Dana Milbank has a reasonably interesting column about what would would have happened if Hillary had been elected president:
Clinton campaign advisers I spoke with say she almost certainly would have pulled the plug on comprehensive health-care reform rather than allow it to monopolize the agenda for 15 months. She would have settled for a few popular items such as children’s coverage and a ban on exclusions for pre-existing conditions. That would have left millions uninsured, but it also would have left Democrats in a stronger political position and given them more strength to focus on job creation and other matters, such as immigration and energy.[….]
The Clinton campaign advisers acknowledge that she probably would have done the auto bailout and other things that got Obama labeled as a socialist. The difference is that she would have coupled that help for big business with more popular benefits for ordinary Americans.
The one concrete thing MIlbank mentions that would have helped ordinary Americans is a 90-day foreclosure moratorium. There have been various arguments here and elsewhere about whether or not it would the federal government could have imposed a 90-day moratorium. Regardless, Obama could probably have grandstanded the issue better.
When Clinton was president, he was criticized for saying he felt voters’ pain without being able to do anything about it. Now, Obama is criticized for not feeling voters’ pain enough, even as he stuck his neck out to pass a transformative health care bill.
Real Murkins stoically tighten up their belts when things get tough. Real Murkins want a president who feels their pain. Real Murkins want a 90-day foreclosure moratorium (I probably agree with them). Real Murkins form tea parties when Rick Santelli complains their neighbors aren’t being foreclosed on fast enough.
How do you make any sense of any of this?