is it possible that clinton would have found herself at war with her own party, and had to concede on so many of these points that i'm concerned about, where she's just about as far right as a democrat can get and still be a democrat?

that's an empirical question. i don't know.

she could just as well have succeeded in shifting the centre even further to the right, which is what both obama and bill clinton did, and the most substantive legacy of both of them...

i'll concede that some of these things that i'm citing - like her abortion policy - seem too abstract to be of any real concern. her position on abortion is a matter of the public record, and it's just the simple truth that she's never been properly defined as seeing the issue as being about choice, as being about autonomy - she's been clear for many years that she sees the issue as a health concern. legal, safe and rare. she always underlines and asterisks the rare. and, unlike many other issues, she's never obfuscated on this point because she seems to think that unwavering support for abortion rights is unpopular and hurting the party's chances to appeal to the centre; any legislation from her, any judicial appointments from her, would have the strict focus on ensuring the rarity of the procedure. but, could she actually get the amendment in place? she'd need a republican legislature to do it as a first assumption, and it would probably destroy the party. so, i point to her actual position on the matter as a reality check, but that doesn't mean she'd have a realistic path to doing any of it. but, the same analysis holds for trump, who is hardly a pro-life republican, and it is well known has stated support for pro-choice policies in the past.

i'm keying on abortion, because it's the best argument i've seen to hold your nose and vote for her. but, a careful analysis largely even debunks this - trump is hardly jerry falwell, and clinton is well to the right of her own party on this issue, and may very well have found herself fighting against it.