While being an incredibly dislikable candidate, her actual platform is moderate compared to current Democrats. What would our country look like?

I'd assume she would have won two terms, meaning Trump and Biden would have never happened.

And also since Trump and Biden didn't accomplish anything with long term significance (they both did some things but it can all be quickly reversed) that we would have missed out on, I'd say the country would be 95% the same today if Hillary had won.

If I had to speculate on the 5%, we would overall be better off never having been subject to the clown show of Trump and Biden, but we'd probably have a moderate swamp Republican in office right now bombing Iran while promising to lower taxes while spending more on the Military.

All just a huge waste of energy with zero lessons learned.

I agree with most of that except for the last part, it does seem like Trump was absolutely unique. in starting this war Iran. If the reporting from The New York Times is correct,other republicans we're not on board and only joined in afterwards to protect the administration

I kind of think that a lot of Republicans weren't on board because they were the ones who ran on the populist messaging Trump ran on about no new wars, and once Trump did a 180 on that they were all like "oh fuk, what do we do now"

If say John McCain ran again in 2016 and won, he probably would have bombed Iran and Republicans would have mostly fallen in line without much reservation, because the "populist" wing would be much smaller since Trump never happened in the first place

I'm not sure about that because the intel community has been pretty straightforward and transparent about the fact that we did not think we could remove the regime through force. And that being the case, I don't think even McCain pulls the trigger. Now Russia, Ukraine one hundred percent mccain and hillary support that policy

I'm gonna post using copy paste

None of this would have happened....


Janus v. AFSCME (2018): In a 5-4 decision, the Court overruled Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977), holding that public-sector employees cannot be compelled to pay agency fees to unions. This was a major victory for free-speech and right-to-work principles, weakening public-sector unions. 

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022): 6-3 ruling established a new “history and tradition” test for Second Amendment challenges (replacing means-ends scrutiny). It struck down New York’s restrictive concealed-carry licensing law, significantly expanding gun rights nationwide and making many existing regulations vulnerable. 

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022): 6-3 ruling established a new “history and tradition” test for Second Amendment challenges (replacing means-ends scrutiny). It struck down New York’s restrictive concealed-carry licensing law, significantly expanding gun rights nationwide and making many existing regulations vulnerable. 

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022): 6-3 decision protected a public high-school football coach’s right to pray on the field after games. It effectively abandoned the Lemon test for Establishment Clause cases, marking a major expansion of religious liberty in public schools and government contexts.

Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (and companion UNC case) (2023): 6-3/6-2 rulings held that race-based affirmative action in college admissions violates the Equal Protection Clause. It effectively overruled Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), ending decades of race-conscious admissions policies at public and private universities.

303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2023): 6-3 decision held that the First Amendment protects a web designer from being compelled to create expressive content (wedding websites) celebrating same-sex marriages, despite state anti-discrimination laws. A key free-speech victory against compelled speech in the culture-wars context.

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024): 6-3 decision (companion Relentless) explicitly overruled Chevron U.S.A. v. NRDC (1984), a 40-year-old cornerstone of administrative law. Courts must now independently interpret ambiguous statutes rather than defer to agency interpretations; this is widely seen as one of the biggest blows to the administrative state in modern history. 

United States v. Skrmetti (2025), upholding state bans on puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors; Mahmoud v. Taylor

Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025), protecting parental rights to opt children out of certain LGBTQ+-themed school instruction


Louisiana v. Callais (April 2026), which sharply limited Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by ruling that creating additional majority-Black districts can constitute unconstitutional racial gerrymandering in some cases. 




I could keep going on forever, but it was worth the mean tweets

The way Iran has played out I don't think Trump really wanted to get involved either. It definitely doesn't seem like it was his idea.

Impossible to say, but anyone else may have been even more receptive to Israel's leverage than he's been.

That's hard to imagine, but maybe ted cruz, though ted cruz was unelectable

Damn, 12 years later and Nolibs is still dreaming of a Hillary win...and LOL claiming Hillary is a moderate, she like every (D) govern as are left as the electorate allows, unlike the (R) who govern as far right as their donors allow.

PS: as Chase pointed out, if she won and had the SCOTUS, theres a good chance the OP would be sitting in a cell right now for hate speech, assuming the Bonobo character would have still been created??

I am assuming McCain would do it because it was his wet dream for years. But yeah I can see some of the neocon wing backing off of Iran. Romney likely wouldn't have. He would have sucked at being president for reasons other than that, though.

Well he's right that her platform was moderate compared to the Democrats of today, but she would have just "evolved" along with them.

Bill Clinton was a center-right president, but he moved along with the party and is now pro troon, etc.

You had Jimmy Carter endorsing Stacey Abrams in Georgia ffs.

Funny, he views this hypothetical as a pro-Hillary statement - which it's not.

Now, one thing you point out that is interesting is the fact that the all are moving left with the base at least on woke issues. So the question is, that being the case, how much power does the base actually have? We saw Newsom briefly flirt with some anti-israel sentiment before quickly reversing course. So on that issue, he's ignoring the base and ninety five percent of the democrat party who is done with israel

They might be able to get away with not being pro-Israel this time around, strictly on anti-Trump sentiment. They'll probably bend the knee in the future, though.

I still hear some people say that they'd be open to voting for a center-right or conservative Democrat, and I just lol. Yeah they'll say chit like they support law enforcement and that boys shouldn't be in girls sports, and then vote with the woke lunatics on 95% of issues anyway.

The previous county executive of Suffolk County where I live was a center-right Democrat and presided over the county like one, but when it came to congressional endorsements he put his full support behind a Manhattan joo who moved to his East Hampton summer house just so he could run for congress, and whose campaign centerpiece was gun grabbing in a congressional district that has a large number of gun owners and hunters. "Conservative Democrats" are still going to support woke loons at the end of the day.

Put very simply, for time constraints:

The (D) gets to be pro Israel by expanding DEI/clown world/open borders/racism, etc. Thats their trade off with their base.

The (R) gets to be pro Israel by opposing that. Thats their trade off with their base.

100%.

That's a whole lot of words just to say you want to fuck her Tard.

Tell him Hillary..

IMO, if Hillary were president, it would be largely ceremonial, economy ok, but weak foreign policy with China eating our lunch and stealing much more IT than it already has, intense partisan gridlock, the House and the Senate would have blocked any significant change, making most of it lame duck.

Too bad there is no way to look into a parallel world where Hillary won and see what happens.

I figured that Hillary would have continued a lot of Obama's plans as well as having Bill behind her advising her to do more slick willy things.

One huge contrast between Trump and Obama/Clinton was that while he was like FU to the rest of the world, Obama and Clinton would sell us out to appease the rest of the world. I think they would have made moves to help China become the #1 economy and world superpower.

I certainly what hate to see a president sell us out to another country

Even a street shitter gets it right every once in a while.

Joe was suppose to have been a moderate too. You are still heart broken about your gal not winning. Truly pathetic behavior bro...

Ewww, too young.

Read the thread and pull your head out your ass. Fucking exhausting dealing with you simpletons

Nah, the real question here is what kind of a person is still thinking about the what ifs of a Hilldawg presidency? Sad, very sad...

This section is called religion and politics. Intellectual exercise are useful, except for knuckle dragging morons

his obsession with hillary makes me sad.

It was suppose to be...HER TURN!!

Oh man... does this discussion need GOO or what!

Fucking GOO loved him some Hilldog lol. So much that her 2016 loss didn't.... agree, with him very well.

Ecto posts very similar to Goo. Hmmm..

I gotta admit, her proposal of having a taco truck in every street corner is still pretty enticing