to be a shoo-in. But, now with the economy and jobs tanking, his chances are in jeopardy. If he becomes the target of the political venom that is likely to spew forth this election season, then the Democrats may need an alernative candidate who can win. Hillary would be the best last-minute choice . She ran very close to Obama in the 2008 Democratic race. Now, her popularity may have eclipsed his.

    It would not look good for Hillary to decide to become a candidate now, but she should be ready if the Democrats decide they cannot win with Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  312. ron in kentucky

    I voted for Hillary in the primary but couldn't in the general election so I voted for President Obama ( I certainly could not vote for McCain ) . Unfortunately , I'm afraid that our President feels his place in HISTORY was secured by being the 1st African- American to be elected as president , and doesn't care or is a completely afraid to fight for the average American ,(you know those of us who actually work for a living).Why won't President Obama just stop trying to make the republican like him , they never will so my advise is to stand up and be counted Mr. President or quit and let someone who will stand up take over.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  313. Mr. OO

    Once Obama gained momentum in the 2008 campaign by his elegant speeches and suave demeanor, the Democrats had to nominate him for fear of a black lash from liberal voters. I’m sure the democrats felt they could make up for his lack of experience by careful behind the scenes guidance. As someone has already said it was an opportunity ‘to make history’. It seems to be backfiring. While many see Obama’s stand back and observe, think, and then make a speech approach to leadership as dignified and intellectual, it is troublesome for a nation yearning for a ‘take action’ President in these difficult times. I believe that H. Clinton would have made a better leader because she has the guts to get her hands dirty and the bravery to face the consequences.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  314. Michelle W

    Yes Jack. That's a no brainer. Ask me something you don't already know! While I voted for Obama, I would have voted for Hillary had she won the nomination. I would vote for her if she somehow magically appeared in this election. But I will vote for Obama because I can't stomach another Republican (and now including the unbelievably stupid Tea Party) led White House anymore than I could stomach a Palin or Bachman leading...well, anything.

    HIllary '12!
    Chicago, IL

    August 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  315. Ann

    Honolulu, HI

    We need to become more progressive as a country. I thought that was going to happen with the election of Obama, but it appears we are not mature enough to handle a black president. I'm not sure if Hilary would receive better treatment as a woman. With that being said I do think the Tea Party would have a harder time trying to bully her. She is definitely no nonsense which would be helpful at this time.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  316. Barb in New Hampshire

    Absolutely Hillary!!! If she were there now, I would be sleeping better at night! Obama cannot even negotiate his way around Washington, let alone a (God forbid) real crisis of terrorism or a natural catastrophe! Unfortunately in 2008, the country voted for a populist candidate, and just like a Hollywood star-that fades quickly!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  317. Bill

    Good god, Jack–what a ridiculous question. The fact of the matter is that Obama IS the president, and no amount of fantasy role-playing will change that. How about we all deal with reality for once, and play the hand we are holding. You've missed the target so completely on this pseudo-question that I'm beginning to wonder if you're going to run for Congress.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  318. Vence

    That's a hard one Jack!

    You know race and gender are still big issues in this country of many nations!
    But, I believe that Hillary would have been treated better than Obama. Race has and always be a wider division on a this country, with so many nations on it!

    August 11, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  319. Ron demarco

    She is still part of the problem. Like Obama she will represent the
    Corporation and not the will of the people.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  320. Overby from Melbourne

    Well, Obama was elected because McCain made the ridiculously dumb decision to add Palin to his ticket, meaning any Democrat would've won, so Hilary would've obviously been a better choice for everyone....

    August 11, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  321. rdg18

    Odumbo and Hillary are poured from the same worthless cancerous mold as the roiting thugs in London. The world would be better off without both of them.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  322. Lisa in Lincoln City Oregon

    Hillary would have done a better job with the mess Bush left. After all Bill cleaned up after the first Bush and she understood how to do it. Obama should have waited a few years, gotten more experience and he could have done great things. Poor timing for him because he will never be remembered as a great president.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  323. Greg in Seattle

    I blame most of Obama's "failures" on Harry Reid. While Nancy Pelosi delivered majorities in the House, Reid could never herd his cats in the Senate. And the inability to push things through the Senate forced much of the "watering down" that happened across both houses.

    The sad thing is that politics used to be a game of horsetrading. It didn't achieve perfect solutions, but it achieved solutions. Politics today seems to be a zero-sum game, all or nothing, with hardcores on both sides willing to burn it all down if they don't get what they want.

    In 2012, we need to throw them ALL out... a vote for an incumbent is a vote to destroy America.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  324. Chuck in Little Rock

    I for one, and many of my peers were behind Hillary from the beginning. Even as she handed over the nomination to Obama, we felt that the party was making the wrong deicision. Again we voters were left with the choice of the lesser of two evils – McCain obviously the more evil. I'm not always in agreement with the Democrats or our President, but at least I hear them out. Like many others have said, it is apparent that the GOP's ONLY action for the past few years has been to rant against Democrats in any elected position and forestall any forward movement in Washington. That said, I don't believe it would really have mattered which of them won the nomination.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  325. Grant

    Yes, but a rotting sack of apples would have been at least as good of a choice as Obama

    August 11, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  326. Tom Bulger, Canandaigua

    The Secretary of State is a very capable woman and and she would have made a very good president, but the mess that Bush left us in required a great president. Mrs. Clinton has neither the patience nor the temperament to argue with fools. Until the voters purge Congress of several dozen, that is the job regretfully.

    August 11, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  327. John In Bellevue, NE

    Dear Jack,

    Obama and Hillary are the choices? Talk about The Lesser Of Two Evils! Is "None Of The Above" an option?

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  328. Sharon from Texas

    From the eyes of his Hater's, Charlie Brown would have been a better choice. But, from a fair-minded perspective, who knows?

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  329. Alan K in Nashville Tennessee

    There would be no difference due to the pile of STINK George Bush left us.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  330. TJ

    Absolutely she would have been a better choice. I live in Maryland, so it doesn't much matter who runs as we'll be voting democrat anyway. But once Obama was the front runner, I passed on voting. The first time since turning 18. He was woefully unqualified to lead this county. He lacked experience, tact, and focus. He's too busy trying to be people's friends and not able to make a decision when the time comes.

    He's certainly better than the alternative those years ago. Even today this country would have been a disaster with the republicans at the wheel. But he simply hasn't done enough to turn us around since the 8 years of failure before him.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  331. BRUCE


    But I also should have bought stocks yesterday...


    Bruce, CA.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  332. Maria Houser Conzemius

    Hillary would absolutely have made a better president. I knew that Pres. Obama was weak and inexperienced. I was especially alarmed when I read a New York Times article in early February 2008 about Obama's relationship as an Illinois legislator with Exelon Nuclear. Exelon became his biggest fund-raiser after Obama watered down his bill on requiring nuclear companies to notify the public in cases of groundwater contamination. The bill was never passed after Obama watered it down to "suggest" that Exelon notify the public. Yet he claimed credit in Iowa for passing the bill that never passed.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  333. Madeline

    It's impossible to say if Hillary would have been better, although she may have been tougher. Unfortunately being tougher would get her labeled as a B–ch! Not sure we have a leader out there that could handle the dysfunction in Washington. Obama didn't really have a shot when he lost the House. It seems the Republicans are bound and determined to get him out and stop at nothing to do that. Hillary wouldn't have fared any better.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  334. Carol, Washington

    There's no point to speculating– this is all pie-in-the-sky hindsight. She wasn't the candidate and thus we couldn't elect her. Obviously we'll never know.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  335. Wayne K

    Who knows?! What I do know is "moving the masses" will get you votes. I'm disappointed in where we are as a country right now also but I think President Obama will do just that (move masses) for the next year and half and get people to the polls in November 2012.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  336. Jim

    It wouldn't matter if it were John F Kennedy. Politicians today care only about one thing and that is pleasing the people of their drawn up Congressional DIstricts and the only ones not affected by that are the Senate and the White House. If you can't please those in the House whatever you try to do won't matter.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  337. Sue

    Yes Yes and Yes. Hillary would have been a stonger President politically and should be placed on the 2012 ticket as VP to renew some hope in the party and for the country. .

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  338. Warren

    No comparison. Hilary would have been – and would be – an excellent President.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  339. Sydney

    Jack...People Love You Today and Hate You Tomorrow... So, No Hillary is wonderful, but she would be going through the same thing if not worse if she was President...they would eat her alive with if she was a Man... we wouldn't have this problem, etc... President Obama is the RIGHT PRESIDENT FOR THE TIME WE'RE IN NOW! I would love to see a question from you about what can the American People can do to support our President in this tragic time. Hmmmm...that maybe too much to ask!

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  340. Johnathon

    The only way for President Obama to be re-elected is to put Hillary Clinton on the 2012 ticket.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  341. David Johnson

    It's not Obama's weakness that is killing his presidency, it is the Republi8can hate machine. And they hated Hillary Clinton in 2008 far more than they did Barack Obama. The lesson here is that if one of the two parties sets out to destroy governance there isn't much a President can do about it.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  342. John-Baptist

    It's easy to say that Hillary would be better when Obama has had the job for the last 3 years. Im willing to wager the same would have been said had the reverse occured. Perhaps americans in general should recognize the proper role of the presidency. If they did they would vote Ron Paul. He will not abuse its power like mostly all other would.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  343. Peggy

    That is really a no brainer. I tried to tell everyone. Maybe next time they will listen to me !! If the Democrats want a snow ball's chance now, they better be begging her to Run
    Peggy from Georgia

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  344. Mitch Dworkin - Dallas, Texas

    The answer is "Yes" in my opinion. Jack: This is something that you and many others in the media should have thought about regarding candidate Obama when most of the media were rooting for Obama to win as opposed to asking him the tough questions. This may possibly have been avoided if the media had done their job of seriously vetting candidate Obama when they had the chance to back in 2007 and early 2008!

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  345. Ashley

    Of course Hillary Clinton would have been better – I knew that when I voted for her in the primary.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  346. Bob

    She would have been a better LEADER,,thats what we need now

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  347. Benjamin

    I think it's kinda what we call... "speculation"

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  348. Earl Nye

    When Hillary Clinton failed to win the Democratic nomination, I told everyone I knew that a very big mistake was made within the democratic party. Ms. Clinton, from what I have heard her say and her actions as Seceretary of State prove that she would make a far better president than anyone of the Republican hopefuls and the President himself. Please, please, Ms. Clinton, say you will seek the Democratic nomination. WE NEED YOU!!

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  349. Anne

    I believe she would have been obstructed just like President Obama. She would have been in the good old boys club which don't have much respect for woman. Just look at how Nancy Pelosi was treated and named called by the oppostion being the first woman speaker in history. Can you imagine what would be said about the first woman President. Just asking.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  350. Bill Harris

    I think Hillary, as a women, would have had even more problems than a black man getting through to this "just say no" Republican party.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  351. deb in mo

    Yes. She is smart and bold and tough. I did not give up on her. She was always the right answer but they could not see it. They were ready to elect another man not the right woman for the job.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  352. Tony

    Keene, NH
    No, Hillary Clinton fell silent after the health insurance industry paid her to shut up about health care reform during the Clinton administration

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  353. Mike Toussaint

    Hillary would not have had her citizenship questioned. Hillary would not have called "unamerican" or the other code words. Hillary would not have had the Tea Party trying to illegitimate her presidency. The only problem I have with Obama is that he is sitting back and LETTING them destroy his presidency. No other president in history has had to deal with the hatred, vitriol and shear disrespect that Obama has had to deal with. But you wouldn't know anything about that would you Jack???

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  354. Zack

    Obama's nomination was a big disappointment to those of us who exactly knew that Hillary would bring a credible presidency and also the collective experience to govern. Watching Obama grow up from a social activist to a mediocre statesman has not been easy! He does not seem to learn from his mistakes either. It is best he opts out running for the 2nd term and lets a strong experience Democratic Leader to emerge for 2012 election. May be wishful thinking but certainly a better scenario for the country in my humble opinion.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  355. Alexander Frey

    I think Hillary should run for president for 2012. It's her real chance now, and she would definitely win the primary hands down. Someone like John Kerry could jump in and finish her term as secretary of state. The Democrats have to look at the big picture: then next president should be from their party. But to achieve that, a candidate that would have a real chance of winning must be the nominee.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  356. Chuck Hendrix, Jasper Ga

    Of course she would have. What a bonehead question Jack.. She got my vote as a write in. I knew Obama would be opposed at every turn, while Hillary Clinton had the inside track on how to get things done. She also has a spine.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  357. Deloris

    Jack, you are being short sighted. Hillary is a very hard worker, probably hones,t and dependable. And knows a lot about politics due to her years in the White House with Bill. But, she is not a leader and lacks the vision needed in a President. Obama gets it. He is just too far ahead of the pack to be appresiated.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  358. Jane Wells

    Absolutely. She has the political savvy and the world knowledge very few have, or can acquire quickly. She is ready DAY ONE, and knows the current battlefield is not compromise, but Kill or be killed. Doesn't hurt that she would have more experience with her husband in tow! Not to say Michelle and Pres. Obama don't have good intentions– Washington is not a place for good intentions–it's about greed power and dominance. Hillary Clinton has more experience than anyone on the playing field!

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  359. Chris from Las Vegas

    To quote Hillary from a debate in 2008 "Yes, yes, yes". Obama was a good choice to get record numbers of Democrats regsitered to vote (especially Nevada and what some argue has saved Harry Reid in 2010). Hillary has a lifetime of experience and is a true workhorse who commands respect, something our President is lacking.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  360. Lisa V in Colorado

    Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if she had run and won.
    But I also wonder how very different our world would be if GWB hadn't been given the office in 2000.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  361. Gonzalo Rivera

    Most were just afraid of letting a woman come to power and thus we got stuck with a closet republican. Hillary was and still is a more capable suitor for the position of President. I would only dream of her running again, because I truly believe she would steer this economy and the country as a whole to the right track after 12 years or what seems will be 16 years of republican religiously motivated erroneous policies.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  362. Steve

    You bet. He was elected because of his affability, articulative ability and perceived sense of fairness.
    Despite being emminately more qualified, she lost due to her lesser likeability.
    Maybe the American people are moving closer to substance than personality after our recent failures to function without proactive leadership.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  363. K Vaught

    Are you kidding? She has more guts and determination in her pinky than Obama will generate in a lifetime. He bends over backwards for defeat and then smiles. Hillary has no delusions about the RepuliCons and would not play nice any more than they ever do. I think her realism would have served the country better.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  364. Robert Washington, DC

    Absolutely. Not simply "Change you can Believe in" – Hillary is "Change you can Count On!"

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  365. Rory

    No, Hillary Clinton is well-suited for her role as Secretary of State. However, if she was as tough and capable, relative to the President, as people are now suggesting; she would not have lost the 2008 race from her front-runner position.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  366. Carolyn Morwick

    Of course Hillary would have been a better choice. She's tougher, smarter and experienced. It's that simple. The country lost when Hillary was dissed by the liberal media and put someone in office with no experience, no real passion about much of anything and no commitment to the average American.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  367. Terry

    I think Obama is doing great considering that his first two yrs. were spent stopping the slide of 800k jobs a week to I believe it's 345k now. That's not great, but better. As far as his other agenda's, We're down to 44k troops in Iraq, "don"t as, Don't tell" is dead, and so is Bin Laden! We need to wipe out anyone that even thinks "Tea Party", and then get some real work done!

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  368. GOP Povertyland (USA)

    I supported Hillary when she ran. She has a backbone, Obama is a whimp who has squandered Democrat values away kissing up to the Greedy Old Pig party of me, myself and I. I would be elated to hear Hillary was going to challenge coward Obama.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  369. SueP

    While I applaud the job Hilliary Clinton has done as SOS, I think that she too, would have suffered the same backlash from the GOP and especially the T-Baggers that Pres. Obama is facing. Anyone who was not a "Conservative" would have been lambasted by these bunch of radicals. Where were the GOP Baggers the last 8 years? Heads in the sand? I for one, being an Independent Senior Citizen will never again vote for a GOPer in my lifetime – at least NOT THIS GOP.

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  370. Nick Carbone

    Of course, there policy from gays to Israel...the Clintons are the ticket. lasts time I checked. They left office and the government was making money. Hillary is as should be the democrats and americas choice

    August 11, 2011 at 6:24 pm |