How big a disaster will a Hillary Clinton presidency be?

[Hilldog]

Let's even things out.  Go on and discuss.

[ag]

It will be a very conventional presidency, similar to that of Obama, but with less flair.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

It will be a very conventional presidency, similar to that of Obama, but with less flair.

This and with a good chance of only being a one term president.

[BlueSwan]

I think she will be somewhat stronger than Obama for a couple of reasons:

1) She is a better negotiator.

2) Surely at SOME POINT, the republicans will have to cease with the complete obstructionism. A Trump loss might mean that the GOP will be licking their wounds and reassessing their approach to politics given that the xenophobic line is a long term losing strategy.

[ag]

It will be a very conventional presidency, similar to that of Obama, but with less flair.

This and with a good chance of only being a one term president.

That is simply too early to say now. I would say, conditional on getting elected this time, her probability of reelection is exactly equal to that of any other incumbent at this point. It is going to be an unexceptional presidency.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

2) Surely at SOME POINT, the republicans will have to cease with the complete obstructionism. A Trump loss might mean that the GOP will be licking their wounds and reassessing their approach to politics given that the xenophobic line is a long term losing strategy.

Not really.  Until they lose the House, the GOP has no reason to reconsider obstructionism.  If they did, a number of them would get primaried from the right, which is the only way many of them could lose reelection.

[OSR stands with Israel]

a pretty big one just not as bad as trump

[Hilldog]

I just wanted to compare this to the other thread about Trump.  There seems to be an ant-GOP bias.

[Dr. Arch]

I just wanted to compare this to the other thread about Trump.  There seems to be an ant-GOP bias.

No, it's anti-fascist.

[Hilldog]

I just wanted to compare this to the other thread about Trump.  There seems to be an ant-GOP bias.

No, it's anti-fascist.

In particular just anti-Trump?

[Dr. Arch]

I just wanted to compare this to the other thread about Trump.  There seems to be an ant-GOP bias.

No, it's anti-fascist.

In particular just anti-Trump?

For now, we don't have any others running for office, so you could extrapolate that if you wish, but it would be a mischaracterization of the actual sentiments.

[Virginiá]

2) Surely at SOME POINT, the republicans will have to cease with the complete obstructionism. A Trump loss might mean that the GOP will be licking their wounds and reassessing their approach to politics given that the xenophobic line is a long term losing strategy.

Not really.  Until they lose the House, the GOP has no reason to reconsider obstructionism.  If they did, a number of them would get primaried from the right, which is the only way many of them could lose reelection.

Basically this. Unfortunately a massive wave of gerrymandering has rendered many seats noncompetitive and given House Republicans little reason to compromise and has in fact bred the opposite, with primary challengers to reinforce it.

You would think Republicans would reconsider after 3 straight Democratic terms (and losing 5/7 of the last presidential elections), but what is really going to happen is Republicans will set their eyes on 2018, with the idea that they can get another wave by doing exactly what they've been doing so far. Endless House committee investigations into Hillary. Constant smearing in public. Obstruct everything so she looks weak and ineffective. Basically the same as Obama, but expect more investigations.

Most likely nothing changes until they lose the House and have a hard time getting it back.

[Horus]

a pretty big one just not as bad as trump

[Hilldog]

2) Surely at SOME POINT, the republicans will have to cease with the complete obstructionism. A Trump loss might mean that the GOP will be licking their wounds and reassessing their approach to politics given that the xenophobic line is a long term losing strategy.

Not really.  Until they lose the House, the GOP has no reason to reconsider obstructionism.  If they did, a number of them would get primaried from the right, which is the only way many of them could lose reelection.

Basically this. Unfortunately a massive wave of gerrymandering has rendered many seats noncompetitive and given House Republicans little reason to compromise and has in fact bred the opposite, with primary challengers to reinforce it.

You would think Republicans would reconsider after 3 straight Democratic terms (and losing 5/7 of the last presidential elections), but what is really going to happen is Republicans will set their eyes on 2018, with the idea that they can get another wave by doing exactly what they've been doing so far. Endless House committee investigations into Hillary. Constant smearing in public. Obstruct everything so she looks weak and ineffective. Basically the same as Obama, but expect more investigations.

Most likely nothing changes until they lose the House and have a hard time getting it back.

You want Republicans to gerrymander themselves out of office?

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

I just wanted to compare this to the other thread about Trump.  There seems to be an ant-GOP bias.

You really don't seem to understand the concept of "bias". If one candidate does, or has done, more dumb things, then it is the unbiased thing to do  to treat that candidate in turn. If you think that there is something about Clinton that has somehow been ignored on this forum, I'm curious to know what it is...

Also, to address the OP, none at all. If anything it will be a logical extension of Obama's presidency, which hasn't been great but which has at least been pretty decent. The only issue is an obstructionist Congress, which is only going to continue unless we take back a slew of statehouses in 2020

[Senator-elect Spark]

Very bad. Like her judgement

[kyc0705]

A Hillary Clinton presidency will probably be obstructed, largely uneventful, and most likely only one term. But unlike a hypothetical Trump presidency, I do not conjure up images of a Sinclair Lewis novel when I think of it.

[Seriously?]

It will be your typical immoral Clinton Presidency, chock full of indictments for friends, crony capitalism at its finest and business-as-usual in Washington.

Except for one thing: Hillary Clinton will join her husband and Andrew Johnson as Presidents that were impeached. The truth will come out about the Clinton Foundation and the e-mail scandals. She won't be convicted (the partisan hacks in the Senate will save her), but it will be a black eye on the "first woman President."

Thankfully, America won't get there, as it will be Made Great Again by the Donald instead.

[Simfan34]

A barrage of mediocrity.

[elcorazon]

Clinton will be very popular. She will unite the country and will ultimately be considered the stronger Clinton. In 30 years, politicians will remember her as fondly as Republicans remember Reagan today. The country will have a strong economy, with peace reigning mostly, a continued drop in crime, extensions of health care coverage to the poor. I look forward to it.

[PeteB]

Let me balance things out and look at the worst case scenario, with Clinton.  I would like to preface this by saying that the alternative worst case (with Trump) would be nuclear Armageddon!

1. Clinton tries to expand Obamacare and introduce new legislation regarding climate change and education.  She also tries to appoint a new SC Judge.  On all counts, she is blocked by Congress and because her tendency is to retreat to her confidantes and close advisers (like Obama, but without the charm ), there is total gridlock in DC.  With her aloof public image (fair or not), she gets the bulk of the blame for this and loses public support.

2. She implements a more ambitious strategy on ISIS but increased domestic terrorism, by ISIS, and difficulties of picking ISIS fighters from civilian targets in Syria and Iraq, make the policy a flop.  Kim Jong Un figures any "female" is weak, and decides to be more "daring" with the nuclear tests and to test the US resolve (any response to this is essentially not a happy one ).  She reacts impatiently, by changing key military people, and makes the situation worse.  Poll numbers plummet and bumper stickers "Don't blame me - I voted for Trump" become a favorite.

3. The Chinese economy takes a hit and China withdraws massive investments from US Bonds.  The Dollar loses 30% of its value, and there is an immediate economic recession.  Rather than delegate the economic portfolio to a knowledgeable surrogate, she mishandles some key portion of it and makes the situation worse.  Unemployment, inflation and personal and business bankruptcies all rise.  The number of parents naming their daughters Hillary is at an all time low.

4. Midterms bring both houses of congress back to the GOP.  Legislation, against Clinton's wishes, is passed, and it can withstand a Presidential veto.  Clinton is officially a lame duck in her third year of office.  The divide in the country has never been greater, making a mockery of the "...stronger together..." promise.

5. Clinton reacts with a daring plan to fix the problems (e.g. assassination of Kim or a risky fiscal measure, propping the Dollar), and it goes badly wrong.  Congress uses that pretext to begin impeachment procedures.  Clinton is removed in disgrace and Tim Kaine becomes the fourty-sixth president.

Do I believe that this will happen?  Not really, but I do believe that Hillary Clinton's standoffishness will cause a lot of these doubts in many people's minds.  She has a chance tonight to show how she will not make all these mistakes!

[progressive85]

I think it would be like George Bush (the first).  One term, struggles constantly with Congress to pass anything, not really a lot of accomplishments, and possibly scandals.  She'll be remembered for being the first woman president.  She may have more of an impact in foreign affairs than in any domestic issues.  Her Supreme Court choice, like Mr. Bush's to replace Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas, will swing the court towards the left.  I think she'll choose Merrick Garland and he will, contrary to his non-controversial, centrist image now, become a progressive on the Court.  She will also likely replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a younger woman who will stay on the Court for a long, long time.  Anthony Kennedy may even choose to retire and this seat is going to be a giant battle.  Her biggest legacy will probably be taking away the Supreme Court from conservative rule.

I certainly think she will be perceived (whether she deserves to be or not) as a failure, as a disaster, and she will face opposition from both the left and the right in 2020, which would be the second consecutive Republican year.  Notice that 2018 and 2020 are years that determine the gerrymandering of the 2020s, so she could be detrimental to the Democratic Party of the near future.  2020 might even be a three-way race.  By 2020, people will have tired of her and of Democrats in general and the Republican nominee will have as good of a chance of winning as they have had since 1988.

So I say it will be a C presidency.  A disaster to conservatives and disappointing for progressives.

Decades from now, her presidency will be re-evaluated and she might experience a Truman-like rise in the polls.  After her death, she will become an iconic figure, much like Barack Obama will be.

[gsmiro]

1.  Foreign Policy.  If Hillary is elected, she would continue the current foreign policy in the Middle East.  The US's policy in Syria is making the confrontation with Russia and her allies inevitable.  The US is deploying special troops in northern Syria.  Russia and China have both sent their only aircraft carriers to the region.  So war would be very likely.  

2.  Economy.  The economy is in a very bad shape due to the Fed's policy.  Auto loan, student loan are all becoming serious bubbles waiting to burst.  There's no real economy recovery for the average Americans.  Middle class has been shrinking and is now a minority.  Wages have been stagnant.  US federal government has more than 19 trillions of debt!  The list goes on and on.  So the economy will not become better.  The Fed is stuck between the rock and a hard place.  They cannot raise the interest rate.  

3.  Social Issues.  The Hillary administration will continue the pursue of liberal, progressive, anti-American, anti-traditional, racial divisive, and hate-mongering "social justice" policies.  It will continue to aid and abate the radical leftists communists activists in creating civil unrest and further the divide in our society.  Expect more and more of the riots, looting, beating of innocents, lost of properties and lost of peace, security and freedom.

4.  Immigration.  The Hillary administration will continue to invite hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants from the Middle East.  This will create serious issues as the Muslims will not integrate into the American society.  It will also increase the frequencies and the scales of Islamic terrorists attacks, such as the bombings that just happened in New York and the shootings that just happened in Washington.  Expect waves of terrorists attacks throughout all the US.

Conclusion:
Overall, it is going to be a huge disaster if Hillary becomes president, as the current administration's many policies will be continued.  However, there maybe one positive for Hillary's presidency, that is the American public may see the true effects and results of the liberal/progressive policies.  And they cannot blame the disaster on the conservatives.  In that regard, it's probably better for Hillary to become the president than Trump.

[gsmiro]

Let me balance things out and look at the worst case scenario, with Clinton.  I would like to preface this by saying that the alternative worst case (with Trump) would be nuclear Armageddon!

I disagree with your assessment that a Trump presidency would bring nuclear war.  In fact, I think the opposite is more likely.  As you know the US and Russia is already on the brink of war in Syria.  The US Air force bombed a Syrian air force based intentionally a week ago.  And now US is sending special forces to station them in northern Syria.  If Hillary becomes president, her administration will pursue the same policy and that will guide the US down the path to an inevitable confrontation with Russia, Syria, Iran and China. 

On the other hand, if Trump becomes president, I believe he would reduce the tension between US and Russia by finding a solution in Syria and not continue to pursue the anti-Russian anti-China foreign policy.

[ProudModerate2]

I can promise you this ....
A Hillary Clinton presidency would be extremely LESS of a disaster, than a trump presidency.