this sort of wishful thinking about the democrats and where they actually stand on the spectrum and what positions they're likely to actually promote is widespread and deep-seated and goes back to at least the 1992 election, where clinton appears to have been elected on the perception that we would do exactly the opposite of what he actually did. i do remember that election, but i have no memory of carter, and my weak analysis of his presidency is that it was kind of the last gasp of the old solid south. he later distanced himself from it, but carter was initially successful by running as a racist old southern democrat - and that appears to be what people expected from him. those voters went to perot in the 90s. so, the 1992 election opened up a new era in the democratic party.

one of the worst examples i can think of is this delusional perception that al gore, the leading congressional hawk on actions against iraq throughout the 80s and 90s, would have somehow acted differently, had he been elected. this position is not based on an absence of evidence, but a negation of it; all evidence suggests he would have been more aggressive than bush was. he'd been aggressively pushing for an invasion of iraq for 20 years, and he was the architect of the situation that made it such an immediate cakewalk, namely the sanctions and the no-fly zone. 

so, the idea that al gore would have spared saddam hussein is absurdly ignorant and just deeply delusional. however, it's almost ubiquitous in certain circles.

one of the worst things about trump is his environmental policy, and i'm hardly going to defend his record on the point. he's been a disaster on that file. but, would clinton have been better? the best evidence we have for the issue is her handling of the keystone xl pipeline, and it's not very inspiring. 

so, i want you to be fully cognizant of where i'm coming from on this - i'm trying to look at the actual data in front of me, rather than draw partisan conclusions, or buy into specious media narratives. the general direction of this administration is pretty terrible, but it has truly come with a few positive surprises, too. but, that's inevitable; i'm sure i agreed with reagan on two or three things, too, even if i can't think of them, right now. what i'm more concerned about is comparing what we've seen from trump to what a sober analysis would have expected from clinton, and the stark conclusion is that i don't see a lot of reasons to think that i'd be happier about existing policy if she had won.

but, i still can't answer the general question, and i don't expect i'll be able to until years after trump leaves office.