The “Hillary as Obama’s third term” fallacy

Last updated on: October 23, 2016 at 8:26 pm

October 24, 2016 by Gene Veith

I keep hearing that if Hillary Clinton is elected, it would be the equivalent of Barack Obama’s third term.

But Clinton and Obama are extremely different. President Obama is weak and ineffective. My fear is that a President Hillary Clinton would be strong and effective. I would much rather have a weak president who has trouble passing a bad agenda than a strong president who would be effective in imposing that bad agenda. Let me explain further. . . .

President Obama, for all of his faults, is mild-mannered, cautious, and idealistic. Mrs. Clinton, in contrast, is (from what I have heard) ruthless, vindictive, and power-hungry.

Although Mrs. Clinton may not be as liberal as she pretends to be, with her Wall Street connections and hawkish past, I suspect she would be more forceful in imposing her liberal ideology, such as it is, especially her cultural liberalism (particularly, her support of abortion).

Perhaps President Obama’s most dangerous legacy is his use of executive orders to circumvent the constitutionally-mandated legislative process. Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly shown that she believes that she is above the law. Donald Trump would need to use executive orders to implement many of his policies, such as re-negotiating free trade treaties and building his wall. So we may be getting a too-powerful presidency no matter who gets elected.

But the next term, whoever wins, for better or worse, will look nothing like Obama’s.