Check out this recent newspaper subhead: "President Barack Obama is facing mounting doubts within his own party about his re-election prospects, with fellow Democrats beginning to ask if Hillary Clinton would have made a better president."
Well, with favorability numbers in the low 40s and 73 percent of Americans believing America is on the "wrong track," doubts do tend to sort of creep in. But Hillary?!
If you're a lefty, sure there's stuff to grumble about. But would the equally left-wing Hillary Clinton, likewise backed by supportive Democratic supermajorities in the House and Senate, have governed differently? Please.
On what political basis -- from the left's perspective -- would Hillary have done a better job in pushing the leftist agenda? During the '08 primaries, what were the differences between Obama and her? She wanted a health care "mandate." He did not. Then he did. OK.
In the eyes of the H2L2 (the hard-hard left-left -- not to be confused with an Obama-like regular old hard left), Obama "caved" to the tea party-led Republicans on the debt deal. The deal included no tax hikes, and "millionaires and billionaires" kept their "corporate jet" loopholes! Egads!
Now, most lefties still love Obama -- until and unless, to quote a former governor of Louisiana, he gets "caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy." The left loves "stimulus," new and proposed taxes on the rich (and many non-rich, too), the redistribution of wealth from unworthy rich to far nobler "working men and women," and rhetoric against Wall Street greed (on which Obama blames the housing crisis).
Lefties applaud the Justice Department lawsuits against the states of Arizona and Alabama over their immigration laws. And the two new female left-wing Supreme Court justices, one a Latina, please the left greatly.
Sure, Obama failed to close Gitmo, but then so did former President George W. Bush. So, gee, it might be harder than the left thought. Give him a mulligan on that one. As for Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama shed the gung-ho image of that warmonger George W. Bush and now undertakes a gradual withdrawal that is condition-based, except on a time certain. Sure, he's involved in three wars, with an incomprehensible involvement in Libya. But then we can always blame Bush ... well, except for the Libyan thing, but whatever.