There is an argument to be made that Democratic administration would be good for WOT. During the years as VP, Gore was not the unhinged lunatic he became since the 2000 election. He was actually a reasonably sane and reasonably competent individual back then. Being a loser of an election unleashed the worst part of him, because he no longer has any control and responsibility for what he says or does. Being in opposition is easy because you no longer are responsible for grounding your proclamations to reality. If Gore won in 2000, he would have to deal with reality.
Would his determination, his instincts, be as strong as Bush’s? No, they would not. But, he would not have nearly as much headwind as Bush does. Instead of facing press determined to bring him down and an opposition party which puts their own interest ahead of country’s interest, he would face a semi-supportive, semi-hostile press and opponent party. I agree with those who say that Republicans wouldn’t be nearly as irresponsible as Democrats proved to be. So, things would be different, but I don’t know if they’d be worse. A more united country with a weaker leader just might beat a divided country with a stronger one.
That is one of the reasons why I am not as dismayed about Hillary as most people are. Her natural inclination would be completely wrong, of course. But, she has shown that she is capable of ignoring that. She is a genuine 100% authentic fake, but that is a good thing. She has tried to blow off the extreme left, who was never that happy with her in the first place, because she knows that is a political loser. She might be one of them, but she is smarter than them, and more willing to compromise. Unlike opportunistic and none too bright Edwards, or inexperienced idealistic Obama, Hillary would do the right thing in spire of herself.
And it might be nice not to have half the country trying to sabotage the other half.
